Startseite Towards a new paradigm in laboratory medicine: the five rights
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Towards a new paradigm in laboratory medicine: the five rights

  • Mario Plebani ORCID logo EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 12. Oktober 2016
Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill
Manuskript einreichen Informationen für Autor*innen
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
Aus der Zeitschrift Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) Band 54 Heft 12

Abstract

A body of evidence collected in the last few decades demonstrates that the pre- and post-analytical phases of the testing cycle are more error-prone than the analytical phase. However, the paradigm of errors and quality in laboratory medicine has been questioned, analytical mistakes continuing to be a major cause of adverse clinical outcomes and patient harm. Although the brain-to-brain concept is widely recognized in the community of laboratory professionals, there is lack of clarity concerning the inter-relationship between the different phases of the cycle, interdependence between the pre-analytical phase and analytical quality, and the effect of the post-analytical steps on the quality of ultimate laboratory information. Analytical quality remains the “core business” of clinical laboratories, but laboratory professionals and clinicians alike should never lose sight of the fact that pre-analytical variables are often responsible for erroneous test results and that quality biospecimens are pre-requisites for a reliable analytical phase. In addition, the pressure for expert advice on test selection and interpretation of results has increased hand in hand with the ever-increasing complexity of tests and diagnostic fields. Finally, the data on diagnostic errors and inappropriate clinical decisions made due to delay or misinterpretation of laboratory data underscore the current need for greater collaboration at the clinical-laboratory interface.

Keywords: analytical quality; diagnostic errors; laboratory medicine; patient safety; pre-analytical phase; total testing process
Corresponding author: Mario Plebani, CCLM Editor in Chief, Department of Laboratory Medicine, University-Hospital of Padova, Padova, Italy

  1. Author contributions: The author has accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  2. Research funding: None declared.

  3. Employment or leadership: None declared.

  4. Honorarium: None declared.

  5. Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.

References

1. Bonini P, Plebani M, Ceriotti F, Rubboli F. Errors in laboratory medicine. Clin Chem 2002;48:691–8.10.1093/clinchem/48.5.691Suche in Google Scholar

2. Plebani M. The detection and prevention of errors in laboratory medicine. Ann Clin Biochem 2010;47:101–1010.1258/acb.2009.009222Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

3. Plebani M, Laposata M, Lundberg GD. The brain-to-brain loop concept for laboratory testing 40 years after its introduction. Am J Clin Pathol 2011;136:829–33.10.1309/AJCPR28HWHSSDNONSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

4. Institute of Medicine. Improving diagnosis in health care. Washington, DC: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2015. Available at: http://iom.nationalacademies.org/Reports/2015/Improving-Diagnosis-in-Healthcare.aspx.Suche in Google Scholar

5. Vogeser M, Seger C. Quality management in clinical application of mass spectrometry measurement systems. Clin Biochem 2016;49:947–54.10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2016.07.005Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

6. Sturgeon CM, Viljoen A. Analytical error and interference in immunoassay: minimizing risk. Ann Clin Biochem 2011;48:418–32.10.1258/acb.2011.011073Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

7. Lippi G, Plebani M, Favaloro EJ. Interference in coagulation testing: focus on spurious hemolysis, icterus, and lipemia. Semin Thromb Hemost 2013;39:258–66.10.1055/s-0032-1328972Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

8. Westgard JO, Westgard SA. Assessing quality on the Sigma scale from proficiency testing and external quality assessment surveys. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:1531–5.10.1515/cclm-2014-1241Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

9. Lundberg GD. Adding outcome as the 10th step in the brain-to-brain laboratory test loop. Am J Clin Pathol 2014;141:767–9.10.1309/AJCP5KSXWTI2DMCCSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

10. Van Houcke SK, Thienpont LM. “Good samples make good assays” – the problem of sourcing clinical samples for a standardization project. Clin Chem Lab Med 2013;51:967–72.10.1515/cclm-2012-0617Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

11. Miller WG, Jones GR, Horowitz GL, Weykamp C. Proficiency testing/external quality assessment: current challenges and future directions. Clin Chem 2011;57:1670–80.10.1373/clinchem.2011.168641Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

12. Clerico A, Ripoli A, Masotti S, Prontera C, Storti S, Fortunato A, et al. Pilot study on harmonization of cardiac troponin I immunoassays using patients and quality control plasma samples. On behalf of the Italian Section of the European Ligand Assay Society (ELAS) and of the Study Group on Cardiovascular Biomarkers of the Società Italiana di Biochimica Clinica (SIBioC). Clin Chim Acta 2016 1;456:42–8.10.1016/j.cca.2016.02.017Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

13. Clerico A, Ripoli A, Zucchelli GC, Plebani M. Harmonization protocols for thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) immunoassays: different approaches based on the consensus mean value. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:377–82.10.1515/cclm-2014-0586Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

14. Ellervik C, Vaught J. Preanalytical variables affecting the integrity of human biospecimens in biobanking. Clin Chem 2015;61:914–34.10.1373/clinchem.2014.228783Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

15. Holman JW, Mifflin TE, Felder RA, Demers LM. Evaluation of an automated preanalytical robotic workstation at two academic health centers. Clin Chem 2002;48:540–8.10.1093/clinchem/48.3.540Suche in Google Scholar

16. Da Rin G. Pre-analytical workstations: a tool for reducing laboratory errors. Clin Chim Acta 2009;404:68–74.10.1016/j.cca.2009.03.024Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

17. Campbell K, Muniak A, Rothwell S, Dempster L, Per J, Barr K. Improving Quality and Safety through Positive Patient Identification. Healthc Q 2015;18:56–60.10.12927/hcq.2015.24431Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

18. College of American Pathologists, Valenstein PN, Raab SS, Walsh MK. Identification errors involving clinical laboratories: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of patient and specimen identification errors at 120 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2006;130:1106–13.10.5858/2006-130-1106-IEICLSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

19. Van Dongen-Lases EC, Cornes MP, Grankvist K, Ibarz M, Kristensen GB, Lippi G, et al. Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE), European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM). Patient identification and tube labelling – a call for harmonisation. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016;54:1141–5.10.1515/cclm-2015-1089Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

20. Bolton-Maggs PH, Wood EM, Wiersum-Osselton JC. Wrong blood in tube – potential for serious outcomes: can it be prevented? Br J Haematol 2015;168:3–13.10.1111/bjh.13137Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

21. Lang T. The Association for Clinical Biochemistry & Laboratory Medicine. National minimum re-testing interval project. Prepared for the Clinical Practice Group of the ACB and supported by the Royal College of Pathologists; 2013:1–36.Suche in Google Scholar

22. Pelloso M, Basso D, Padoan A, Fogar P, Plebani M. Computer-based-limited and personalised education management maximise appropriateness of vitamin D, vitamin B12 and folate retesting. Clin Pathol 2016;69:777–83.10.1136/jclinpath-2015-203447Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

23. Plebani M. Exploring the iceberg of errors in laboratory medicine. Clin Chim Acta 2009;404:16–23.10.1016/j.cca.2009.03.022Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

24. Zhi M, Ding EL, Theisen-Toupal J, Whelan J, Arnaout R. The landscape of inappropriate laboratory testing: a 15-year meta-analysis. PLoS One 2013;8:e78962.10.1371/journal.pone.0078962Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

25. Fryer AA, Smellie WS. Managing demand for laboratory tests: a laboratory toolkit. J Clin Pathol 2013;66:62–72.10.1136/jclinpath-2011-200524Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

26. Plebani M, Panteghini M. Promoting clinical and laboratory interaction by harmonization. Clin Chim Acta 2014;432:15–21.10.1016/j.cca.2013.09.051Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

27. Morden NE, Schwartz LM, Fisher ES, Woloshin S. Accountable prescribing. N Engl J Med 2013;369:299–302.10.1056/NEJMp1301805Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

28. Cornes MP, Atherton J, Pourmahram G, Borthwick H, Kyle B, West J, et al. Monitoring and reporting of preanalytical errors in laboratory medicine: the UK situation. Ann Clin Biochem 2016;53:279–84.10.1177/0004563215599561Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

29. Karcher DS, Lehman CM. Clinical consequences of specimen rejection: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes analysis of 78 clinical laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2014;138:1003–8.10.5858/arpa.2013-0331-CPSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

30. Dikmen ZG, Pinar A, Akbiyik F. Specimen rejection in laboratory medicine: necessary for patient safety? Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2015;25:377–85.10.11613/BM.2015.037Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

31. Lippi G, Blanckaert N, Bonini P, Green S, Kitchen S, Palicka V, et al. Haemolysis: an overview of the leading cause of unsuitable specimens in clinical laboratories. Clin Chem Lab Med 2008;46:764–72.10.1515/CCLM.2008.170Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

32. Cao L, Chen M, Phipps RA, Del Guidice RE, Handy BC, Wagar EA, et al. Causes and impact of specimen rejection in a clinical chemistry laboratory. Clin Chim Acta 2016;458:154–8.10.1016/j.cca.2016.05.003Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

33. Stark A, Jones BA, Chapman D, Well K, Krajenta R, Meier FA, et al. Clinical laboratory specimen rejection–association with the site of patient care and patients’ characteristics: findings from a single health care organization. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2007;131:588–92.10.5858/2007-131-588-CLSRWTSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

34. Howanitz PJ, Lehman CM, Jones BA, Meier FA, Horowitz GL. Practices for identifying and rejecting hemolyzed specimens are highly variable in clinical laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2015;139:1014–9.10.5858/arpa.2014-0161-CPSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

35. Becker N, Lockwood CM. Pre-analytical variables in miRNA analysis. Clin Biochem 2013;46:861–8.10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2013.02.015Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

36. Lippi G, Simundic AM. Laboratory networking and sample quality: a still relevant issue for patient safety. Clin Chem Lab Med 2012;50:1703–5.10.1515/cclm-2012-0245Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

37. Zaninotto M, Tasinato A, Padoan A, Vecchiato G, Pinato A, Sciacovelli L, et al. An integrated system for monitoring the quality of sample transportation. Clin Biochem 2012;45:688–90.10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2012.02.013Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

38. Lippi G, Banfi G, Church S, Cornes M, De Carli G, Grankvist K, et al. Preanalytical quality improvement. In pursuit of harmony, on behalf of European Federation for Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE). Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:357–70.10.1515/cclm-2014-1051Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

39. ISO 15189:2012. Medical laboratories – requirements for quality and competence. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization, 2012.Suche in Google Scholar

40. Vasikaran S, Sikaris K, Kilpatrick E, French J, Badrick T, Osypiw J, et al; on behalf of the IFCC WG Harmonization of Quality Assessment of Interpretative Comments. Assuring the quality of interpretative comments in clinical chemistry. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016;54:1901–11.10.1515/cclm-2016-0709Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

41. Howanitz JH, Howanitz PJ. Laboratory results. Timeliness as a quality attribute and strategy. Am J Clin Pathol 2001;116:311–5.10.1309/H0DY-6VTW-NB36-U3L6Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

42. Steindel SJ, Howanitz PJ. Physician satisfaction and emergency department laboratory test turnaround time. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2001;125:863–71.10.5858/2001-125-0863-PSAEDLSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

43. Novis DA, Walsh MK, Dale JC, Howanitz PJ; College of American Pathologists Q-Tracks. Continuous monitoring of stat and routine outlier turnaround times: two College of American Pathologists Q-Tracks monitors in 291 hospitals. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2004;128:621–6.10.5858/2004-128-621-CMOSARSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

44. Plebani M, Lippi G. Improving the post-analytical phase. Clin Chem Lab Med 2010;48:435–6.10.1515/CCLM.2010.113Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

45. Lippi G, Plebani M. Toxic alcohol calculations and misinterpretation of laboratory results. JAMA Intern Med 2016;176:1228–9.10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.3720Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

46. Oosterhuis WP, Ulenkate HJ, Goldschmidt HM. Evaluation of LabRespond, a new automated validation system for clinical laboratory test results. Clin Chem 2000;46:1811–7.10.1093/clinchem/46.11.1811Suche in Google Scholar

47. Guidi GC, Poli G, Bassi A, Giobelli L, Benetollo PP, Lippi G. Development and implementation of an automatic system for verification, validation and delivery of laboratory test results. Clin Chem Lab Med 2009;47:1355–60.10.1515/CCLM.2009.316Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

48. Demirci F, Akan P, Kume T, Sisman AR, Erbayraktar Z, Sevinc S. Artificial neural network approach in laboratory test reporting: learning algorithms. Am J Clin Pathol 2016;146:227–37.10.1093/ajcp/aqw104Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

49. Plebani M. Harmonization in laboratory medicine: requests, samples, measurements and reports. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 2016;53:184–96.10.3109/10408363.2015.1116851Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

50. Plebani M. Harmonization in laboratory medicine: the complete picture. Clin Chem Lab Med 2013;51:741–51.10.1515/cclm-2013-0075Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

51. Laposata ME, Laposata M, Van Cott EM, Buchner DS, Kashalo MS, Dighe AS. Physician survey of a laboratory medicine interpretive service and evaluation of the influence of interpretations on laboratory test ordering. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2004;128:1424–7.10.5858/2004-128-1424-PSOALMSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

52. Vasikaran SD, Lai LC, Sethi S, Lopez JB, Sikaris KA. Quality of interpretative commenting on common clinical chemistry results in the Asia-Pacific region and Africa. Clin Chem Lab Med 2009;47:963–70.10.1515/CCLM.2009.225Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

53. Vasikaran SD. Anatomy and history of an external quality assessment program for interpretative comments in clinical biochemistry. Clin Biochem 2015;48:467–71.10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2014.12.014Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

54. Lundberg GD. When to panic over abnormal values. MLO Med Lab Obs 1972;4:47–54.Suche in Google Scholar

55. Piva E, Pelloso M, Penello L, Plebani M. Laboratory critical values: automated notification supports effective clinical decision making. Clin Biochem 2014;47:1163–8.10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2014.05.056Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

56. Campbell CA, Horvath AR. Harmonization of critical result management in laboratory medicine. Clin Chim Acta 2014;432:135–47.10.1016/j.cca.2013.11.004Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

57. Kilpatrick ES, Holding S. Use of computer terminals on wards to access emergency test results: a retrospective audit. Br Med J 2001;322:1101–3.10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1101Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

58. Poon EG, Gandhi TK, Sequist TD, Murff HJ, Karson AS, Bates DW. “I wish I had seen this test result earlier!”: dissatisfaction with test result management systems in primary care. Arch Intern Med 2004;164:2223–8.10.1001/archinte.164.20.2223Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

59. Elder NC, McEwen TR, Flach JM, Gallimore JJ. Management of test results in family medicine offices. Ann Fam Med 2009;7:343–51.10.1370/afm.961Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

60. Elder NC, McEwen TR, Flach J, Gallimore J, Pallerla H. The management of test results in primary care: does an electronic medical record make a difference? Fam Med 2010;42:327–33.Suche in Google Scholar

61. Gandhi TK, Kachalia A, Thomas EJ, Puopolo AL, Yoon C, Brennan TA, et al. Missed and delayed diagnoses in the ambulatory setting: a study of closed malpractice claims. Ann Intern Med 2006;145:488–96.10.7326/0003-4819-145-7-200610030-00006Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

62. Graber ML, Franklin N, Gordon R. Diagnostic error in internal medicine. rch Intern Med 2005;165:1493–9.10.1001/archinte.165.13.1493Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

63. Kachalia A, Gandhi TK, Puopolo AL, Yoon C, Thomas EJ, Griffey R, et al. Missed and delayed diagnoses in the emergency department: a study of closed malpractice claims from 4 liability insurers. Ann Emerg Med 2007;49:196–205.10.1016/j.annemergmed.2006.06.035Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

64. Chen ET, Eder M, Elder NC, Hickner J. Crossing the finish line: follow-up of abnormal test results in a multisite community health center. J Natl Med Assoc 2010;102:720–5.10.1016/S0027-9684(15)30658-1Suche in Google Scholar

65. Schiff GD, Hasan O, Kim S, Abrams R, Cosby K, Lambert BL, et al. Diagnostic error in medicine: analysis of 583 physician-reported errors. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:1881–7.10.1001/archinternmed.2009.333Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

66. Callen J, Georgiou A, Li J, Westbrook JI. The safety implications of missed test results for hospitalised patients: a systematic review. BMJ Qual Saf 2011;20:194–9.10.1136/bmjqs.2010.044339Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

67. Harris DM, Westfall JM, Fernald DH, Duclos CW, West DR, Niebauer L, et al. Mixed methods analysis of medical error event reports: a report from the ASIPS collaborative. In: Henriksen K, Battles JB, Marks ES, Lewin DI, editors. Advances in patient safety: from research to implementation (volume 2: concepts and methodology). Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), 2005.Suche in Google Scholar

68. Westgard JO, Westgard SA. The quality of laboratory testing today: an assessment of sigma metrics for analytic quality using performance data from proficiency testing surveys and the CLIA criteria for acceptable performance. Am J Clin Pathol 2006;125:343–54.10.1309/V50H4FRVVWX12C79Suche in Google Scholar

69. Weykamp C, Secchiero S, Plebani M, Thelen M, Cobbaert C, Thomas A, et al. Analytical performance of 17 general chemistry analytes across countries and across manufacturers in the INPUtS project of EQA organizers in Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, United Kingdom and Spain. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016 Jul 22 pii:/j/cclm.ahead-of-print/cclm-2016–0220/cclm-2016–0220.xml. doi:10.1515/cclm-2016–0220. [Epub ahead of print].10.1515/cclm-2016–0220Suche in Google Scholar

70. Kristensen GB, Rustad P, Berg JP, Aakre KM. Analytical bias exceeding desirable quality goal in 4 out of 5 common immunoassays: results of a native single serum sample external quality assessment program for cobalamin, folate, ferritin, thyroid-stimulating hormone, and free T4 analyses. Clin Chem 2016;62:1255–63.10.1373/clinchem.2016.258962Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

71. Nakhleh RE, Nosé V, Colasacco C, Fatheree LA, Lillemoe TJ, McCrory DC, et al. Interpretive diagnostic error reduction in surgical pathology and cytology: guideline from the college of american pathologists pathology and laboratory quality center and the association of directors of anatomic and surgical pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2016;140:29–40.10.5858/arpa.2014-0511-SASuche in Google Scholar PubMed

72. Fraser CG, Kallner A, Kenny D, Petersen PH. Introduction: strategies to set global quality specifications in laboratory medicine. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1999;59:477–8.10.1080/00365519950185184Suche in Google Scholar

73. Sandberg S, Fraser CG, Horvath AR, Jansen R, Jones G, Oosterhuis W, et al. Defining analytical performance specifications: consensus statement from the 1st Strategic Conference of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:833–5.10.1515/cclm-2015-0067Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

74. Plebani M, Astion ML, Barth JH, Chen W, de Oliveira Galoro CA, Escuer MI, et al. Harmonization of quality indicators in laboratory medicine. A preliminary consensus. Clin Chem Lab Med 2014;52:951–8.10.1515/cclm-2014-0142Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

75. Plebani M, Sciacovelli L, Aita A, Pelloso M, Chiozza ML. Performance criteria and quality indicators for the pre-analytical phase. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:943–8.10.1515/cclm-2014-1124Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

76. Sciacovelli L, Aita A, Padoan A, Pelloso M, Antonelli G, Piva E, et al. Performance criteria and quality indicators for the post-analytical phase. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016;54:1169–76.10.1515/cclm-2015-0897Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

77. Plebani M. The quality indicator paradox. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016;54:1119–22.10.1515/cclm-2015-1080Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

78. Epner PL, Gans JE, Graber ML. When diagnostic testing leads to harm: a new outcomes-based approach for laboratory medicine. BMJ Qual Saf 2013;22(Suppl 2):ii6–10.10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001621Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

79. Porter ME, Larsson S, Lee TH. Standardizing patient outcomes measurement. N Engl J Med 2016;374:504–6.10.1056/NEJMp1511701Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

Published Online: 2016-10-12
Published in Print: 2016-12-1

©2016 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Biomarkers, inflammation and cancer: where to go?
  4. Review
  5. Analysis, detection and quantitation of mixed cryoglobulins in HCV infection: brief review and case examples
  6. Mini Reviews
  7. Calcitonin measurement and immunoassay interference: a case report and literature review
  8. Exosomal non-coding RNAs: a promising cancer biomarker
  9. Opinion Paper
  10. Towards a new paradigm in laboratory medicine: the five rights
  11. EFLM Recommendation
  12. Recommendation for the review of biological reference intervals in medical laboratories
  13. IFCC Position Paper
  14. Assuring the quality of interpretative comments in clinical chemistry
  15. General Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
  16. The effect of centrifugation speed and time on pre-analytical platelet activation
  17. An assessment of clinical laboratory performance for the determination of manganese in blood and urine
  18. Evaluation of antiphospholipid antibody assays using latent class analysis to address the lack of a reference standard
  19. Evaluation of the hypochromic erythrocyte and reticulocyte hemoglobin content provided by the Sysmex XE-5000 analyzer in diagnosis of iron deficiency erythropoiesis
  20. Cancer Diagnosis
  21. Identifying risk in the use of tumor markers to improve patient safety
  22. Association between Echinococcus granulosus infection and cancer risk – a pilot study in Cyprus
  23. Dynamic change of the systemic immune inflammation index predicts the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after curative resection
  24. Aberrant methylation of tumour suppressor genes WT1, GATA5 and PAX5 in hepatocellular carcinoma
  25. Cardiovascular Diseases
  26. High homocysteine and low folate plasma concentrations are associated with cardiovascular events but not bleeding during warfarin treatment
  27. Hemolysis and Coagulation
  28. Hemolysis rates in blood samples: differences between blood collected by clinicians and nurses and the effect of phlebotomy training
  29. Letters to the Editor
  30. Harmonisation of the laboratory testing process: need for a coordinated approach
  31. Pseudohyperkalemia due to severe leukocytosis: case presentation
  32. When obtaining a blood sample from the right arm was not the right thing to do: a case of elevated parathyroid hormone levels 27 years after thyroidectomy
  33. Raising awareness of assay compatibility with heparinized plasma
  34. Improved protocol for extraction of genomic DNA from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples without the use of xylene
  35. Effect of refrigeration, centrifugation, acidification, heat treatment and storage on urine calcium, magnesium and phosphate
  36. Letter in response to: Identifying risk in the use of tumor markers to improve patient safety
  37. Letter to the Editor in reply to Dayyani and Morgenstern’s comment on the article “Identifying risk in the use of tumor markers to improve patient safety”
  38. Level of red cell distribution width is affected by various factors
  39. Red blood cell distribution: an index without additional cost in estimating the prognosis of acute pancreatitis
  40. Testing of total 25(OH)vitamin D: agreement and discrepant cases between Cobas® 8000 and Liaison® XL methods
  41. Expression profiling and ontology analysis of circulating long non-coding RNAs in septic acute kidney injury patients
https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2016-0848
Schlagwörter für diesen Artikel
analytical quality; diagnostic errors; laboratory medicine; patient safety; pre-analytical phase; total testing process

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Biomarkers, inflammation and cancer: where to go?
  4. Review
  5. Analysis, detection and quantitation of mixed cryoglobulins in HCV infection: brief review and case examples
  6. Mini Reviews
  7. Calcitonin measurement and immunoassay interference: a case report and literature review
  8. Exosomal non-coding RNAs: a promising cancer biomarker
  9. Opinion Paper
  10. Towards a new paradigm in laboratory medicine: the five rights
  11. EFLM Recommendation
  12. Recommendation for the review of biological reference intervals in medical laboratories
  13. IFCC Position Paper
  14. Assuring the quality of interpretative comments in clinical chemistry
  15. General Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine
  16. The effect of centrifugation speed and time on pre-analytical platelet activation
  17. An assessment of clinical laboratory performance for the determination of manganese in blood and urine
  18. Evaluation of antiphospholipid antibody assays using latent class analysis to address the lack of a reference standard
  19. Evaluation of the hypochromic erythrocyte and reticulocyte hemoglobin content provided by the Sysmex XE-5000 analyzer in diagnosis of iron deficiency erythropoiesis
  20. Cancer Diagnosis
  21. Identifying risk in the use of tumor markers to improve patient safety
  22. Association between Echinococcus granulosus infection and cancer risk – a pilot study in Cyprus
  23. Dynamic change of the systemic immune inflammation index predicts the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after curative resection
  24. Aberrant methylation of tumour suppressor genes WT1, GATA5 and PAX5 in hepatocellular carcinoma
  25. Cardiovascular Diseases
  26. High homocysteine and low folate plasma concentrations are associated with cardiovascular events but not bleeding during warfarin treatment
  27. Hemolysis and Coagulation
  28. Hemolysis rates in blood samples: differences between blood collected by clinicians and nurses and the effect of phlebotomy training
  29. Letters to the Editor
  30. Harmonisation of the laboratory testing process: need for a coordinated approach
  31. Pseudohyperkalemia due to severe leukocytosis: case presentation
  32. When obtaining a blood sample from the right arm was not the right thing to do: a case of elevated parathyroid hormone levels 27 years after thyroidectomy
  33. Raising awareness of assay compatibility with heparinized plasma
  34. Improved protocol for extraction of genomic DNA from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples without the use of xylene
  35. Effect of refrigeration, centrifugation, acidification, heat treatment and storage on urine calcium, magnesium and phosphate
  36. Letter in response to: Identifying risk in the use of tumor markers to improve patient safety
  37. Letter to the Editor in reply to Dayyani and Morgenstern’s comment on the article “Identifying risk in the use of tumor markers to improve patient safety”
  38. Level of red cell distribution width is affected by various factors
  39. Red blood cell distribution: an index without additional cost in estimating the prognosis of acute pancreatitis
  40. Testing of total 25(OH)vitamin D: agreement and discrepant cases between Cobas® 8000 and Liaison® XL methods
  41. Expression profiling and ontology analysis of circulating long non-coding RNAs in septic acute kidney injury patients
Jetzt anmelden und 20% sparen
Institutioneller Zugang
Wie funktioniert Authentifizierung?
Haben Sie eine Idee, wie wir unsere Website verbessern können?
Bitte schreiben Sie uns.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Heruntergeladen am 12.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2016-0848/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen