Multidisciplinary training activities for decreasing preanalytical mistakes in samples from primary care

Adolfo Romero; Juan Gómez-Salgado; José Antonio Gómez-Fernández; Andrés Cobos; Carlos Ruiz-Frutos

doi:10.1515/cclm-2016-1002

Article

Multidisciplinary training activities for decreasing preanalytical mistakes in samples from primary care

Adolfo Romero , Juan Gómez-Salgado , José Antonio Gómez-Fernández , Andrés Cobos and Carlos Ruiz-Frutos

Published/Copyright: March 7, 2017

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information

From the journal Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) Volume 55 Issue 11

Abstract

Background:

The presence of preanalytical mistakes (PM) in samples from primary care centres (PCC) is a widely studied topic. Different correcting strategies have been proposed, with variable success. We planned a series of multidisciplinary sessions for clinical update, with the aim to decrease PM rates in samples from PCC.

Methods:

The incidence of PM in samples from PCC processed at the laboratories of University Hospital Virgen de la Victoria (LAB1) and University Hospital Juan Ramon Jimenez (LAB2) was assessed during two time periods (October to November 2013 and January to May 2014). Clinical update sessions were conducted between periods (2014). Differences in PM rates between observation periods were evaluated.

Results:

With respect to 2014, we observed a significant reduction of PM rates in blood samples processed at LAB1 during 2015, whereas those in LAB2 were slightly increased. The most common PMs were haemolysed sample at LAB1 and missed sample at LAB2.

Conclusions:

Although the presence of PM remains slightly high, there was a significant reduction after the clinical update sessions in LAB1, where the most frequent PM was haemolysed sample. In contrast, the PM rates were slightly increased at LAB2, and the main source was missed sample. This might be explained, at least in part, by different problems associated with sample transportation, and by the delay in transferring acquired knowledge into clinical practice. Implementation of regular programme of update sessions and improvements in sample transportation might help to reduce the PM presence in our area.

Keywords: educational intervention; incidence; preanalytical mistakes; preanalytical phase

Corresponding author: Prof. Juan Gómez-Salgado, Nursing Department, University of Huelva, Campus del Carmen, Avenida de las Fuerzas Armadas, 21007 Huelva, Spain, Phone: +34 699999918

Acknowledgments

Authors wish to thank to Prof. Dr. M Muñoz for his collaboration in the translation and revision of the manuscript.

Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.
Research funding: This study was supported by grants from Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias (FIS 12/1099), Ministry of Health and Social Policies (Spain), and the European Union (FEDER).
Employment or leadership: None declared.
Honorarium: None declared.
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. 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-2014-1051Search in Google Scholar PubMed

2. Plebani M, Carraro P. Mistakes in a stat laboratory: types and frequency. Clin Chem Lab Med 1997;43:1348–51.10.1093/clinchem/43.8.1348Search in Google Scholar

3. Wiwanitkit V. Types and frequency of preanalytical mistakes in the first Thai ISO 9002: 1994 certified clinical laboratory, a 6-month monitoring. BMC Clin Pathol 2001;1:53.10.1186/1472-6890-1-5Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

4. Bonini PA, Plebani M, Ceriotti F, Rubboli F. Errors in laboratory medicine. Clin Chem Lab Med 2002;48:691–8.10.1093/clinchem/48.5.691Search in Google Scholar

5. Donaldson L. Foreword. Clin Chem Lab Med 2007;45:697–9.10.1515/CCLM.2007.171Search in Google Scholar

6. Plebani M. Errors in clinical laboratories or errors in laboratory medicine? Clin Chem Lab Med 2006;44:750–9.10.1515/CCLM.2006.123Search in Google Scholar PubMed

7. Carraro P, Plebani M. Errors in a stat laboratory: types and frequencies 10 years later. Clin Chem Lab Med 2007;53:1338–42.10.1373/clinchem.2007.088344Search in Google Scholar PubMed

8. Plebani M. The detection and prevention of errors in laboratory medicine. Ann Clin Biochem 2010;47:101–10.10.1258/acb.2009.009222Search in Google Scholar PubMed

9. Carraro P, Zago T, Plebani M. Exploring the initial steps of the testing process: frequency and nature of pre-preanalytic errors. Clin Chem Lab Med 2012;58:3638–42.10.1373/clinchem.2011.175711Search in Google Scholar PubMed

10. Romero A, Muñoz M, Ramos JR, Campos A, Ramírez G. Preanalytical mistakes in a stat laboratory. Clin Chem Lab Med 2005;43:974–5.10.1515/CCLM.2005.168Search in Google Scholar PubMed

11. Söderberg J, Grankvist K, Brulin C, Wallin O. Incident reporting practices in the preanalytical phase: Low reported frequencies in the primary health care setting. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 2009;69:731–5.10.3109/00365510903007018Search in Google Scholar PubMed

12. Söderberg J, Wallin O, Grankvist K, Brulin C. Is the test result correct? A questionnaire study of blood collection practices in primary health care. J Eval Clin Pract 2010;16:707–11.10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01179.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed

13. Gómez-Salgado J, Romero A, Cobos A, Caparrós IS, Gómez-Fernández JA, Domínguez JA, et al. Preanalytical errors: the professionals' perspective. Clin Chem Lab Med 2014;52:53–5.10.1515/cclm-2013-0930Search in Google Scholar PubMed

14. Gómez-Salgado J, Romero A, Cobos A, Caparrós IS, Barba MC, Reina M, et al. Preanalytical errors: a preliminary approach to the point of view of primary care caregivers. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015;53:225–9.10.1515/cclm-2014-0576Search in Google Scholar PubMed

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

16. Heyer NJ, Derzon DH, Winges L, Shaw D, Mass D, Snyder SR, et al. Effectiveness of practices to reduce blood sample hemolysis in EDs: a laboratory medicine best practices systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Biochem 2012;45:1012–32.10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2012.08.002Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

17. Romero A, Cobos A, Gómez-Salgado J, Muñoz M. Role of training activities for the reduction of pre-analytical errors in laboratory samples from primary care. Clin Chim Acta 2012;413:166–9.10.1016/j.cca.2011.09.017Search in Google Scholar PubMed

18. Sociedad Española de Bioquímica Clínica y Patología Molecular. Procedimiento para el estudio de la interferencia por hemólisis, bilirrubina y turbidez y para la verificación de los índices de hemólisis, ictericia y lipemia. Comisión de Metrología y Sistemas Analíticos. Documento Técnico. 2013:21–6.Search in Google Scholar

19. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Hemolysis, icterus and lipemia/turbidity indices as indicators of interference in clinical laboratory analysis. C56, USA 2011.Search in Google Scholar

20. Morris ZS, Wooding S, Grant J. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research. J R Soc Med 2011;104:510–20.10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

21. Ellis G. An episode of increased hemolysis due to a defective pneumatic air tube delivery system. Clin Biochem 2009;42:1265–9.10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2009.05.002Search in Google Scholar PubMed

22. Lippi G. Systematic assessment of the hemolysis index: pros and cons. Adv Clin Chem 2015;71:157–70.10.1016/bs.acc.2015.05.002Search in Google Scholar PubMed

23. Lippi G. Practices for identifying and rejecting hemolyzed specimens in Europe. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2016;140:622.10.5858/arpa.2015-0330-LESearch in Google Scholar PubMed

24. Vecellio E, Li L, McKay M, Grey S, Lake R, Georgiou A, et al. A benchmark study of the frequency and variability of haemolysis reporting across pathology laboratories. Sydney. NSW Health Pathology 2015.Search in Google Scholar

25. Schöffski P, Deroose CM, Gheysens O, Lips N, Slabbaert K, Vancleynenbreugel B, et al. The more you look, the more you find: challenging results on FDG-PET CT in a patient with neurofibromatosis type I. BMC Med Imaging 2014;29:14–19.10.1186/1471-2342-14-19Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

26. Vickerman P, Grebely J, Dore GJ, Sacks-Davis R, Page K, Thomas DL, et al. The more you look, the more you find: effects of hepatitis C virus testing interval on reinfection incidence and clearance and implications for future vaccine study design. J Infect Dis 2012;205:1342–50.10.1093/infdis/jis213Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

Received: 2016-11-3

Accepted: 2017-1-9

Published Online: 2017-3-7

Published in Print: 2017-10-26

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2016-1002

Keywords for this article

educational intervention; incidence; preanalytical mistakes; preanalytical phase