Effectiveness of Laboratory Practices to Reducing Patient Misidentification Due to Specimen Labeling Errors at the Time of Specimen Collection in Healthcare Settings: LMBP™ Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Specimen labeling errors have long plagued the laboratory industry putting patients at risk of transfusion-related death, medication errors, misdiagnosis, and patient mismanagement. Many interventions have been implemented and deemed to be effective in reducing sample error rates. The objective of this review was to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of laboratory practices/ interventions to develop evidence based recommendations for the best laboratory practices to reduce labeling errors. CONTENT: The standardized LMBP™ A-6 methods were used to conduct this systematic review. Total evidence included 12 studies published during the time periods of 1980 to September 2015. Combined data from seven studies found that the interventions developed as a result of improved communication and collaboration between the laboratory and clinical staff resulted in substantial decrease in specimen labeling errors (Median relative percent change in labeling errors: -75.86; IQI: -84.77, -58.00). Further data from subset of four studies showed a significant decrease in specimen labeling errors after the institution of the standardized specimen labeling protocols (Median relative percent decrease in specimen labeling errors: -72.45; IQI: -83.25, -46.50). SUMMARY: Based on the evidence included in this review, the interventions that enhance the communication and collaboration between laboratory and healthcare professionals can decrease the specimen identification errors in healthcare settings. However, more research is needed to make the conclusion on the effectiveness of other evaluated practices in this review including training and education of the specimen collection staff, audit and feedback of labeling errors, and implementation of new technology (other than barcoding).

Proficiency testing performance in US laboratories: results reported to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 1994 through 2006.

CONTEXT: Beginning in 1994, clinical laboratories performing nonwaived testing were required, under the regulations implementing the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA), to enroll and participate in a proficiency testing (PT) program approved by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Successful PT performance is a requirement for maintaining CLIA certification to perform testing in certain specialties and subspecialties and for specific analytes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the PT performance from 1994 through 2006 of hospital and independent laboratories (HI) compared with all other testing sites (AOT) for selected commonly performed tests and analytes. DESIGN: Proficiency testing data, from 1994 through 2006, were electronically reported to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services by approved PT programs as required by CLIA regulations. Approximately 16 million PT event scores from 36 000 unique testing sites were sorted into 2 groups based on the type of testing facility: HI or AOT. RESULTS: The PT performance scores for 15 of the most commonly performed tests demonstrated a decline in failure rates for both HI and AOT laboratory groups during 1994 through 2006 (analyte/test values reported in this article include alanine aminotransferase, amylase, bilirubin, cholesterol, digoxin, glucose, hemoglobin, leukocyte count, potassium, prothrombin time, theophylline, thyroxine, triglycerides, white blood cell differential, and uric acid). For most analytes, the difference in failure rates between HI and AOT was statistically significant. The AOT group started with higher failure rates, and remained higher for all analytes, during most years when compared with the HI group; although, over time, that difference diminished. The AOT group showed a greater decline in PT failure than the HI group. For all analytes, the AOT group performance improved during this period. CONCLUSIONS: The PT performance improved dramatically for the AOT group from 1994 through 2006 as measured by a decrease in the percentage of laboratories with unsatisfactory performance for 15 selected analytes. The PT performance in the HI group improved modestly for some analytes during this same period, whereas, for other analytes, the group showed no apparent improvement.