Quality and resilience of clinical laboratories in Rwanda: a need for sustainable strategies.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Global Health Action Pub Date : 2024-12-31 Epub Date: 2024-06-03 DOI:10.1080/16549716.2024.2358633
Vincent Rusanganwa, Innocent Nzabahimana, Magnus Evander
{"title":"Quality and resilience of clinical laboratories in Rwanda: a need for sustainable strategies.","authors":"Vincent Rusanganwa, Innocent Nzabahimana, Magnus Evander","doi":"10.1080/16549716.2024.2358633","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Quality healthcare is a global priority, reliant on robust health systems for evidence-based medicine. Clinical laboratories are the backbone of quality healthcare facilitating diagnostics, treatment, patient monitoring, and disease surveillance. Their effectiveness depends on sustainable delivery of accurate test results. Although the Strengthening Laboratory Management Towards Accreditation (SLMTA) programme has enhanced laboratory quality in low-income countries, the long-term sustainability of this improvement remains uncertain.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore the sustainability of quality performance in clinical laboratories in Rwanda following the conclusion of SLMTA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A quasi-experimental design was adopted, involving 47 laboratories divided into three groups with distinct interventions. While one group received continuous mentorship and annual assessments (group two), interventions for the other groups (groups one and three) ceased following the conclusion of SLMTA. SLMTA experts collected data for 10 years through assessments using WHO's StepwiseLaboratory Quality Improvement Process Towards Accreditation (SLIPTA) checklist. Descriptive and t-test analyses were conducted for statistical evaluation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Improvements in quality were noted between baseline and exit assessments across all laboratory groups (mean baseline: 35.3%, exit: 65.8%, <i>p</i> < 0.001). However, groups one and three experienced performance declines following SLMTA phase-out (mean group one: 64.6% in reference to 85.8%, <i>p</i> = 0.01; mean group three: 57.3% in reference to 64.7%, <i>p</i> < 0.001). In contrast, group two continued to enhance performance even years later (mean: 86.6%compared to 70.6%, <i>p</i> = 0.03).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A coordinated implementation of quality improvement plan that enables regular laboratory assessments to pinpoint and address the quality gaps is essential for sustaining quality services in clinical laboratories.</p>","PeriodicalId":49197,"journal":{"name":"Global Health Action","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11149573/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Health Action","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2024.2358633","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Quality healthcare is a global priority, reliant on robust health systems for evidence-based medicine. Clinical laboratories are the backbone of quality healthcare facilitating diagnostics, treatment, patient monitoring, and disease surveillance. Their effectiveness depends on sustainable delivery of accurate test results. Although the Strengthening Laboratory Management Towards Accreditation (SLMTA) programme has enhanced laboratory quality in low-income countries, the long-term sustainability of this improvement remains uncertain.

Objective: To explore the sustainability of quality performance in clinical laboratories in Rwanda following the conclusion of SLMTA.

Methods: A quasi-experimental design was adopted, involving 47 laboratories divided into three groups with distinct interventions. While one group received continuous mentorship and annual assessments (group two), interventions for the other groups (groups one and three) ceased following the conclusion of SLMTA. SLMTA experts collected data for 10 years through assessments using WHO's StepwiseLaboratory Quality Improvement Process Towards Accreditation (SLIPTA) checklist. Descriptive and t-test analyses were conducted for statistical evaluation.

Results: Improvements in quality were noted between baseline and exit assessments across all laboratory groups (mean baseline: 35.3%, exit: 65.8%, p < 0.001). However, groups one and three experienced performance declines following SLMTA phase-out (mean group one: 64.6% in reference to 85.8%, p = 0.01; mean group three: 57.3% in reference to 64.7%, p < 0.001). In contrast, group two continued to enhance performance even years later (mean: 86.6%compared to 70.6%, p = 0.03).

Conclusion: A coordinated implementation of quality improvement plan that enables regular laboratory assessments to pinpoint and address the quality gaps is essential for sustaining quality services in clinical laboratories.

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
卢旺达临床实验室的质量和复原力:需要可持续战略。
背景:高质量的医疗保健是全球的优先事项,有赖于以证据为基础的强大医疗系统。临床实验室是优质医疗保健的支柱,为诊断、治疗、患者监测和疾病监控提供便利。它们的有效性取决于能否持续提供准确的检验结果。尽管 "加强实验室管理,促进资质认定"(SLMTA)计划提高了低收入国家的实验室质量,但这种改善的长期可持续性仍不确定:目的:探讨卢旺达临床实验室质量绩效在加强实验室管理认证计划结束后的可持续性:方法:采用准实验设计,将 47 家实验室分为三组,采取不同的干预措施。其中一组持续接受指导和年度评估(第二组),其他各组(第一组和第三组)在 SLMTA 结束后停止干预。SLMTA 专家通过使用世卫组织的 "逐步实现实验室质量改进过程认证(SLIPTA)"核对表进行评估,收集了 10 年的数据。统计评估采用了描述性分析和 t 检验分析:结果:所有实验室组在基线和退出评估之间的质量都有所改善(平均基线:35.3%,退出:65.8%,p p = 0.01;第三组平均:57.3%,参照64.7%,p p = 0.03):结论:协调实施质量改进计划,定期进行实验室评估,找出并解决质量差距,对维持临床实验室的优质服务至关重要。
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
Global Health Action
Global Health Action PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.80%
发文量
108
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Health Action is an international peer-reviewed Open Access journal affiliated with the Unit of Epidemiology and Global Health, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine at Umeå University, Sweden. The Unit hosts the Umeå International School of Public Health and the Umeå Centre for Global Health Research. Vision: Our vision is to be a leading journal in the global health field, narrowing health information gaps and contributing to the implementation of policies and actions that lead to improved global health. Aim: The widening gap between the winners and losers of globalisation presents major public health challenges. To meet these challenges, it is crucial to generate new knowledge and evidence in the field and in settings where the evidence is lacking, as well as to bridge the gaps between existing knowledge and implementation of relevant findings. Thus, the aim of Global Health Action is to contribute to fuelling a more concrete, hands-on approach to addressing global health challenges. Manuscripts suggesting strategies for practical interventions and research implementations where none already exist are specifically welcomed. Further, the journal encourages articles from low- and middle-income countries, while also welcoming articles originated from South-South and South-North collaborations. All articles are expected to address a global agenda and include a strong implementation or policy component.
期刊最新文献
Prevalence and associated factors for poor mental health among young migrants in Sweden: a cross-sectional study. The effectiveness of rural community health workers in improving health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review. Adaptation and validation of the Children's Surgical Assessment Tool for Rwandan district hospitals. Electronic health record and primary care physician self-reported quality of care: a multilevel study in China. Recruiting hard-to-reach populations via respondent driven sampling for mobile phone surveys in Colombia: a qualitative study.
×
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
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