Cargando…

Three years’ experience of quality monitoring program on pre‐analytical errors in china

BACKGROUND: Various errors in the procedure of specimen collection have been reported as the primary causes of pre‐analytical errors. The aim of this study was to monitor and assess the reasons and frequencies of rejected samples in China. METHODS: A pre‐analytical external quality assessment (EQA)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kang, Fengfeng, Li, Weixing, Xia, Xiaohua, Shan, Zhiming
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7958002/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33458892
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.23699
_version_ 1783664766975213568
author Kang, Fengfeng
Li, Weixing
Xia, Xiaohua
Shan, Zhiming
author_facet Kang, Fengfeng
Li, Weixing
Xia, Xiaohua
Shan, Zhiming
author_sort Kang, Fengfeng
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Various errors in the procedure of specimen collection have been reported as the primary causes of pre‐analytical errors. The aim of this study was to monitor and assess the reasons and frequencies of rejected samples in China. METHODS: A pre‐analytical external quality assessment (EQA) scheme involving six quality indicators (QIs) was conducted from 2017 to 2019. Rejection rate was calculated for each QI. The difference of the rejection rates over the time was checked by Chi‐square test. Furthermore, the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of the results from total laboratories each year were calculated as optimum, desirable, and minimum level of performance specifications. RESULTS: In total, 423 laboratories submitted data continuously for six EQA rounds. The overall rejection rates were 0.2042%, 0.1709%, 0.1942%, 0.1689%, 0.1593%, and 0.1491%, respectively. The most common error was sample hemolysed (0.0514%–0.0635%), and the least one was sample not received (0.0008%–0.0014%). A significant reduction in percentages was observed for all QIs. For biochemistry and immunology, hemolysis accounted for more than half of the rejection causes, while for hematology, the primary cause shifted from incorrect fill level to sample clotted. The quality specifications had improved over time, except for the optimum level. CONCLUSION: The significant reduction in error rates on sample rejection we observed suggested that laboratories should pay more attention to the standardized specimen collection. We also provide a benchmark for QIs performance specification to help laboratories increase awareness about the critical aspects in the need of improvement actions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7958002
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79580022021-03-19 Three years’ experience of quality monitoring program on pre‐analytical errors in china Kang, Fengfeng Li, Weixing Xia, Xiaohua Shan, Zhiming J Clin Lab Anal Research Articles BACKGROUND: Various errors in the procedure of specimen collection have been reported as the primary causes of pre‐analytical errors. The aim of this study was to monitor and assess the reasons and frequencies of rejected samples in China. METHODS: A pre‐analytical external quality assessment (EQA) scheme involving six quality indicators (QIs) was conducted from 2017 to 2019. Rejection rate was calculated for each QI. The difference of the rejection rates over the time was checked by Chi‐square test. Furthermore, the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of the results from total laboratories each year were calculated as optimum, desirable, and minimum level of performance specifications. RESULTS: In total, 423 laboratories submitted data continuously for six EQA rounds. The overall rejection rates were 0.2042%, 0.1709%, 0.1942%, 0.1689%, 0.1593%, and 0.1491%, respectively. The most common error was sample hemolysed (0.0514%–0.0635%), and the least one was sample not received (0.0008%–0.0014%). A significant reduction in percentages was observed for all QIs. For biochemistry and immunology, hemolysis accounted for more than half of the rejection causes, while for hematology, the primary cause shifted from incorrect fill level to sample clotted. The quality specifications had improved over time, except for the optimum level. CONCLUSION: The significant reduction in error rates on sample rejection we observed suggested that laboratories should pay more attention to the standardized specimen collection. We also provide a benchmark for QIs performance specification to help laboratories increase awareness about the critical aspects in the need of improvement actions. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-01-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7958002/ /pubmed/33458892 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.23699 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis published by Wiley Periodicals LLC This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Kang, Fengfeng
Li, Weixing
Xia, Xiaohua
Shan, Zhiming
Three years’ experience of quality monitoring program on pre‐analytical errors in china
title Three years’ experience of quality monitoring program on pre‐analytical errors in china
title_full Three years’ experience of quality monitoring program on pre‐analytical errors in china
title_fullStr Three years’ experience of quality monitoring program on pre‐analytical errors in china
title_full_unstemmed Three years’ experience of quality monitoring program on pre‐analytical errors in china
title_short Three years’ experience of quality monitoring program on pre‐analytical errors in china
title_sort three years’ experience of quality monitoring program on pre‐analytical errors in china
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7958002/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33458892
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcla.23699
work_keys_str_mv AT kangfengfeng threeyearsexperienceofqualitymonitoringprogramonpreanalyticalerrorsinchina
AT liweixing threeyearsexperienceofqualitymonitoringprogramonpreanalyticalerrorsinchina
AT xiaxiaohua threeyearsexperienceofqualitymonitoringprogramonpreanalyticalerrorsinchina
AT shanzhiming threeyearsexperienceofqualitymonitoringprogramonpreanalyticalerrorsinchina