American journal of clinical pathology · 2018
Quality Control Practices for Chemistry and Immunochemistry in a Cohort of 21 Large Academic Medical Centers.
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.
Rosenbaum Matthew W, Flood James G, Melanson Stacy E F, Baumann Nikola A, Marzinke Mark A, Rai Alex J, Hayden Joshua, Wu Alan H B, Ladror Megan, Lifshitz Mark S, Scott Mitchell G, Peck-Palmer Octavia M, Bowen Raffick, Babic Nikolina, Sobhani Kimia, Giacherio Donald, Bocsi Gregary T, Herman Daniel S, Wang Ping, Toffaletti John, Handel Elizabeth, Kelly Kathleen A, Albeiroti Sami, Wang Sihe, Zimmer Melissa, Driver Brandon, Yi Xin, Wilburn Clayton, Lewandrowski Kent B
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: In the United States, minimum standards for quality control (QC) are specified in federal law under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment and its revisions. Beyond meeting this required standard, laboratories have flexibility to determine their overall QC program.
METHODS: We surveyed chemistry and immunochemistry QC procedures at 21 clinical laboratories within leading academic medical centers to assess if standardized QC practices exist for chemistry and immunochemistry testing.
RESULTS: We observed significant variation and unexpected similarities in practice across laboratories, including QC frequency, cutoffs, number of levels analyzed, and other features.
CONCLUSIONS: This variation in practice indicates an opportunity exists to establish an evidence-based approach to QC that can be generalized across institutions.
METHODS: We surveyed chemistry and immunochemistry QC procedures at 21 clinical laboratories within leading academic medical centers to assess if standardized QC practices exist for chemistry and immunochemistry testing.
RESULTS: We observed significant variation and unexpected similarities in practice across laboratories, including QC frequency, cutoffs, number of levels analyzed, and other features.
CONCLUSIONS: This variation in practice indicates an opportunity exists to establish an evidence-based approach to QC that can be generalized across institutions.