Ten years of preanalytical monitoring and control: Synthetic Balanced Score Card Indicator

Introduction: Preanalytical control and monitoring continue to be an important issue for clinical laboratory professionals. The aim of the study was to evaluate a monitoring system of preanalytical errors regarding not suitable samples for analysis, based on different indicators; to compare such ind...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Salinas, M, López-Garrigós, M, Flores, E, Santo-Quiles, A, Gutierrez, M, Lugo, J, Lillo, R, Leiva-Salinas, C
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2015
País:España
Institución:Fundación para el Fomento de la Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de la Comunitat Valenciana (FISABIO)
Repositorio:r-FISABIO. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica
OAI Identifier:oai:fisabio.fundanetsuite.com:p18222
Acceso en línea:https://fisabio.portalinvestigacion.com/publicaciones/18222
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Preanalytical phase
errors in laboratory medicine
balanced scorecard
patient safety
Descripción
Sumario:Introduction: Preanalytical control and monitoring continue to be an important issue for clinical laboratory professionals. The aim of the study was to evaluate a monitoring system of preanalytical errors regarding not suitable samples for analysis, based on different indicators; to compare such indicators in different phlebotomy centres; and finally to evaluate a single synthetic preanalytical indicator that may be included in the balanced scorecard management system (BSC). Materials and methods: We collected individual and global preanalytical errors in haematology, coagulation, chemistry, and urine samples analysis. We also analyzed a synthetic indicator that represents the sum of all types of preanalytical errors, expressed in a sigma level. We studied the evolution of those indicators over time and compared indicator results by way of the comparison of proportions and Chi-square. Results: There was a decrease in the number of errors along the years (P < 0.001). This pattern was confirmed in primary care patients, inpatients and outpatients. In blood samples, fewer errors occurred in outpatients, followed by inpatients. Conclusion: We present a practical and effective methodology to monitor unsuitable sample preanalytical errors. The synthetic indicator results summarize overall preanalytical sample errors, and can be used as part of BSC management system.