Towards harmonisation of critical laboratory result management - review of the literature and survey of australasian practices.

Q1 Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology Clinical Biochemist Reviews Pub Date : 2012-11-01
Ca Campbell, Ar Horvath
{"title":"Towards harmonisation of critical laboratory result management - review of the literature and survey of australasian practices.","authors":"Ca Campbell, Ar Horvath","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Timely release and communication of critical test results may have significant impact on medical decisions and subsequent patient outcomes. Laboratories therefore have an important responsibility and contribution to patient safety. Certification, accreditation and regulatory bodies also require that laboratories follow procedures to ensure patient safety, but there is limited guidance on best practices. In Australasia, no specific requirements exist in this area and critical result reporting practices have been demonstrated to be heterogeneous worldwide.Recognising the need for agreed standards and critical limits, the AACB started a quality initiative to harmonise critical result management throughout Australasia. The first step toward harmonisation is to understand current laboratory practices. Fifty eight Australasian laboratories responded to a survey and 36 laboratories shared their critical limits. Findings from this survey are compared to international practices reviewed in various surveys conducted elsewhere. For the successful operation of a critical result management system, critical tests and critical limits must be defined in collaboration with clinicians. Reporting procedures must include how critical results are identified; who can report and who can receive critical results; what is an acceptable timeframe within which results must be delivered or, if reporting fails, what escalation procedures should follow; what communication channels or systems should be used; what should be recorded and how; and how critical result procedures should be maintained and evaluated to assess impact on outcomes.In this paper we review the literature of current standards and recommendations for critical result management. Key elements of critical result reporting are discussed in view of the findings of various national surveys on existing laboratory practices, including data from our own survey in Australasia. Best practice recommendations are made that laboratories are expected to follow in order to provide high quality and safe service to patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":34924,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Biochemist Reviews","volume":"33 4","pages":"149-60"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3529552/pdf/cbr_33_4_149.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Biochemist Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Timely release and communication of critical test results may have significant impact on medical decisions and subsequent patient outcomes. Laboratories therefore have an important responsibility and contribution to patient safety. Certification, accreditation and regulatory bodies also require that laboratories follow procedures to ensure patient safety, but there is limited guidance on best practices. In Australasia, no specific requirements exist in this area and critical result reporting practices have been demonstrated to be heterogeneous worldwide.Recognising the need for agreed standards and critical limits, the AACB started a quality initiative to harmonise critical result management throughout Australasia. The first step toward harmonisation is to understand current laboratory practices. Fifty eight Australasian laboratories responded to a survey and 36 laboratories shared their critical limits. Findings from this survey are compared to international practices reviewed in various surveys conducted elsewhere. For the successful operation of a critical result management system, critical tests and critical limits must be defined in collaboration with clinicians. Reporting procedures must include how critical results are identified; who can report and who can receive critical results; what is an acceptable timeframe within which results must be delivered or, if reporting fails, what escalation procedures should follow; what communication channels or systems should be used; what should be recorded and how; and how critical result procedures should be maintained and evaluated to assess impact on outcomes.In this paper we review the literature of current standards and recommendations for critical result management. Key elements of critical result reporting are discussed in view of the findings of various national surveys on existing laboratory practices, including data from our own survey in Australasia. Best practice recommendations are made that laboratories are expected to follow in order to provide high quality and safe service to patients.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
实现关键实验室结果管理的统一--文献综述和澳大利亚实践调查。
关键检验结果的及时发布和通报可能会对医疗决策和随后的患者预后产生重大影响。因此,实验室对患者安全负有重要的责任和贡献。认证、认可和监管机构也要求实验室遵循相关程序以确保患者安全,但有关最佳实践的指导却十分有限。大洋洲在这一领域没有具体的要求,而关键结果报告的做法已被证明在全球范围内是不尽相同的。实现统一的第一步是了解当前的实验室实践。58 家澳大拉西亚实验室对一项调查做出了回应,36 家实验室分享了他们的临界值。本次调查的结果与其他地方进行的各种调查中审查的国际惯例进行了比较。为了成功运行关键结果管理系统,必须与临床医生合作定义关键检验项目和关键限值。报告程序必须包括:如何确定关键结果;谁可以报告关键结果,谁可以接收关键结果;必须在什么可接受的时间范围内提供结果,或者,如果报告失败,应遵循什么升级程序;应使用什么沟通渠道或系统;应记录什么以及如何记录;应如何维护和评估关键结果程序,以评估对结果的影响。本文综述了有关关键结果管理的现行标准和建议的文献,并结合各国对实验室现行做法的调查结果(包括我们在澳大拉西亚的调查数据),讨论了关键结果报告的关键要素。本文提出了实验室应遵循的最佳实践建议,以便为患者提供优质安全的服务。
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
Clinical Biochemist Reviews
Clinical Biochemist Reviews Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Clinical Biochemistry
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Digital Disruption in Healthcare and its Impact on Laboratory Services Standardisation of Dietary and Medication Restrictions for Urine 5-Hydroxyindoleacetic Acid (5-HIAA) Collection Diagnostic Evaluation of Renal Tubular Acidosis: A Clinical Biochemistry Perspective Digoxin: Review of Current Laboratory Practice and Considerations Proceedings of the Australasian Association of Clinical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine's 2021 Virtual Scientific Conference.
×
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