Joint EFLM-COLABIOCLI Recommendation for venous blood sampling

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

This document provides a joint recommendation for venous blood sampling of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) and Latin American Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE-LATAM) of the Latin America Confederation of Clinical Biochemistry (COLABIOCLI). It offers guidance on the requirements for ensuring that blood collection is a safe and patient-centered procedure and provides practical guidance on how to successfully overcome potential barriers and obstacles to its widespread implementation. The target audience for this recommendation are healthcare staff members directly involved in blood collection. This recommendation applies to the use of a closed blood collection system and does not provide guidance for the blood collection with an open needle and syringe and catheter collections. Moreover, this document neither addresses patient consent, test ordering, sample handling and transport nor collection from children and unconscious patients. The recommended procedure is based on the best available evidence. Each step was graded using a system that scores the quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendation. The process of grading was done at several face-to-face meetings involving the same mixture of stakeholders stated previously. The main parts of this recommendation are: 1) Pre-sampling procedures, 2) Sampling procedure, 3) Post-sampling procedures and 4) Implementation. A first draft of the recommendation was circulated to EFLM members for public consultation. WG-PRE-LATAM was also invited to comment the document. A revised version has been sent for voting on to all EFLM and COLABIOCLI members and has been officially endorsed by 33/40 EFLM and 21/21 COLABIOCLI members. We encourage professionals throughout Europe and Latin America to adopt and implement this recommendation to improve the quality of blood collection practices and increase patient and workers safety.

Related collections

Most cited references 66

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Laboratory Diagnostics and Quality of Blood Collection

Gabriel Lima-Oliveira, Giuseppe Lippi, Gian Salvagno … (2015)

Summary Diagnostic blood samples collected by phlebotomy are the most common type of biological specimens drawn and sent to laboratory medicine facilities for being analyzed, thus supporting caring physicians in patient diagnosis, follow-up and/or therapeutic monitoring. Phlebotomy, a relatively invasive medical procedure, is indeed critical for the downstream procedures accomplished either in the analytical phase made in the laboratory or in the interpretive process done by the physicians. Diagnosis, management, treatment of patients and ultimately patient safety itself can be compromised by poor phlebotomy quality. We have read with interest a recent article where the authors addressed important aspects of venous blood collection for laboratory medicine analysis. The authors conducted a phlebotomy survey based on the Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute (CLSI) H03-A6 document (presently replaced by the GP41-A6 document) in three government hospitals in Ethiopia to evaluate 120 professionals (101 non-laboratory professionals vs. 19 laboratory professionals) as regards the venous blood collection practice. The aim of this mini (non-systematic) review is to both take a cue from the above article and from current practices we had already observed in other laboratory settings, and discuss four questionable activities performed by health care professionals during venous blood collection. We refer to: i) diet restriction assessment; ii) puncture site cleansing; iii) timing of tourniquet removal and; iv) mixing specimen with additives.

0 comments Cited 37 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Pre-analytical phase management: a review of the procedures from patient preparation to laboratory analysis.

Gabriel Lima-Oliveira, Waldemar Volanski, Giuseppe Lippi … (2017)

The pre-analytical phase encompasses all the procedures before the start of laboratory testing. This phase of the testing process is responsible for the majority of the laboratory errors, since the related procedures involve many sorts of non-laboratory professionals working outside the laboratory setting, thus without direct supervision by the laboratory staff. Therefore, either correct organization or management of both personnel and procedures that regard blood specimen collection by venipuncture are of fundamental importance, since the various steps for performing blood collection represent per se sources of laboratory variability. The aim of this (non-systematic) review addressed to healthcare professionals is to highlight the importance of blood specimen management (from patient preparation to laboratory analyses), as a tool to prevent laboratory errors, with the concept that laboratory results from inappropriate blood specimens are inconsistent and do not allow proper treatment nor monitoring of the patient.

0 comments Cited 36 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Reducing blood culture contamination in the emergency department: an interrupted time series quality improvement study.

Wesley H. Self, Theodore Speroff, R Ashburn … (2012)

Blood culture contamination is a common problem in the emergency department (ED) that leads to unnecessary patient morbidity and health care costs. The study objective was to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of a quality improvement (QI) intervention for reducing blood culture contamination in an ED. The authors developed a QI intervention to reduce blood culture contamination in the ED and then evaluated its effectiveness in a prospective interrupted times series study. The QI intervention involved changing the technique of blood culture specimen collection from the traditional clean procedure to a new sterile procedure, with standardized use of sterile gloves and a new materials kit containing a 2% chlorhexidine skin antisepsis device, a sterile fenestrated drape, a sterile needle, and a procedural checklist. The intervention was implemented in a university-affiliated ED and its effect on blood culture contamination evaluated by comparing the biweekly percentages of blood cultures contaminated during a 48-week baseline period (clean technique) and 48-week intervention period (sterile technique), using segmented regression analysis with adjustment for secular trends and first-order autocorrelation. The goal was to achieve and maintain a contamination rate below 3%. During the baseline period, 321 of 7,389 (4.3%) cultures were contaminated, compared to 111 of 6,590 (1.7%) during the intervention period (p < 0.001). In the segmented regression model, the intervention was associated with an immediate 2.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.2% to 3.2%) absolute reduction in contamination. The contamination rate was maintained below 3% during each biweekly interval throughout the intervention period. A QI assessment of ED blood culture contamination led to development of a targeted intervention to convert the process of blood culture collection from a clean to a fully sterile procedure. Implementation of this intervention led to an immediate and sustained reduction of contamination in an ED with a high baseline contamination rate. © 2013 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine.

0 comments Cited 31 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Title: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Publisher: Walter de Gruyter GmbH

ISSN (Electronic): 1437-4331

ISSN (Print): 1434-6621

Publication date Created: November 27 2018

Publication date (Print): November 27 2018

Volume: 56

Issue: 12

Pages: 2015-2038

Article

DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2018-0602

PubMed ID: 30004902

SO-VID: 13478a18-7012-488e-ad3f-db748de8e109

History

Data availability:

Comments

Comment on this article

Cited by 61

See all cited by

Most referenced authors 483

See all reference authors

- Version 1