Improving quality in the preanalytical phase through innovation, on behalf of the European Federation for Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE)

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

It is now undeniable that laboratory testing is vital for the diagnosis, prognostication and therapeutic monitoring of human disease. Despite the many advances made for achieving a high degree of quality and safety in the analytical part of diagnostic testing, many hurdles in the total testing process remain, especially in the preanalytical phase ranging from test ordering to obtaining and managing the biological specimens. The Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) has planned many activities aimed at mitigating the vulnerability of the preanalytical phase, including the organization of three European meetings in the past 7 years. Hence, this collective article follows the previous three opinion papers that were published by the EFLM WGPRE on the same topic, and brings together the summaries of the presentations that will be given at the 4th EFLM-BD meeting “Improving quality in the preanalytical phase through innovation” in Amsterdam, 24–25 March, 2017.

Related collections

Most cited references 53

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Choosing wisely: helping physicians and patients make smart decisions about their care.

Christine K. Cassel, James A. Guest (2012)

0 comments Cited 89 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Preanalytical quality improvement: from dream to reality.

I. Watson, K Stankovic, Gian Salvagno … (2011)

Abstract Laboratory diagnostics (i.e., the total testing process) develops conventionally through a virtual loop, originally referred to as "the brain to brain cycle" by George Lundberg. Throughout this complex cycle, there is an inherent possibility that a mistake might occur. According to reliable data, preanalytical errors still account for nearly 60%-70% of all problems occurring in laboratory diagnostics, most of them attributable to mishandling procedures during collection, handling, preparing or storing the specimens. Although most of these would be "intercepted" before inappropriate reactions are taken, in nearly one fifth of the cases they can produce inappropriate investigations and unjustifiable increase in costs, while generating inappropriate clinical decisions and causing some unfortunate circumstances. Several steps have already been undertaken to increase awareness and establish a governance of this frequently overlooked aspect of the total testing process. Standardization and monitoring preanalytical variables is of foremost importance and is associated with the most efficient and well-organized laboratories, resulting in reduced operational costs and increased revenues. As such, this article is aimed at providing readers with significant updates on the total quality management of the preanalytical phase to endeavour further improvement for patient safety throughout this phase of the total testing process.

0 comments Cited 74 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Practical challenges related to point of care testing

Julie Shaw (2015)

Point of care testing (POCT) refers to laboratory testing that occurs near to the patient, often at the patient bedside. POCT can be advantageous in situations requiring rapid turnaround time of test results for clinical decision making. There are many challenges associated with POCT, mainly related to quality assurance. POCT is performed by clinical staff rather than laboratory trained individuals which can lead to errors resulting from a lack of understanding of the importance of quality control and quality assurance practices. POCT is usually more expensive than testing performed in the central laboratory and requires a significant amount of support from the laboratory to ensure the quality testing and meet accreditation requirements. Here, specific challenges related to POCT compliance with accreditation standards are discussed along with strategies that can be used to overcome these challenges. These areas include: documentation of POCT orders, charting of POCT results as well as training and certification of individuals performing POCT. Factors to consider when implementing connectivity between POCT instruments and the electronic medical record are also discussed in detail and include: uni-directional versus bidirectional communication, linking patient demographic information with POCT software, the importance of positive patient identification and considering where to chart POCT results in the electronic medical record.