Limits...
Ten years of preanalytical monitoring and control: Synthetic Balanced Score Card Indicator.

Salinas M, López-Garrigós M, Flores E, Santo-Quiles A, Gutierrez M, Lugo J, Lillo R, Leiva-Salinas C - Biochem Med (Zagreb) (2015)

Bottom Line: We studied the evolution of those indicators over time and compared indicator results by way of the comparison of proportions and Chi-square.We present a practical and effective methodology to monitor unsuitable sample preanalytical errors.The synthetic indicator results summarize overall preanalytical sample errors, and can be used as part of BSC management system.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Clinical Laboratory, Hospital Universitario de San Juan, San Juan de Alicante, Spain ; Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Pathology, Universidad Miguel Hernandez, Elche, Spain.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Preanalytical control and monitoring continue to be an important issue for clinical laboratory professionals. The aim of the study was to evaluate a monitoring system of preanalytical errors regarding not suitable samples for analysis, based on different indicators; to compare such indicators in different phlebotomy centres; and finally to evaluate a single synthetic preanalytical indicator that may be included in the balanced scorecard management system (BSC).

Materials and methods: We collected individual and global preanalytical errors in haematology, coagulation, chemistry, and urine samples analysis. We also analyzed a synthetic indicator that represents the sum of all types of preanalytical errors, expressed in a sigma level. We studied the evolution of those indicators over time and compared indicator results by way of the comparison of proportions and Chi-square.

Results: There was a decrease in the number of errors along the years (P<0.001). This pattern was confirmed in primary care patients, inpatients and outpatients. In blood samples, fewer errors occurred in outpatients, followed by inpatients.

Conclusion: We present a practical and effective methodology to monitor unsuitable sample preanalytical errors. The synthetic indicator results summarize overall preanalytical sample errors, and can be used as part of BSC management system.

Show MeSH
Annual individual indicators results: Shows each type of preanalytical error with respect to every sample collected (three in haematology and coagulation, two in chemistry, and one in urine samples).
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4401317&req=5

f1: Annual individual indicators results: Shows each type of preanalytical error with respect to every sample collected (three in haematology and coagulation, two in chemistry, and one in urine samples).

Mentions: Daily, a set of indicators results (individual, global and synthetic) are obtained and integrated in laboratory quality system. The annual individual indicators results are shown in Figure 1. The four global indicators results - as errors per 10,000 samples - were significantly (P < 0.001) lower in year 2003 when compared to 2012 (haematology: 112.07 in year 2003 vs. 52.84 in 2012; coagulation 345.52 in year 2003 vs. 120.12 in 2012; chemistry 55.53 in year 2003 vs. 5.46 in 2012; urine 361.45 in year 2003 vs. 302.62 in 2012).


Ten years of preanalytical monitoring and control: Synthetic Balanced Score Card Indicator.

Salinas M, López-Garrigós M, Flores E, Santo-Quiles A, Gutierrez M, Lugo J, Lillo R, Leiva-Salinas C - Biochem Med (Zagreb) (2015)

Annual individual indicators results: Shows each type of preanalytical error with respect to every sample collected (three in haematology and coagulation, two in chemistry, and one in urine samples).
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4401317&req=5

f1: Annual individual indicators results: Shows each type of preanalytical error with respect to every sample collected (three in haematology and coagulation, two in chemistry, and one in urine samples).
Mentions: Daily, a set of indicators results (individual, global and synthetic) are obtained and integrated in laboratory quality system. The annual individual indicators results are shown in Figure 1. The four global indicators results - as errors per 10,000 samples - were significantly (P < 0.001) lower in year 2003 when compared to 2012 (haematology: 112.07 in year 2003 vs. 52.84 in 2012; coagulation 345.52 in year 2003 vs. 120.12 in 2012; chemistry 55.53 in year 2003 vs. 5.46 in 2012; urine 361.45 in year 2003 vs. 302.62 in 2012).

Bottom Line: We studied the evolution of those indicators over time and compared indicator results by way of the comparison of proportions and Chi-square.We present a practical and effective methodology to monitor unsuitable sample preanalytical errors.The synthetic indicator results summarize overall preanalytical sample errors, and can be used as part of BSC management system.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Clinical Laboratory, Hospital Universitario de San Juan, San Juan de Alicante, Spain ; Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Pathology, Universidad Miguel Hernandez, Elche, Spain.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Preanalytical control and monitoring continue to be an important issue for clinical laboratory professionals. The aim of the study was to evaluate a monitoring system of preanalytical errors regarding not suitable samples for analysis, based on different indicators; to compare such indicators in different phlebotomy centres; and finally to evaluate a single synthetic preanalytical indicator that may be included in the balanced scorecard management system (BSC).

Materials and methods: We collected individual and global preanalytical errors in haematology, coagulation, chemistry, and urine samples analysis. We also analyzed a synthetic indicator that represents the sum of all types of preanalytical errors, expressed in a sigma level. We studied the evolution of those indicators over time and compared indicator results by way of the comparison of proportions and Chi-square.

Results: There was a decrease in the number of errors along the years (P<0.001). This pattern was confirmed in primary care patients, inpatients and outpatients. In blood samples, fewer errors occurred in outpatients, followed by inpatients.

Conclusion: We present a practical and effective methodology to monitor unsuitable sample preanalytical errors. The synthetic indicator results summarize overall preanalytical sample errors, and can be used as part of BSC management system.

Show MeSH