Journals / Türk Klinik Biyokimya Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2

Evaluation of Analytical Process in Clinical Laboratories: Six Sigma Methodology

Klinik Laboratuvarlarda Analitik Süreç Değerlendirilmesi: Altı Sigma Metodolojisi

Pages
79–86
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results: Tests having a process sigma level of

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Analytical reliability of clinical laboratories may be obtained by internal quality control, external quality control by analyzing the data with statistical methods.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In Six Sigma Methodology, which is one of these methods, the analytical performance of the tests is determined by process sigma values.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: Tests having a process sigma level of
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Analytical reliability of clinical laboratories may be obtained by internal quality control, external quality control by analyzing the data with statistical methods. In Six Sigma Methodology, which is one of these methods, the analytical performance of the tests is determined by process sigma values. In this study, we aimed to assess the analytical process performances of most frequently used tests in our laboratory according to six sigma methodology. Material and Methods: Internal quality control data between July- October 2014 were obtained from the laboratory information system. Process sigma levels based on formula (% TEa - % Bias) / % CV) were calculated for the analytes. The results were classified in 3 groups according to sigma level as low =6. Results: Tests having a process sigma level of

Özet

Amaç: Laboratuvarların analitik güvenilirliği iç kalite kontrol, dış kalite kontrol verilerinin istatistiksel yöntemlerle analiziyle kanıtlanır. Bu yöntemlerden Altı Sigma Metodolojisinde performans, süreç sigma değerleri ile belirlenir. Altı Sigma Metodolojisi sürecin mükemmellikten sapma derecesini gösterir. Bu çalışmada; laboratuvarımızda sık çalışılan testlerin analitik süreç performanslarını Altı Sigma Metodolojisine göre değerlendirmeyi amaçladık. Gereç ve Yöntem: Temmuz - Ekim 2014 iç kalite kontrol verileri laboratuvar bilgi sisteminden elde edildi. Seçilen testler için laboratuvar ortalama, standart sapma, varyasyon ve varyasyon katsayısı hesaplandı. Aylık süreç sigma seviyeleri "(% TEa -% Bias) / % CV" formülüne göre hesaplandı. Sonuçlar sigma değeri = 6 iyi olarak üç gruba ayrıldı. Bulgular: Süreç sigma değeri

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇİÇEK, E. A., NAR, R., İLANBEY, B., GÜÇLÜ, K., TURNA, G., EMEKLİ, D. İ. (2022). Evaluation of Analytical Process in Clinical Laboratories: Six Sigma Methodology. Türk Klinik Biyokimya Dergisi, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2, 79–86. https://ajindex.com/articles/634422

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Taga Y, Aslan D, Güner G, Kutay ZF. Tıbbi Laboratuvarlarda Standardizasyon ve Kalite Yönetimi. TBD Yayınları Ankara. 2000
  2. Burnett D, Ceriotti F, Cooper G, Parvin C, Plebani M, Westgard J et al. Collective opinion paper on findings of the 2009 convocation of experts on quality control. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2010;48(1):41- 52
  3. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). GP35-A-Development and Use of Quality Indicators for Process Improvement and Monitoring of Laboratory Quality; Approved Guideline, GP35-A (ISBN 1-56238-738-3). 30(24)
  4. Wolcott J, Schwartz A, Goodman C eds. Quality and the Total Testing Process. Laboratory Medicine a National Status Report. 2008; 139-195
  5. Coskun A, Inal T, Unsal I, Serteser M. Six Sigma as a Quality Management Tool: Evaluation of Performance in Laboratory Medicine. 2007;247-62
  6. Coskun A, ed. Quality Management and Six Sigma (ISBN 978-953-307-130-5). www.sciyo.com. Rijeka, Croatia; 2010
  7. Demir S. Süreç Performansının Ölçülmesi: Altı Sigma Yöntemi. Aslan D. ed.Klinik laboratuvarlarda Analitik Kalite Yönetimi Kursu Kitabı, Türk Biyokimya Derneği, İzmir, 2010; 83-90
  8. Lippi G, Plebani M, Simundic A. Special issue: Quality in laboratory diagnostics: from theory to practice Quality in laboratory diagnostics: from theory to practice. 2010;(1):126-130
  9. Sciacovelli L, Plebani M. The IFCC Working Group on laboratory errors and patient safety. Clin Chim Acta. 2009;404(1):79-85
  10. Sciacovelli L, O'Kane M, Skaik YA, Caciagli P, et al. Quality Indicators in Laboratory Medicine: from theory to practice. Preliminary data from the IFCC Working Group Project "Laboratory Errors and Patient Safety". Clin Chem Lab Med. 2011;49(5): 835-44
  11. Aslan D. Klinik Laboratuvarlarda Analitik Kalite Yönetiminde Yararlanılan Temel İstatistik için Hazırlıklar. Aslan D.ed. Klinik laboratuvarlarda Analitik Kalite Yönetimi Kursu Kitabı, Türk Biyokimya Derneği, İzmir, 2010; 16-37
  12. Westgard JO. Managing quality vs. measuring uncertainty in the medical laboratory. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2010;48(1):31-40
  13. Llopis MA, Trujillo G, Llovet MI, Tarrés E, et al. Quality indicators and specifications for key analytical-extranalytical processes in the clinical laboratory. Five years' experience using the Six Sigma concept. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2011;49(3): 463-70
  14. Miller G. Quality Control. McPherson R, Pincus M, eds. Henry's Clinical Diagnosis and Management by Laboratory Methods, 22nd ed. 2011; 119-234
  15. Şişman A.R. Kalite Planlam