Literature DB >> 27282213

Application of failure mode and effect analysis in an assisted reproduction technology laboratory.

Giulia Intra1, Alessandra Alteri1, Laura Corti1, Elisa Rabellotti1, Enrico Papaleo1, Liliana Restelli2, Stefania Biondo3, Maria Paola Garancini3, Massimo Candiani1, Paola Viganò4.   

Abstract

Assisted reproduction technology laboratories have a very high degree of complexity. Mismatches of gametes or embryos can occur, with catastrophic consequences for patients. To minimize the risk of error, a multi-institutional working group applied failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) to each critical activity/step as a method of risk assessment. This analysis led to the identification of the potential failure modes, together with their causes and effects, using the risk priority number (RPN) scoring system. In total, 11 individual steps and 68 different potential failure modes were identified. The highest ranked failure modes, with an RPN score of 25, encompassed 17 failures and pertained to "patient mismatch" and "biological sample mismatch". The maximum reduction in risk, with RPN reduced from 25 to 5, was mostly related to the introduction of witnessing. The critical failure modes in sample processing were improved by 50% in the RPN by focusing on staff training. Three indicators of FMEA success, based on technical skill, competence and traceability, have been evaluated after FMEA implementation. Witnessing by a second human operator should be introduced in the laboratory to avoid sample mix-ups. These findings confirm that FMEA can effectively reduce errors in assisted reproduction technology laboratories.
Copyright © 2016 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  FMEA; IVF; assisted reproduction technology; mismatch; risk assessment

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27282213     DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2016.05.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online        ISSN: 1472-6483            Impact factor:   3.828


  7 in total

Review 1.  Microfluidics for sperm analysis and selection.

Authors:  Reza Nosrati; Percival J Graham; Biao Zhang; Jason Riordon; Alexander Lagunov; Thomas G Hannam; Carlos Escobedo; Keith Jarvi; David Sinton
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2017-10-31       Impact factor: 14.432

2.  Top quality blastocyst formation rates in relation to progesterone levels on the day of oocyte maturation in GnRH antagonist IVF/ICSI cycles.

Authors:  V S Vanni; E Somigliana; M Reschini; L Pagliardini; E Marotta; S Faulisi; A Paffoni; P Vigano'; W Vegetti; M Candiani; E Papaleo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-05-17       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Deng Entropy Weighted Risk Priority Number Model for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis.

Authors:  Haixia Zheng; Yongchuan Tang
Journal:  Entropy (Basel)       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 2.524

4.  Six Sigma performance of quality indicators in total testing process of point-of-care glucose measurement: A two-year review.

Authors:  Anne Vincent; Donnah Pocius; Yun Huang
Journal:  Pract Lab Med       Date:  2021-03-19

5.  Multifactorial analysis of the stochastic epigenetic variability in cord blood confirmed an impact of common behavioral and environmental factors but not of in vitro conception.

Authors:  D Gentilini; E Somigliana; L Pagliardini; E Rabellotti; P Garagnani; L Bernardinelli; E Papaleo; M Candiani; A M Di Blasio; P Viganò
Journal:  Clin Epigenetics       Date:  2018-06-08       Impact factor: 6.551

6.  A Customized Tool of Incident Reporting for the Detection of Nonconformances at a Single IVF Center: Development, Application, and Efficacy.

Authors:  Daria Morini; Jessica Daolio; Alessia Nicoli; Gaetano De Feo; Barbara Valli; Beatrice Melli; Arua Sibahi; Maria Lucrezia Tranquillo; Cecilia Mezzadri; Pietro Ragni; Lorenzo Aguzzoli; Maria Teresa Villani
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2021-10-21       Impact factor: 3.411

7.  Comparison of electronic versus manual witnessing of procedures within the in vitro fertilization laboratory: impact on timing and efficiency.

Authors:  Rebecca Holmes; Kelly Athayde Wirka; Allison Baxter Catherino; Brooke Hayward; Jason E Swain
Journal:  F S Rep       Date:  2021-04-28
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.