PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16729864

Errors in clinical laboratories or errors in laboratory medicine?

Abstract

Laboratory testing is a highly complex process and, although laboratory services are relatively safe, they are not as safe as they could or should be. Clinical laboratories have long focused their attention on quality control methods and quality assessment programs dealing with analytical aspects of testing. However, a growing body of evidence accumulated in recent decades demonstrates that quality in clinical laboratories cannot be assured by merely focusing on purely analytical aspects. The more recent surveys on errors in laboratory medicine conclude that in the delivery of laboratory testing, mistakes occur more frequently before (pre-analytical) and after (post-analytical) the test has been performed. Most errors are due to pre-analytical factors (46-68.2% of total errors), while a high error rate (18.5-47% of total errors) has also been found in the post-analytical phase. Errors due to analytical problems have been significantly reduced over time, but there is evidence that, particularly for immunoassays, interference may have a serious impact on patients. A description of the most frequent and risky pre-, intra- and post-analytical errors and advice on practical steps for measuring and reducing the risk of errors is therefore given in the present paper. Many mistakes in the Total Testing Process are called "laboratory errors", although these may be due to poor communication, action taken by others involved in the testing process (e.g., physicians, nurses and phlebotomists), or poorly designed processes, all of which are beyond the laboratory's control. Likewise, there is evidence that laboratory information is only partially utilized. A recent document from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) recommends a new, broader definition of the term "laboratory error" and a classification of errors according to different criteria. In a modern approach to total quality, centered on patients' needs and satisfaction, the risk of errors and mistakes in pre- and post-examination steps must be minimized to guarantee the total quality of laboratory services.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mario Plebani. 2006. Errors in clinical laboratories or errors in laboratory medicine?. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm.2006.123

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effect of temperature on the extraction kinetics and diffusivity of Cyclosporin A in the fungus Tolypocladium inflatum.

The influence of temperature on the extraction kinetics of Cyclosporin A (CyA) from the mycelia of Tolypocladium inflatum was examined in this study. The extraction of CyA from mycelia was performed in a 2-L stirred, baffled vessel using 30% v/v aqueous methanol. The temperature range used was from 5 to 45 degrees C. A linear relationship was found between the extraction yield of CyA and temperature. As the temperature increased, the yield of CyA increased with a maximum CyA yield of 18.3% obtained at 45 degrees C, which is 21.3% higher than the yield at 25 degrees C. The activation energy for the extraction of CyA from T. inflatum was found to be 36.7 kJ/mol, which indicates that the extraction of CyA from T. inflatum is controlled by both solubilization of CyA and diffusion of CyA through the solid phase of mycelia. The overall mass transfer coefficient, k(L)a(S), was found to increase from 1.02 x 10(-3) to 1.34 x 10(-2) s(-1) as the temperature increased from 5 to 45 degrees C. The effective diffusivity of CyA in the solid matrix of mycelia was found to increase from 1.05 x 10(-15) to 1.43 x 10(-14) m(2)/s as the temperature increased from 5 to 45 degrees C. A mathematical diffusion model was developed and was used to fit the experimental kinetic data of CyA extraction and determination of CyA effective diffusivities at different temperatures. This is the first time CyA diffusivities as a function of extraction temperature are reported in the literature.

Clinical Laboratory Techniques↗

Laboratory-confirmed non-O157 Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli--Connecticut, 2000-2005.

Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) infection causes diarrhea that is often bloody and can result in potentially life-threatening hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS). Escherichia coli O157:H7 is the most common cause of STEC infection in the United States, producing 73,000 illnesses annually, according to the last estimate in 1999. Unlike O157, however, little is known about the incidence of non-O157 strains. Because STEC other than O157 are not commonly identified, the incidence, trends, and epidemiology of non-O157 STEC are not well understood. To assess trends in Shiga toxin enzyme immunoassay (Stx EIA) testing by local clinical laboratories, the Connecticut Department of Public Health (CTDPH) analyzed results of confirmatory testing conducted in the state laboratory during 2000--2005. The findings indicated that a total of 403 STEC infections were reported by clinical laboratories in Connecticut, including 207 identified as STEC by Stx EIA testing alone, and that the use of Stx EIA increased from 2000 to 2005. Use of Stx EIA without prompt culture confirmation can delay or prevent serotyping and subtyping of isolates and detection of both O157 and non-O157 STEC outbreaks. Public health authorities in all states should ensure that clinical laboratories forward Stx EIA-positive specimens to the state laboratory for isolation and identification of STEC, as recommended by the Association of Public Health Laboratories and CDC.

Clinical Laboratory Techniques↗

Clinical use of laboratory tests for the identification of secondary forms of arterial hypertension.

The prevalence of secondary hypertension can be underestimated if appropriate tests are not performed. The importance of selecting patients with a high pre-test probability of secondary forms of hypertension is first discussed. The laboratory tests currently used for seeking a cause of hypertension are critically reviewed, with emphasis on their operative features and limitations. Strategies to identify primary aldosteronism, the most frequent form of secondary hypertension, and to determine its unilateral or bilateral causes are described. Treatment entails adrenalectomy in unilateral forms, and mineralocorticoid receptor blockade in bilateral forms. Renovascular hypertension is also a common, curable form of hypertension, that should be identified as early as possible to avoid the onset of cardiovascular target organ damage. The tests for its confirmation or exclusion are discussed. The various tests available for the diagnosis of pheochromocytoma, which is much rarer than the above but extremely important to identify, are also described, with emphasis on recent developments in genetic testing. Finally, the tests for diagnosing some rarer monogenic forms and other renal and endocrine causes of arterial hypertension are explored.

Clinical Laboratory Techniques↗