Article

Sağlık kurumlarında kalite güvencesi ve akreditasyon: Mikrobiyoloji laboratuvarları örneği

Hacettepe Tıp Dergisi 01/2008; 39(1):9-15.

Full-text

Available from: Dolunay Gülmez, Apr 18, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
109 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Institute of Medicine (IOM) report (1999) stated that the prevalence of medical errors is high in today's health care system. Some specialties in health care are more risky than others. A varying blunder/error rate of 0.1-9.3% in clinical diagnostic laboratories has been reported in the literature. Many of these errors occur in the preanalytical and postanalytical phases of testing. It has been suggested that the errors occurring in clinical diagnostic laboratories are smaller in number than those occurring elsewhere in a hospital setting. However, given the quantum of laboratory tests used in health care, even this small rate may reflect a large number of errors. The surgical specialties, emergency rooms, and intensive care units have been previously identified as areas of risk for patient safety. Though the nature of work in these specialties and their interdependence on clinical diagnostic laboratories presents abundant opportunities for error-generating behavior, many of these errors may be preventable. Appropriate attention to system factors involved in these errors and designing intelligent system approaches may help control and eliminate many of these errors in health care.
    Clinical Biochemistry 01/2005; 37(12):1052-62. DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2004.08.009 · 2.23 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Quality assurance (QA) is the total process whereby the quality of laboratory reports can be guaranteed. The term quality control covers that part of QA, which primarily concerns the control of errors in the performance of tests and verification of test results. All materials, equipment and procedures must be adequately controlled. Culture media must be tested for sterility and performance. Each laboratory must have standard operating procedures (SOPs). QA of pre-analytical, analytical and post-analytical stages of microbiological procedures should be incorporated in SOPs. The laboratory must be well lit with dust-free air-conditioned environment. Environmental conditions should be monitored. Supervisory and technical personnel should be well qualified. The laboratory should participate in external and internal quality assurance schemes.
    Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology 01/2004; 22(2):81-6. · 1.04 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patient safety is influenced by the frequency and seriousness of errors that occur in the health care system. Error rates in laboratory practices are collected routinely for a variety of performance measures in all clinical pathology laboratories in the United States, but a list of critical performance measures has not yet been recommended. The most extensive databases describing error rates in pathology were developed and are maintained by the College of American Pathologists (CAP). These databases include the CAP's Q-Probes and Q-Tracks programs, which provide information on error rates from more than 130 interlaboratory studies. To define critical performance measures in laboratory medicine, describe error rates of these measures, and provide suggestions to decrease these errors, thereby ultimately improving patient safety. A review of experiences from Q-Probes and Q-Tracks studies supplemented with other studies cited in the literature. Q-Probes studies are carried out as time-limited studies lasting 1 to 4 months and have been conducted since 1989. In contrast, Q-Tracks investigations are ongoing studies performed on a yearly basis and have been conducted only since 1998. Participants from institutions throughout the world simultaneously conducted these studies according to specified scientific designs. The CAP has collected and summarized data for participants about these performance measures, including the significance of errors, the magnitude of error rates, tactics for error reduction, and willingness to implement each of these performance measures. A list of recommended performance measures, the frequency of errors when these performance measures were studied, and suggestions to improve patient safety by reducing these errors. Error rates for preanalytic and postanalytic performance measures were higher than for analytic measures. Eight performance measures were identified, including customer satisfaction, test turnaround times, patient identification, specimen acceptability, proficiency testing, critical value reporting, blood product wastage, and blood culture contamination. Error rate benchmarks for these performance measures were cited and recommendations for improving patient safety presented. Not only has each of the 8 performance measures proven practical, useful, and important for patient care, taken together, they also fulfill regulatory requirements. All laboratories should consider implementing these performance measures and standardizing their own scientific designs, data analysis, and error reduction strategies according to findings from these published studies.
    Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine 11/2005; 129(10):1252-61. DOI:10.1043/1543-2165(2005)129[1252:EILMPL]2.0.CO;2 · 2.88 Impact Factor