Literature DB >> 30016272

National surveys on 15 quality indicators for the total testing process in clinical laboratories of China from 2015 to 2017.

Min Duan1,2, Xudong Ma3, Jing Fan3, Yanhong Guo3, Wei Wang1, Haijian Zhao1, Yuanyuan Ye1,2, Yang Fei4, Falin He1, Zhiguo Wang5,6, Zongjiu Zhang7.   

Abstract

Background As effective quality management tools, quality indicators (QIs) are widely used in laboratory medicine. This study aimed to analyze the results of QIs, identify errors and provide quality specifications (QSs) based on the state-of-the-art. Methods Clinical laboratories all over China participated in the QIs survey organized by the National Health Commission of People' Republic of China from 2015 to 2017. Most of these QIs were selected from a common model of QIs (MQI) established by the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC). All participants were asked to submit general information and original QIs data through a medical quality control data collection system. The results of QIs were reported in percentages and sigma, except turnaround time (TAT) which was measured in minutes. The 25th, 50th and 75th percentiles were, respectively, calculated as three levels of QSs, which were defined starting from the model proposed during the 1st Strategic Conference of the EFLM on "Defining analytical performance 15 years after the Stockholm Conference on Quality Specification in Laboratory Medicine". Results A total of 76 clinical laboratories from 25 provinces in China continuously participated in this survey and submitted complete data for all QIs from 2015 to 2017. In general, the performance of all reported QIs have improved or at least kept stable over time. Defect percentages of blood culture contamination were the largest in the pre-analytical phase. Intra-laboratory TAT was always larger than pre-examination TAT. Percentage of tests covered by inter-laboratory comparison was relatively low than others in the intra-analytical phase. The performances of critical values notification and timely critical values notification were the best with 6.0σ. The median sigma level of incorrect laboratory reports varied from 5.5σ to 5.7σ. Conclusions QSs of QIs provide useful guidance for laboratories to improve testing quality. Laboratories should take continuous quality improvement measures in all phases of total testing process to ensure safe and effective tests.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical laboratory; laboratory errors; quality indicators; quality specifications; total testing process

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30016272     DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2018-0416

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med        ISSN: 1434-6621            Impact factor:   3.694


  2 in total

1.  Real-world use of key performance indicators for point-of-Care Testing network accredited by ISO 22870.

Authors:  Paloma Oliver; Pilar Fernandez-Calle; Roberto Mora; Jorge Diaz-Garzon; Daniel Prieto; Marta Manzano; Inmaculada Dominguez; Antonio Buño
Journal:  Pract Lab Med       Date:  2020-11-06

2.  The response of total testing process in clinical laboratory medicine to COVID-19
pandemic.

Authors:  Funda Eren; Merve Ergin Tuncay; Esra Firat Oguz; Salim Neselioglu; Ozcan Erel
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 2.313

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.