A quality control procedure for central venous blood sampling based on potassium concentrations

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY Journal of Laboratory Medicine Pub Date : 2023-12-20 DOI:10.1515/labmed-2023-0084
Lingli Wang, Xiaomei Zhang, Yi Qin, Feng Wang, Ming Cui, Yingjuan Shi, Yu Chen
{"title":"A quality control procedure for central venous blood sampling based on potassium concentrations","authors":"Lingli Wang, Xiaomei Zhang, Yi Qin, Feng Wang, Ming Cui, Yingjuan Shi, Yu Chen","doi":"10.1515/labmed-2023-0084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives To evaluate the extent of agreement between two blood collection methods for electrolytes, central venous blood sampling by the push-pull technique versus venipuncture, and to mitigate errors in blood sampling by a potassium-based quality control procedure. Methods A comparative within-subject study was carried out for adult patients in the intensive care unit. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to estimate concordance, and Bland–Altman analysis and clinically acceptable limits were used to compare the equivalence of the two methods. An in-house checklist was designed to identify errors made by nurses throughout central venous blood sampling by the push-pull technique, the corrective training and quality control procedure were conducted, and the rate of errors, incidence of hemolysis and distribution of potassium concentrations were comparatively analyzed for the quality of central venous blood sampling before and after the quality control procedure. Results All the ICCs of 220 paired blood samples displayed excellent reliability, except for potassium. Most of the electrolyte variables were within the clinically acceptable limits, and the results showed that the potassium concentrations did not seem to sufficiently affect clinical decision-making. A total of 30 nurses accepted 90 observations before and after the quality control procedure, and the results showed that blood exposure and repeated disconnections of the line in the push-pull technique were always the main problems throughout the process of central venous blood sampling. In addition, after improvement, the number of patients with hypokalemia or hyperkalemia tended to decrease, but the difference was not statistically significant. For all of the blood samples, only three push-pull paired samples received hemolysis notice. Conclusions Central venous blood sampling by the push-pull technique could be an acceptable substitute for most electrolytes via venipuncture, but caution should be exercised for potassium-based quality control procedures.","PeriodicalId":55986,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Laboratory Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Laboratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/labmed-2023-0084","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives To evaluate the extent of agreement between two blood collection methods for electrolytes, central venous blood sampling by the push-pull technique versus venipuncture, and to mitigate errors in blood sampling by a potassium-based quality control procedure. Methods A comparative within-subject study was carried out for adult patients in the intensive care unit. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to estimate concordance, and Bland–Altman analysis and clinically acceptable limits were used to compare the equivalence of the two methods. An in-house checklist was designed to identify errors made by nurses throughout central venous blood sampling by the push-pull technique, the corrective training and quality control procedure were conducted, and the rate of errors, incidence of hemolysis and distribution of potassium concentrations were comparatively analyzed for the quality of central venous blood sampling before and after the quality control procedure. Results All the ICCs of 220 paired blood samples displayed excellent reliability, except for potassium. Most of the electrolyte variables were within the clinically acceptable limits, and the results showed that the potassium concentrations did not seem to sufficiently affect clinical decision-making. A total of 30 nurses accepted 90 observations before and after the quality control procedure, and the results showed that blood exposure and repeated disconnections of the line in the push-pull technique were always the main problems throughout the process of central venous blood sampling. In addition, after improvement, the number of patients with hypokalemia or hyperkalemia tended to decrease, but the difference was not statistically significant. For all of the blood samples, only three push-pull paired samples received hemolysis notice. Conclusions Central venous blood sampling by the push-pull technique could be an acceptable substitute for most electrolytes via venipuncture, but caution should be exercised for potassium-based quality control procedures.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于钾浓度的中心静脉血采样质量控制程序
目的 评估推拉技术中心静脉采血与静脉穿刺两种采血方法在电解质方面的一致性程度,并通过基于钾的质量控制程序减少采血中的误差。方法 对重症监护室的成年患者进行了一项受试者内比较研究。使用类内相关系数(ICC)来估计一致性,并使用布兰-阿尔特曼分析和临床可接受限值来比较两种方法的等效性。设计了一份内部核对表以识别护士在整个推拉技术中心静脉采血过程中出现的错误,进行了纠正培训和质量控制程序,并对质量控制程序前后中心静脉采血质量的错误率、溶血发生率和血钾浓度分布进行了比较分析。结果 220 份配对血液样本的所有 ICC 均显示出极佳的可靠性,钾除外。大多数电解质变量都在临床可接受范围内,结果显示钾浓度似乎不足以影响临床决策。共有 30 名护士在质控程序前后接受了 90 次观察,结果显示,在中心静脉采血的整个过程中,血液暴露和推拉技术中反复断开管路始终是主要问题。此外,经过改进后,出现低钾血症或高钾血症的患者人数趋于减少,但差异无统计学意义。在所有血液样本中,只有三份推拉配对样本收到了溶血通知。结论 通过推拉技术采集中心静脉血样本可以替代静脉穿刺采集大多数电解质,但在基于钾的质量控制程序中应谨慎行事。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Laboratory Medicine
Journal of Laboratory Medicine Mathematics-Discrete Mathematics and Combinatorics
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Laboratory Medicine (JLM) is a bi-monthly published journal that reports on the latest developments in laboratory medicine. Particular focus is placed on the diagnostic aspects of the clinical laboratory, although technical, regulatory, and educational topics are equally covered. The Journal specializes in the publication of high-standard, competent and timely review articles on clinical, methodological and pathogenic aspects of modern laboratory diagnostics. These reviews are critically reviewed by expert reviewers and JLM’s Associate Editors who are specialists in the various subdisciplines of laboratory medicine. In addition, JLM publishes original research articles, case reports, point/counterpoint articles and letters to the editor, all of which are peer reviewed by at least two experts in the field.
期刊最新文献
Assessing the stability of uncentrifuged serum and plasma analytes at various post-collection intervals How Gaussian mixture modelling can help to verify reference intervals from laboratory data with a high proportion of pathological values Using machine learning techniques for exploration and classification of laboratory data Automated sex and age partitioning for the estimation of reference intervals using a regression tree model Serum LDH and its isoenzymes (LDH2 and LDH5) associated with predictive value for refractory mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia in children
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1