KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / International Journal of Medical Biochemistry / 2018 / Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 2

Evaluation of biochemistry laboratory quality indicators according to the national Laboratory Error Classification System

Medine ALPDEMİR
Mehmet Fatih ALPDEMİR
Aslihan Rümeysa TEMİZ
Sayfa
65–71
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

These results may contribute to future laboratory test procedures and reduce error rates.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objectives: The national Laboratory Error Classification System (LECS) was developed by the Turkish Ministry of Health in 2015 to improve the quality processes of laboratories and enhance patient safety.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Methods: This retrospective study included 4757 samples of a total of 649,001 samples collected between October 1, 2015 and December 30, 2016 and classified according to the LECS.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:These results may contribute to future laboratory test procedures and reduce error rates.
🔬Tür:Laboratuvar & Saha Deneyi
📍Kapsam:2015 · 4757 samples
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Objectives: The national Laboratory Error Classification System (LECS) was developed by the Turkish Ministry of Health in 2015 to improve the quality processes of laboratories and enhance patient safety. This study was an evaluation of laboratory processes and quality indicators (QIs) in biochemistry laboratories according to the LECS criteria. Methods: This retrospective study included 4757 samples of a total of 649,001 samples collected between October 1, 2015 and December 30, 2016 and classified according to the LECS. The data regarding the number and type of rejected samples were obtained from the laboratory information system of Balıkesir State Hospital. Laboratory processes were also analyzed according to the LECS categories and counted on a monthly basis. The data were expressed as percentages. Results: The rate of error in the pre-, intra-, and post-analytical phase was 81.7%, 1.7%, and 16.6%, respectively. Overall, the most common error type was a clotted sample (0.28%). The primary location of error was the emergency service (25.6%). The time intervals during which the most errors occurred were 8:00-12:00 and 12:00-16:00 (30%). The professional group that made the most errors was the nurse group (64.6%). Conclusion: Different QIs have been used in clinical laboratories in Turkey and in the world in recent years to comply with the requirements of accreditation standards. In the present study, QIs were evaluated according to the LECS. These indicators provide a means to compare the performance of individual laboratories. These results may contribute to future laboratory test procedures and reduce error rates.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ALPDEMİR, M., ALPDEMİR, M. F., TEMİZ, A. R. (2018). Evaluation of biochemistry laboratory quality indicators according to the national Laboratory Error Classification System. International Journal of Medical Biochemistry, Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 2, 65–71. https://ajindex.com/articles/164812

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Shahangian S, Snyder SR. Laboratory medicine quality indicators: a review of the literature. Am J Clin Pathol 2009;131:418– 31
  2. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System. Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, editors. Washington DC: National Academies Press; 2000
  3. ISO 15189:2012 Medical laboratories - Requirements for quality and competence. Medical laboratories — Requirements for quality and competence. Available at: http://www.tecmoh. com/mypages/guides/CwgXKF9s1c.pdf. Accessed 12 Apr, 2018
  4. Sciacovelli L, O'Kane M, Skaik YA, Caciagli P, Pellegrini C, Da Rin G, 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;49:835–44. 5. https://kalite.saglik.gov.tr/TR,9209/hata-siniflandirma-sistemleri- hss.html. Accessed Nov 2016
  5. Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute. CLSI H3-A6 document. 6th ed. Procedures for the collection of diagnostic blood specimens by venipuncture. Wayne, PA: Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute; 2007
  6. Plebani M. The detection and prevention of errors in laboratory medicine. Ann Clin Biochem. 2010;47:101–10
  7. Chawla R, Goswami B, Singh B, Chawla A, Gupta VK, Mallika V. Evaluating Laboratory Performance with Quality Indicators. Labmedicine 2010,41:297–300
  8. Plebani M, Carraro P. Mistakes in a stat laboratory: types and frequency. Clin Chem 1997;43:1348–51
  9. Atay A, Demir L, Cuhadar S, Saglam G, Unal H, Aksun S, et al. Clinical biochemistry laboratory rejection rates due to various types of preanalytical errors. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2014;24:376–82
  10. Grecu DS, Vlad DC, Dumitrascu V. Quality indicators in the preanalytical phase of testing in a stat laboratory. Lab Med 2014 Winter;45:74–81
  11. Sakyi A, Laing E, Ephraim R, Asibey O, Sadique O. Evaluation of analytical errors in a clinical chemistry laboratory: a 3 year experience. Ann Med Health Sci Res 2015;5:8–12
  12. Dikmen ZG, Pinar A, Akbiyik F. Specimen rejection in laboratory medicine: Necessary for patient safety? Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2015;25:377–85 14. Sinici Lay I, Pınar A, Akbıyık F. Classification of reasons for rejection of biological specimens based on pre-preanalytical processes to identify quality indicators at a university hospital clinical laboratory in Turkey. Clin Biochem 2014;47:1002–5
  13. Plebani M, Chiozza ML, Sciacovelli L