Literature DB >> 9111088

Chemistry specimen acceptability: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 453 laboratories.

B A Jones1, R R Calam, P J Howanitz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency and reasons for rejection of chemistry specimens. DESIGN AND
SETTING: College of American Pathologists Q-Probes laboratory quality improvement study prospectively recording rejected chemistry specimens in 453 laboratories. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Percentage of submitted specimens rejected for testing.
RESULTS: Of 10,709,701 chemistry specimens submitted to the participating laboratories during the data collection period, 37,208 (0.35%) were rejected prior to testing. The institutional 10th, 50th (median), and 90th percentiles were 1.35%, 0.31%, and 0.06%, respectively. The most frequent reason for rejection was hemolysis, which occurred five times more frequently than the second most cited reason, insufficient specimen quantity to perform the test. When examined with their respective frequency of use, a higher percentage of rejected specimens were collected in microcollection tubes than in other containers. When compared with the respective frequency with which they collect specimens, laboratory personnel submitted significantly fewer rejected specimens than other in-hospital personnel groups and slightly more than out-of-hospital nonlaboratory personnel. The poorest performance was demonstrated by other in-hospital nonlaboratory personnel. Serum and plasma oxalate/fluoride specimens exhibited significantly lower rejection rates when compared with the other specimen types. Relative rejection rates were higher for nongel tubes and lower for syringes when compared with gel tubes.
CONCLUSION: Specimen rejection should be monitored on a regular basis. Institution-specific factors that are associated with rejection should be identified and targeted for improvement efforts. Action thresholds should be set sufficiently low to assure that continuous improvement is effected.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9111088

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med        ISSN: 0003-9985            Impact factor:   5.534


  11 in total

Review 1.  Perspective on the clinical laboratory: new uses for informatics.

Authors:  R A McPherson
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 2.352

2.  Targeting Rejection: Analysis of Specimen Acceptability and Rejection, and Framework for Identifying Interventions in a Single Tertiary Healthcare Facility.

Authors:  Lisa Rooper; Jamal Carter; John Hargrove; Sheri Hoffmann; Stefan Riedel
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 2.352

3.  The "EPiQ"-Study (Evaluation of preanalytical quality): S-Monovette® in manual aspiration mode drastically reduces hemolytic samples in head-to-head study.

Authors:  Laura Millius; Erwin Riedo; Thierry Caron; Juliette Belissent; Benoît Fellay; Vincent Ribordy; Jean-Luc Magnin
Journal:  Pract Lab Med       Date:  2021-07-28

4.  Alcohol Used as Disinfectant before Venipuncture does not Lead to Sample Haemolysis or Sample Dilution.

Authors:  Devajit Sarmah; Booloo Sharma; Dilutpal Sharma; Sheeja Mathew
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-02-01

5.  Effectiveness of Laboratory Practices to Reducing Patient Misidentification Due to Specimen Labeling Errors at the Time of Specimen Collection in Healthcare Settings: LMBP™ Systematic Review.

Authors:  Paramjit Sandhu; Kakali Bandyopadhyay; Dennis J Ernst; William Hunt; Thomas H Taylor; Rebecca Birch; John Krolak; Sharon Geaghan
Journal:  J Appl Lab Med       Date:  2017-09

6.  A content validated questionnaire for assessment of self reported venous blood sampling practices.

Authors:  Karin Bölenius; Christine Brulin; Kjell Grankvist; Marie Lindkvist; Johan Söderberg
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2012-01-19

7.  Ten years of preanalytical monitoring and control: Synthetic Balanced Score Card Indicator.

Authors:  Maria Salinas; Maite López-Garrigós; Emilio Flores; Ana Santo-Quiles; Mercedes Gutierrez; Javier Lugo; Rosa Lillo; Carlos Leiva-Salinas
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.313

8.  Customer satisfaction survey with clinical laboratory and phlebotomy services at a tertiary care unit level.

Authors:  Young Rae Koh; Shine Young Kim; In Suk Kim; Chulhun L Chang; Eun Yup Lee; Han Chul Son; Hyung Hoi Kim
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2014-08-21       Impact factor: 3.464

9.  Pre and Post Examination Aspects.

Authors:  Mario Plebani
Journal:  EJIFCC       Date:  2004-12-28

10.  Haematology specimen acceptability: a national survey in Chinese laboratories.

Authors:  Yuanyuan Ye; Wei Wang; Haijian Zhao; Falin He; Kun Zhong; Shuai Yuan; Yuxuan Du; Bingquan Chen; Zhiguo Wang
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2018-10-15       Impact factor: 2.313

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.