Cargando…

A comprehensive review of the SLMTA literature part 2: Measuring success

BACKGROUND: Since its introduction in 2009, the Strengthening Laboratory Management Toward Accreditation (SLMTA) programme has been implemented in 617 laboratories in 47 countries. OBJECTIVE: We completed a systematic review of the published literature on SLMTA. The review consists of two companion...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luman, Elizabeth T., Yao, Katy, Nkengasong, John N.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AOSIS OpenJournals 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5637800/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29043201
http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajlm.v3i2.276
_version_ 1783270654191075328
author Luman, Elizabeth T.
Yao, Katy
Nkengasong, John N.
author_facet Luman, Elizabeth T.
Yao, Katy
Nkengasong, John N.
author_sort Luman, Elizabeth T.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Since its introduction in 2009, the Strengthening Laboratory Management Toward Accreditation (SLMTA) programme has been implemented in 617 laboratories in 47 countries. OBJECTIVE: We completed a systematic review of the published literature on SLMTA. The review consists of two companion papers; this article examines quantitative evidence presented in the publications along with a meta-analysis of selected results. METHODS: We identified 28 published articles with data from SLMTA implementation. The SLMTA programme was evaluated through audits based on a standard checklist, which is divided into 12 sections corresponding to the 12 Quality System Essentials (QSEs). Several basic service delivery indicators reported by programmes were also examined. Results for various components of the programme were reviewed and summarised; a meta-analysis of QSE results grouped by the three stages of the quality cycle was conducted for 126 laboratories in 12 countries. RESULTS: Global programme data show improved quality in SLMTA laboratories in every country, with average improvements on audit scores of 25 percentage points. Meta-analysis identified Improvement Management as the weakest stage, with internal audit (8%) and occurrence management (16%) showing the lowest scores. Studies documented 19% – 95% reductions in turn-around times, 69% – 93% reductions in specimen rejection rates, 76% – 81% increases in clinician satisfaction rates, 67% – 85% improvements in external quality assessment results, 50% – 66% decreases in nonconformities and 67% increases in staff punctuality. CONCLUSIONS: The wide array of results reported provides a comprehensive picture of the SLMTA programme overall, suggesting a substantive impact on provision of quality laboratory services and patient care. These comprehensive results establish a solid data-driven foundation for program improvement and further expansion.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5637800
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher AOSIS OpenJournals
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56378002017-10-17 A comprehensive review of the SLMTA literature part 2: Measuring success Luman, Elizabeth T. Yao, Katy Nkengasong, John N. Afr J Lab Med Review Article BACKGROUND: Since its introduction in 2009, the Strengthening Laboratory Management Toward Accreditation (SLMTA) programme has been implemented in 617 laboratories in 47 countries. OBJECTIVE: We completed a systematic review of the published literature on SLMTA. The review consists of two companion papers; this article examines quantitative evidence presented in the publications along with a meta-analysis of selected results. METHODS: We identified 28 published articles with data from SLMTA implementation. The SLMTA programme was evaluated through audits based on a standard checklist, which is divided into 12 sections corresponding to the 12 Quality System Essentials (QSEs). Several basic service delivery indicators reported by programmes were also examined. Results for various components of the programme were reviewed and summarised; a meta-analysis of QSE results grouped by the three stages of the quality cycle was conducted for 126 laboratories in 12 countries. RESULTS: Global programme data show improved quality in SLMTA laboratories in every country, with average improvements on audit scores of 25 percentage points. Meta-analysis identified Improvement Management as the weakest stage, with internal audit (8%) and occurrence management (16%) showing the lowest scores. Studies documented 19% – 95% reductions in turn-around times, 69% – 93% reductions in specimen rejection rates, 76% – 81% increases in clinician satisfaction rates, 67% – 85% improvements in external quality assessment results, 50% – 66% decreases in nonconformities and 67% increases in staff punctuality. CONCLUSIONS: The wide array of results reported provides a comprehensive picture of the SLMTA programme overall, suggesting a substantive impact on provision of quality laboratory services and patient care. These comprehensive results establish a solid data-driven foundation for program improvement and further expansion. AOSIS OpenJournals 2014-11-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5637800/ /pubmed/29043201 http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajlm.v3i2.276 Text en © 2014. The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Licensee: AOSIS OpenJournals. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License.
spellingShingle Review Article
Luman, Elizabeth T.
Yao, Katy
Nkengasong, John N.
A comprehensive review of the SLMTA literature part 2: Measuring success
title A comprehensive review of the SLMTA literature part 2: Measuring success
title_full A comprehensive review of the SLMTA literature part 2: Measuring success
title_fullStr A comprehensive review of the SLMTA literature part 2: Measuring success
title_full_unstemmed A comprehensive review of the SLMTA literature part 2: Measuring success
title_short A comprehensive review of the SLMTA literature part 2: Measuring success
title_sort comprehensive review of the slmta literature part 2: measuring success
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5637800/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29043201
http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ajlm.v3i2.276
work_keys_str_mv AT lumanelizabetht acomprehensivereviewoftheslmtaliteraturepart2measuringsuccess
AT yaokaty acomprehensivereviewoftheslmtaliteraturepart2measuringsuccess
AT nkengasongjohnn acomprehensivereviewoftheslmtaliteraturepart2measuringsuccess
AT lumanelizabetht comprehensivereviewoftheslmtaliteraturepart2measuringsuccess
AT yaokaty comprehensivereviewoftheslmtaliteraturepart2measuringsuccess
AT nkengasongjohnn comprehensivereviewoftheslmtaliteraturepart2measuringsuccess