Journals / Türk Mikrobiyoloji Cemiyeti Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 2

Sigmametric Evaluation of Preanalytical Errors in a Medical Microbiology Laboratory

Tıbbi Mikrobiyoloji Laboratuvarında Preanalitik Hataların Sigmametrik Değerlendirilmesi

Pages
141–146
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)

The calculated sigma values were classified as follows: “very good”, ≥5.0; good, 4.0-5.0; minimum, 3.0 and

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: More than 70% of medical laboratory errors occur in the pre-analytical phase.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Analysis and recording of errors are necessary for evaluation and prevention of errors.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The calculated sigma values were classified as follows: “very good”, ≥5.0; good, 4.0-5.0; minimum, 3.0 and
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: More than 70% of medical laboratory errors occur in the pre-analytical phase. Analysis and recording of errors are necessary for evaluation and prevention of errors. We aimed to evaluate the phases of pre-analytical errors of microbiology laboratory and classify them according to six sigma approaches. Material and Methods: Samples which were considered inappropriate for the analysis at the medical microbiology laboratory were evaluated under the three headings as error categories, hospital units and laboratory areas where the analyses were done. Error ratio in one million was determined, and expressed on a sigma scale. The calculated sigma values were classified as follows: “very good”, ≥5.0; good, 4.0-5.0; minimum, 3.0 and

Özet

Amaç: Tıbbi laboratuvar hatalarının %70’inden fazlasıpreanalitik evrede gerçekleşmektedir. Hataların analizi vekayıt altına alınması, durum değerlendirilmesi ve hatalarınönlenebilmesi için gereklidir. Çalışmamızda mikrobiyolojilaboratuvarı preanalitik evre hataları değerlendirilerek altısigma yaklaşımı ile değerlendirilmesi sınıflanmasıamaçlandı.Gereç ve Yöntem: Tıbbi Mikrobiyoloji Laboratuvarı’ndaanaliz için uygun olmadığı saptanan numuneler, hatakategorileri, örneklerin geldiği hastane birimleri ve analizigerçekleştirilen laboratuvar alanları olmak üzere üç anabaşlık altında sınıflandırıldı. Bunun için milyonda hataoranı saptanarak sigmametrik hesaplama yapıldı.Hesaplanan değerler ≥5.0 ise çok iyi, 4.0-

🔖

Cite This Article

AVCI, E., DURAN, H., ÇEKEN, N. (2022). Sigmametric Evaluation of Preanalytical Errors in a Medical Microbiology Laboratory. Türk Mikrobiyoloji Cemiyeti Dergisi, Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 2, 141–146. https://ajindex.com/articles/635829

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Öz L, Koçer D, Buldu S, Karakükcü Ç. Kayseri Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Klinik Biyokimya Laboratuvarında pre-preanalitik hataların analizi. Türk Klinik Biyokimya Derg. 2017;15(3):119-28.
  2. Chawla R, Goswami B, Tayal D, Mallika V. Identification of the types of preanalytical errors in the clinical chemistry laboratory: 1-Year Study at G.B. Pant Hospital. Lab Med. 2010;41(2):89-92. https://doi.org/10.1309/LM9JXZBMLSVJT9RK
  3. Yaylı G, Ergin Ç, Gülen H. Bakteriyolojik kültürlerde kontaminasyonun mali analizi. Klimik Derg. 2001;14(3):154-8.
  4. Özcan O, Güreser AS. Tetkik öncesi hata kaynakları ve eğitim. Dicle Tıp Derg. 2012;39(4):524-30. http://doi.org/10.5798/diclemedj.0921.2012.04.0194
  5. Avcı E, Çeken N, Kangal Z, et al. Approach to preanalytical errors in a public health laboratory. Turk J Biochem. 2017;42(1):59-63. http://doi.org/10.1515/tjb-2016-0197
  6. Söderberg J, Jonsson PA, Wallin O, Grankvist K, Hultdin J. Haemolysis index-an estimate of preanalytical quality in primary health care. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2009;47(8):940-4. http://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2009.227
  7. Lippi G, Blanckaert N, Bonini P, et al. Haemolysis: an overview of the leading cause of unsuitable specimens in clinical laboratories. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2008; 46(6):764-72. http://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2008.170 Green SF. The cost of poor blood specimen quality and errors in preanalytical processes. Clin Biochem. 2013;46(13-14):1175-9. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2013.06.001
  8. Grecu DS, Vlad DC, Dumitrascu V. Quality indicators in the preanalytical phase of testing in a stat laboratory. Lab Med. 2014;45(1):74-81. http://doi.org/10.1309/LM9ZY92YBZRFPFQY
  9. Coşkun A, Ünsal İ, Serteser M, Inal T. Six sigma as a quality management tool: Evaluation of performance in laboratory medicine, quality management and six sigma, Abdurrahman Coskun (Ed.), InTech. https:// www.intechopen.com/books/quality-management-andsix- sigma/six-sigma-as-a-quality-management-toolevaluation- of-performance-in-laboratory-medicine. (Erişim Tarihi: Mart 2018) http://doi.org/10.5772/9928
  10. Plebani M, Sciacovelli L, Aita A, Padoan A, Chiozza ML. Quality indicators to detect pre-analytical errors in laboratory testing. Clin Chim Acta. 2014;432:44-8. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cca.2013.07.033 Hammerling JA. A review of medical errors in laboratory diagnostics and where we are today. Lab Med. 2012;43(2):41-4. http://doi.org/10.1309/LM6ER9WJR1IHQAUY
  11. Gajjar M, Patel A, Jain S. Monitoring of quality indicators in pre analytical phase of testing in t