南非一家学术医院的澳大拉西亚皇家病理学院计划外部质量保证经验。

Ngwanatala Sophia Mokoka, Elise Schapkaitz, Susan Louw
{"title":"南非一家学术医院的澳大拉西亚皇家病理学院计划外部质量保证经验。","authors":"Ngwanatala Sophia Mokoka, Elise Schapkaitz, Susan Louw","doi":"10.1093/labmed/lmae069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Laboratories use their performance in external quality assurance (EQA) to establish quality planning strategies and to assess whether testing processes require improvement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The EQA performance of the hematology and coagulation test parameters on the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia EQA program was evaluated over a 4-year cycle at an academic hospital in Johannesburg, South Africa. The test performance was determined from analytical quality specification (APS) and/or z-scores. Bias and imprecision were used to calculate sigma (σ) metric scores. Specifications from European Federation of Laboratory Medicine and/or biological variation were applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The laboratory achieved a mean testing score of 98.7 ± 4.0%. There were 103 (10.7%) unacceptable results. On investigation, root causes included: presurvey issues (83%), transcription errors (9%), random errors (6%), and test performance errors (3%). All test parameters evaluated achieved an acceptable median APS during the study period. The mean z-scores, however, were >2 and unacceptable for mean cell hemoglobin concentration and hematocrit. On investigation, this was attributed to significant delay in transport and storage of full blood count samples. White cell count and d-dimer achieved a σ ≥ 6.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EQA participation assisted the laboratory in maintaining a quality system. Close monitoring is necessary for international laboratories to avoid sample delays that can affect result quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":94124,"journal":{"name":"Laboratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"External quality assurance experience with Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Program at an academic hospital in South Africa.\",\"authors\":\"Ngwanatala Sophia Mokoka, Elise Schapkaitz, Susan Louw\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/labmed/lmae069\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Laboratories use their performance in external quality assurance (EQA) to establish quality planning strategies and to assess whether testing processes require improvement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The EQA performance of the hematology and coagulation test parameters on the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia EQA program was evaluated over a 4-year cycle at an academic hospital in Johannesburg, South Africa. The test performance was determined from analytical quality specification (APS) and/or z-scores. Bias and imprecision were used to calculate sigma (σ) metric scores. Specifications from European Federation of Laboratory Medicine and/or biological variation were applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The laboratory achieved a mean testing score of 98.7 ± 4.0%. There were 103 (10.7%) unacceptable results. On investigation, root causes included: presurvey issues (83%), transcription errors (9%), random errors (6%), and test performance errors (3%). All test parameters evaluated achieved an acceptable median APS during the study period. The mean z-scores, however, were >2 and unacceptable for mean cell hemoglobin concentration and hematocrit. On investigation, this was attributed to significant delay in transport and storage of full blood count samples. White cell count and d-dimer achieved a σ ≥ 6.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EQA participation assisted the laboratory in maintaining a quality system. Close monitoring is necessary for international laboratories to avoid sample delays that can affect result quality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94124,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Laboratory medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Laboratory medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmae069\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmae069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:实验室利用其在外部质量保证(EQA)中的表现制定质量规划战略,并评估检测过程是否需要改进:实验室利用其在外部质量保证(EQA)中的表现来制定质量规划策略,并评估检验流程是否需要改进:方法:在南非约翰内斯堡的一家学术医院,对澳大利亚皇家病理学院EQA项目中血液学和凝血检验参数的EQA绩效进行了为期4年的评估。检验性能根据分析质量规格(APS)和/或 Z 值确定。偏差和不精确度用于计算西格玛(σ)指标分数。结果:实验室的平均检测得分率为 98.7 ± 4.0%。不可接受的结果有 103 个(10.7%)。经调查,根本原因包括:调查前问题(83%)、转录错误(9%)、随机错误(6%)和测试性能错误(3%)。在研究期间,所有评估的测试参数都达到了可接受的 APS 中值。然而,平均细胞血红蛋白浓度和血细胞比容的平均 Z 值大于 2,无法接受。经调查,这是因为全血细胞计数样本的运输和储存出现了严重延误。白细胞计数和二聚体的σ≥6:参与 EQA 有助于实验室维持质量体系。国际实验室有必要进行密切监控,以避免样本延误而影响结果质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
External quality assurance experience with Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia Program at an academic hospital in South Africa.

Introduction: Laboratories use their performance in external quality assurance (EQA) to establish quality planning strategies and to assess whether testing processes require improvement.

Methods: The EQA performance of the hematology and coagulation test parameters on the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia EQA program was evaluated over a 4-year cycle at an academic hospital in Johannesburg, South Africa. The test performance was determined from analytical quality specification (APS) and/or z-scores. Bias and imprecision were used to calculate sigma (σ) metric scores. Specifications from European Federation of Laboratory Medicine and/or biological variation were applied.

Results: The laboratory achieved a mean testing score of 98.7 ± 4.0%. There were 103 (10.7%) unacceptable results. On investigation, root causes included: presurvey issues (83%), transcription errors (9%), random errors (6%), and test performance errors (3%). All test parameters evaluated achieved an acceptable median APS during the study period. The mean z-scores, however, were >2 and unacceptable for mean cell hemoglobin concentration and hematocrit. On investigation, this was attributed to significant delay in transport and storage of full blood count samples. White cell count and d-dimer achieved a σ ≥ 6.

Conclusion: EQA participation assisted the laboratory in maintaining a quality system. Close monitoring is necessary for international laboratories to avoid sample delays that can affect result quality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Comparison of basic lymphocyte phenotype results between a diagnostic and a research laboratory. Evidence-based approach for the generation of a multivariate logistic regression model that predicts instrument failure. Correlation of the abundance of MDSCs, Tregs, PD-1, and PD-L1 with the efficacy of chemotherapy and prognosis in gastric cancer. Correction to: The utility of an algorithm based on procalcitonin monitoring in patients with sepsis. Implementing laboratory internal audit to improve compliance and quality of care in the municipal public health system-based ambulatory care health clinics in New York city.
×
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