Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025
Investigations on semen analysis capabilities and quality control measures in laboratories with different management modes.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Li Hong-Lin, Lu Jin-Chun, Zhao Chao, Zhang Xi
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To perform a survey on the semen analysis capabilities and quality control measures of medical institutions conducting male infertility-related testing in Jiangsu, China, by the WeChat, aiming to explore the possibility of mutual recognition of testing results among different laboratories.
METHODS: This study designed a survey questionnaire consisting of 105 questions and investigated and compared semen analysis capabilities and quality control measures between regulated laboratories for assisted reproductive technology (RLART) and non-regulated laboratories for assisted reproductive technology (non-RLART) in Jiangsu, China.
RESULTS: RLART had higher percentages of technicians received training on the WHO manual (97.14% [34/35] vs. 57.14% [28/49], P < 0.01), dedicated rooms for semen collection (100% [35/35] vs. 24.49% [12/49], P < 0.01), adherence to the staining methods recommended by the WHO manual (100% [32/32] vs. 33.33% [11/33], P < 0.01), internal quality control for sperm concentration (77.14% [27/35] vs. 6.12% [3/49], P < 0.01), and participation in external quality assessment (74.29% [26/35] vs. 14.29% [7/49], P < 0.01) compared to non-PLART.
CONCLUSIONS: Establishing unified recognition criteria for semen analysis laboratories and conducting regular supervision can improve semen analysis capabilities and promote mutual recognition of semen testing results.
METHODS: This study designed a survey questionnaire consisting of 105 questions and investigated and compared semen analysis capabilities and quality control measures between regulated laboratories for assisted reproductive technology (RLART) and non-regulated laboratories for assisted reproductive technology (non-RLART) in Jiangsu, China.
RESULTS: RLART had higher percentages of technicians received training on the WHO manual (97.14% [34/35] vs. 57.14% [28/49], P < 0.01), dedicated rooms for semen collection (100% [35/35] vs. 24.49% [12/49], P < 0.01), adherence to the staining methods recommended by the WHO manual (100% [32/32] vs. 33.33% [11/33], P < 0.01), internal quality control for sperm concentration (77.14% [27/35] vs. 6.12% [3/49], P < 0.01), and participation in external quality assessment (74.29% [26/35] vs. 14.29% [7/49], P < 0.01) compared to non-PLART.
CONCLUSIONS: Establishing unified recognition criteria for semen analysis laboratories and conducting regular supervision can improve semen analysis capabilities and promote mutual recognition of semen testing results.