Thu, Apr 25, 2024
Volume 15, Issue 6 (Special issue (Nov-Dec) 2021)
mljgoums 2021, 15(6): 44-51 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Jha P K, Agarwal R, Sultana Ahmed R. Quality Tools to Ensure Patient Safety and Reduce the Turnaround Time of Medical Laboratories in Tertiary Care Teaching Hospitals. mljgoums 2021; 15 (6) :44-51
URL: http://mlj.goums.ac.ir/article-1-1416-en.html
URL: http://mlj.goums.ac.ir/article-1-1416-en.html
1- Department of Biochemistry, University College of Medical Sciences & GTB Hospital, Dilshad Garden, Delhi, India
2- Department of Biochemistry, Institute of Human Behavior and Allied Sciences, Dilshad Garden, Delhi, India
3- Department of Biochemistry, University College of Medical Sciences & GTB Hospital, Dilshad Garden, Delhi, India , pujajha26@gmail.com
2- Department of Biochemistry, Institute of Human Behavior and Allied Sciences, Dilshad Garden, Delhi, India
3- Department of Biochemistry, University College of Medical Sciences & GTB Hospital, Dilshad Garden, Delhi, India , pujajha26@gmail.com
Abstract: (1977 Views)
Background and objectives: Turnaround time (TAT) is an important quality indicator for benchmarking laboratory performance. Delay in TAT may affect patient safety; thus, continuous monitoring and analysis of laboratory workflow is mandatory. This study was designed to improve the TAT of two biochemistry laboratories serving in tertiary care teaching hospitals (multispecialty and super-specialty) through the application of quality tools namely quality failure reporting, the Fishbone model, and process mapping.
Methods: First, TAT was defined for routine (four hours) and urgent samples (two hours). Then, TAT failureincidents in 2018-2019 were analyzed using the Fishbone model. The process map of TAT was studied and made more value streamed and lean after removal of waste steps.Corrective action plans were prioritized and implemented for potential causes with more adverse outcomes. Pilot solutions were implemented for six months and TAT failures incidents were reanalyzed.
Results: The quality failure in TAT reporting was reduced by 22% (from 34% to 12%) for urgent samples and by 19% (from 27% to 8%) for routine samples after the implementation of quality tools in multispecialty hospital laboratory. In the super-specialty hospital laboratory, the improvement was more profound and the TAT percentage achieved after the corrective actions was 96.57% and 98% for urgent and routine samples, respectively.
Conclusion: Implementation of quality failure reporting culture along with quality tools led to significant improvement in TAT and higher quality laboratory performance in terms of efficiency, reliability, and increased patient safety.
Methods: First, TAT was defined for routine (four hours) and urgent samples (two hours). Then, TAT failureincidents in 2018-2019 were analyzed using the Fishbone model. The process map of TAT was studied and made more value streamed and lean after removal of waste steps.Corrective action plans were prioritized and implemented for potential causes with more adverse outcomes. Pilot solutions were implemented for six months and TAT failures incidents were reanalyzed.
Results: The quality failure in TAT reporting was reduced by 22% (from 34% to 12%) for urgent samples and by 19% (from 27% to 8%) for routine samples after the implementation of quality tools in multispecialty hospital laboratory. In the super-specialty hospital laboratory, the improvement was more profound and the TAT percentage achieved after the corrective actions was 96.57% and 98% for urgent and routine samples, respectively.
Conclusion: Implementation of quality failure reporting culture along with quality tools led to significant improvement in TAT and higher quality laboratory performance in terms of efficiency, reliability, and increased patient safety.
Keywords: Tertiary Healthcare [MeSH], Hospitals Teaching [MeSH], Patient Safety [MeSH], quality improvement [MeSH]
Research Article: Original Paper |
Subject:
Laboratory Sciences
Received: 2021/08/17 | Accepted: 2021/10/20 | Published: 2021/10/18 | ePublished: 2021/10/18
Received: 2021/08/17 | Accepted: 2021/10/20 | Published: 2021/10/18 | ePublished: 2021/10/18
References
1. Barth JH. Selecting clinical quality indicators for laboratory medicine. Ann Clin Biochem. 2012 ;49(Pt 3):257-61. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1258/acb.2011.011126] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Stotler BA, Kratz A. Determination of turnaround time in the clinical laboratory: "accessioning-to-result" time does not always accurately reflect laboratory performance. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012 ;138(5):724-9. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1309/AJCPYHBT9OQRM8DX] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Steindel SJ, Jones BA, Howanitz PJ. Timeliness of automated routine laboratory tests: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 653 institutions. Clin Chim Acta. 1996 15;251(1):25-40. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1016/0009-8981(96)06298-5] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4. Howanitz PJ. Errors in laboratory medicine: practical lessons to improve patient safety. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005;129(10):1252-61. [DOI:10.5858/2005-129-1252-EILMPL] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
5. O'Kane M. The reporting, classification and grading of quality failures in the medical laboratory. Clin Chim Acta. 2009 ;404(1):28-31. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1016/j.cca.2009.03.023] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
6. Ishikawa K. Guide to quality control. Asian productivity organization. Tokyo, Japan. 1986. [Google Scholar]
7. White GRT, Cicmil S. Knowledge acquisition through process mapping: Factors affecting the performance of work-based activity. Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag. 2016. [DOI:10.1108/IJPPM-01-2014-0007] [Google Scholar]
8. Donaldson MS, Corrigan JM, Kohn LT. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2000. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. Neuberger J, Peters M. The clinical interface--a British physician's view. Clin Chim Acta. 1996 15;248(1):11-8. [View at Publisher] [DOI:10.1016/0009-8981(95)06262-9] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Enamad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.