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。
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.