Pre-Analytical Components of Risk in Four Branches of Clinical Laboratory in Romania--Prospective Study.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Development of quality measurement principles is a strategic point for each clinical laboratory. Preexamination process is the most critical and the most difficult to be managed. The aim of this study is to identify, quantify, and monitor the nonconformities of the pre-analytical process using quality indicators that can affect the patient's health safety in four different locations of a Romanian private clinical laboratory. METHODS: The study group consisted of all the analysis requests received by the departments of biochemistry, hematology, and coagulation from January through March 2015. In order to collect the pre-analytical nonconformities, we created a "Risk Budget", using the entries from the "Evidence notebook--non-conform samples" from the above mentioned departments. The laboratory established the quality indicators by means of the risk management technique in order to identify and control the sources of errors, FMEA (Failure Modes and Effects Analyses), which had been implemented and monitored for its purposes and special needs. For the assessment of the control level over the processes, the results were transformed on the Six Sigma scale, using the Westgard calculation method and being obtained in this way the frequency with which an error may occur. (https//www.westgard. com/six-sigma-calculators.htm). RESULTS: The obtained results prove that the quantification and monitoring of the indicators can be a control instrument for the pre-analytic activities. The calculation of the Six Sigma value adds extra information to the study because it allows the detection of the processes which need improvement (Sigma value higher than 4 represents a well controlled process). The highest rates were observed for the hemolyzed and the lipemic samples, in the department of biochemistry and hemolyzed, insufficient sample volume, or clotted samples for the department of hematology and coagulation. Significant statistical differences between laboratories participating in the study have been recorded for these indicators. CONCLUSIONS: The elaborated study between the four branches of a Romanian private clinical laboratory was a challenge, and it helped in choosing strategic decisions regarding the improvement of the patient's health safety in the institution, corresponding to the accreditation requirements in accordance with ISO 151892013.