Investigating, Categorising and Highlighting Quality Failures in Medical Laboratories

International Journal of Business Society, Vol. 5, Issue 10
Han WeijingSanty Deasy Siregar*Ayu Tan Suyono
Laboratory ErrorsQuality failuresCategorisation and grading systemAdverse impactsPatient safety
PDFSpecial IssueDOI: 10.30566/ijo-bs/2021.special.04
5Volume
10Issue

Abstract

The prevalence of laboratory errors is approximately 0.011%-0.7% in all test results. The laboratory is a key in-patient diagnosis. Therefore, this error rate may be significantly detrimental to patient care. Laboratories have spearheaded endeavours to improve patient safety by implementing a series of improvements such as analytical quality control programmes and expanding the automation of manual processes. All laboratories must have well-established systems capable of identifying and addressing quality failures. This entails a system-led approach that strives to highlight and rectify policy or weak procedural points instead of simply assigning blame. Quality failures can be categorised by cause (the stage at which the issue arose in the testing pathway) and graded on a five-point scale by severity. The severity grade indicates both the actual and potential (worst case scenario) impacts (‘A’ and ‘P’ scores) on the patients’ outcomes. Typically, the ‘A’ and ‘P’ scores are slanted towards low and high adverse impacts on patients, respectively. This further underlines the necessity for laboratories to be constantly vigilant. This implementation of this categorisation and grading system is straightforward and can be a beneficial tool for performance monitoring and evaluation.

References

[1]

Armitage, G. (2009). Human error theory: relevance to nurse management. Journal of nursing management, 17(2), 193 -202.

[2]

Bedell, S. E., Jabbour, S., Goldberg, R., Glaser, H., Gobble, S., Young-Xu, Y., . . . Ravid, S. (2000). Discrepancies in the use of medications: their extent and predictors in an outpatient practice. Archives of Internal Medicine, 160(14), 2129 -2134.

[3]

Carayon, P., Hundt, A. S., Karsh, B., Gurses, A. P., Alvarado, C., Smith, M., & Brennan, P. F. (2006). Work system design for patient safety: the SEIPS model. BMJ Quality & Safety, 15(suppl 1), i50 -i58.

[4]

Clacy, A., Goode, N., Sharman, R., Lovell, G. P., & Salmon, P. M. (2017). A knock to the system: a new sociotechnical systems approach to sport-related concussion. Journal of Sports Sciences, 35(22), 2232-2239.

[5]

Corrigan, J. M., Greiner, A. C., & Adams, K. (2004). The 1st Annual Crossing the Quality Chasm Summit: A Focus on Communities : Report of a Summit. National Academies Press.

[6]

Dyer, S. K. (2020). Human error and interactions with technology in safety-critical workplaces: Learning from the aviation industry. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

[7]

Ellwart, T., Ulfert, A.-S., Antoni, C. H., Becker, J., Frings, C., Göbel, K., Niessen, C. (2019). Intentional forgetting in socio-digital work systems: system characteristics and user-related psychological consequences on emotion, cognition, and behavior. AIS Transactions on Enterprise Systems, 4(1).

[8]

Ervin, D. E., Welsh, R., Batie, S. S., & Carpentier, C. L. (2003). Towards an ecological systems approach in public research for environmental regulation of transgenic crops. Agriculture, ecosystems & environment, 99(1-3), 1-14.

[9]

Haak, R., Hähnel, M., Schneider, H., Rosolowski, M., Park, K.-J., Ziebolz, D., Häfer, M. (2019). Clinical and OCT outcomes of a universal adhesive in a randomized clinical trial after 12 months. Journal of Dentistry, 90, 103200.

[10]

Clacy, A., Goode, N., Sharman, R., Lovell, G. P., Salmon, P. M. (2017). A knock to the system: a new sociotechnical systems approach to sport-related concussion. Journal of Sports Sciences, 35(22), 2232-2239.

[11]

Corrigan, J. M., Greiner, A. C., & Adams, K. (2004). The 1st Annual Crossing the Quality Chasm Summit: A Focus on Communities: Report of a Summit. National Academies Press.

[12]

Søreide, J. A., & Deshpande, R. (2021). Post hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) –Recent advances in prevention and clinical management. European Journal of Surgical Oncology, 47(2), 216-224.

[13]

Tompson, L., Belur, J., & Jerath, K. (2021). A victim-centred cost–benefit analysis of a stalking prevention programme. Crime Science, 10(1), 1-11.

Article Information

Article Details
Volume & IssueVol. 5, Iss. 10
Publication DateDec 1, 2021
Authors
Han Weijing
Santy Deasy Siregar*
Ayu Tan Suyono
DOI
10.30566/ijo-bs/2021.special.04
PDF Download