Proficiency Testing for Thermal Insulation Materials in the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program

Abstract Context.—The Laboratory Accreditation Program of the College of American Pathologists monitors the performance of its subscribers in proficiency testing (PT). Failure to perform as expected prompts the program to query the laboratory. Objective.—To determine whether laboratories are correcting apparent problems when contacted by the program about repeatedly unacceptable performance in a diagnostic test. Design.—Retrospective analysis of 1 year's records (2002–2003) from the College's Proficiency Testing Exception Summary correspondence, which identifies clusters of PT failures. The analysis focused on those laboratories in which the Proficiency Testing Exception Summary algorithm identified repeated failures over 3 or 4 testing events; PT performance is monitored as a condition of accreditation. During 1 survey year, approximately 6300 accredited laboratories collectively tested approximately 1 205 000 analytes and submitted results to their PT providers on more than 3 500 000 PT challenges. During the period of observation, 14 085 Proficiency Testing Exception Summary reports were mailed to participants. Educational materials were included to help laboratories identify and correct each PT failure. Results.—There were only 1304 cases of repeated PT failures after the initial correspondence from the accreditation program (9.3%). Of these, there were only 119 cases of unsatisfactory results on the subsequent PT event (9.1%). All systematic problems were resolved by the conclusion of the third round of correspondence. Conclusions.—Accredited laboratories generally perform well in proficiency testing. Identification of clusters of PT failures by the accreditation provider can help those laboratories having analytic difficulties to investigate and correct the problems.

Download Full-text

Quality and the College of American Pathologists

Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine ◽

10.5858/arpa.2011-0287-sa ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 135 (11) ◽

pp. 1441-1441 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Timothy Craig Allen ◽

M Elizabeth H. Hammond ◽

Stanley J. Robboy

Keyword(s):

Patient Care ◽

Proficiency Testing ◽

Laboratory Medicine ◽

Laboratory Accreditation ◽

Site Specific ◽

Testing Program ◽

Patent Quality ◽

Accreditation Program ◽

Specific Cancer ◽

Medicine Quality

The College of American Pathologists (CAP) is dedicated to pathology and laboratory medicine quality. The CAP's Laboratory Accreditation Program, Proficiency Testing Program, Q-Probes and Q-Tracks, site-specific cancer checklists, webinars, annual meetings, and Advanced Practical Pathology series are all focused on providing superior patent quality. The CAP is synonymous with quality in pathology and laboratory medicine. As pathology practice becomes more sophisticated, the CAP's many programs will increasingly help pathologists provide appropriate, personalized patient care.

Download Full-text

Quality: Walk the Walk

Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine ◽

10.5858/arpa.2011-0301-ed ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 135 (11) ◽

pp. 1384-1386 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Timothy Craig Allen

Keyword(s):

Proficiency Testing ◽

Laboratory Medicine ◽

Laboratory Accreditation ◽

Site Specific ◽

Testing Program ◽

Personalized Care ◽

Accreditation Program ◽

Specific Cancer ◽

Medicine Quality

The College of American Pathologists (CAP) is dedicated to pathology and laboratory medicine quality. The CAP's Laboratory Accreditation Program, Proficiency Testing Program, Q-Probes and Q-Tracks, site-specific cancer checklists, webinars, annual meetings, and Advanced Practical Pathology series are all focused on providing superior patient quality. The CAP is synonymous with quality in pathology and laboratory medicine. As pathology practice becomes more sophisticated, the CAP's many programs will increasingly help pathologists provide appropriate, personalized care.

Download Full-text

Requirements for Accreditation by the College of American Pathologists Laboratory Accreditation Program

Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine ◽

10.5858/1999-123-0465-rfabtc ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 123 (6) ◽

pp. 465-467 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

William B. Hamlin

Keyword(s):

Proficiency Testing ◽

Clinical Laboratory ◽

Accreditation Process ◽

Laboratory Accreditation ◽

Regulatory Requirements ◽

Improve Performance ◽

Laboratory Section ◽

Accreditation Program ◽

Testing Performance ◽

Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments

Abstract The College of American Pathologists Laboratory Accreditation Program expects a participant laboratory or laboratory section to be able to demonstrate that it is in compliance with the Standards for Laboratory Accreditation. The program expects laboratories to demonstrate that they are continually taking steps to identify and correct deficient areas and improve performance, in compliance with the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 regulatory requirements, particularly those pertaining to proficiency testing performance, and participating as inspectors in the accreditation process.

Download Full-text

Participation in the College of American Pathologists Laboratory Accreditation Program Decreases Variability in B-Lymphoblastic Leukemia and Plasma Cell Myeloma Flow Cytometric Minimal Residual Disease Testing: A Follow-up Survey

Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine ◽

10.5858/arpa.2019-0493-cp ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Meghan M. Hupp ◽

Christine Bashleben ◽

Jolene L. Cardinali ◽

David M. Dorfman ◽

William Karlon ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Flow Cytometry ◽

Minimal Residual Disease ◽

Proficiency Testing ◽

Plasma Cell ◽

Residual Disease ◽

Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽

Laboratory Accreditation ◽

Plasma Cell Myeloma ◽

Accreditation Program ◽

Minimal Residual

Context.— Minimal residual disease (MRD) testing by flow cytometry is ubiquitous in hematolymphoid neoplasm monitoring, especially B-lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL), for which it provides predictive information and guides management. Major heterogeneity was identified in 2014. Subsequently, new Flow Cytometry Checklist items required documentation of the sensitivity determination method and required lower level of detection (LLOD) inclusion in final reports. This study assesses Laboratory Accreditation Program (LAP) participation and new Checklist items' impact on flow cytometry MRD testing. Objectives.— To survey flow cytometry laboratories about MRD testing for B-ALL and plasma cell myeloma. In particular, enumerate the laboratories performing MRD testing, the proportion performing assays with very low LLODs, and implementation of new Checklist items. Design.— Supplemental questions were distributed in the 2017-A mailing to 548 flow cytometry laboratories subscribed to the College of American Pathologists FL3 Proficiency Testing Survey (Flow Cytometry–Immunophenotypic Characterization of Leukemia/Lymphoma). Results.— The percentage of laboratories performing MRD studies has significantly decreased since 2014. Wide ranges of LLOD and collection event numbers were reported for B-ALL and plasma cell myeloma. Most laboratories determine LLOD by using dilutional studies and include it in final reports; a higher proportion of LAP participants used these practices than nonparticipants. Conclusions.— Several MRD testing aspects vary among laboratories receiving FL3 Proficiency Testing materials. After the survey in 2014, new Checklist items were implemented. As compared to 2014, fewer laboratories are performing MRD studies. While LLOD remains heterogeneous, a high proportion of LAP subscribers follow the new Checklist requirements and, overall, target LLOD recommendations from disease-specific working groups are met.

Download Full-text