scholarly journals PREDICT: a checklist for preventing preanalytical diagnostic errors in clinical trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 518-526 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Lippi ◽  
Alexander von Meyer ◽  
Janne Cadamuro ◽  
Ana-Maria Simundic ◽  
_ _
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Clinical Chemistry ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Diagnostic Errors ◽  
European Federation ◽  
Sample Collection ◽  
Specimen Retrieval ◽  
Sample Management ◽  
Accurate Performance ◽  
High Level

AbstractAlthough the importance of guaranteeing a high level of preanalytical quality in routine diagnostic testing has already been largely acknowledged over the past decades, minor emphasis is currently being placed on the fact that accurate performance and standardization of many preanalytical activities are also necessary prerogatives of clinical trials. Reliable evidence exists that clear indications on how to manage the different preanalytical steps are currently lacking in many clinical trials protocols, nor have detailed authoritative documents been published or endorsed on this matter to the best of our knowledge. To fill this gap, the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) will provide here a specific checklist for preventing preanalytical diagnostic errors in clinical trials (PREDICT), especially focused on covering the most important preanalytical aspects of blood sample management in clinical studies, and thus encompassing test selection, patient preparation, sample collection, management and storage, sample transportation, as well as specimen retrieval before testing. The WG-PRE members sincerely hope that these recommendations will provide a useful contribution for increasing the success rate in clinical trials.

scholarly journals Patient identification and tube labelling – a call for harmonisation

2016 ◽  
Vol 54 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Edmée C. van Dongen-Lases ◽  
Michael P. Cornes ◽  
Kjell Grankvist ◽  
Mercedes Ibarz ◽  
Gunn B.B. Kristensen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Working Group ◽  
Clinical Laboratory ◽  
Improve Patient Safety ◽  
Clinical Chemistry ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Invasive Procedure ◽  
European Countries ◽  
European Federation ◽  
Sample Collection ◽  
Patient Identification

AbstractVenous blood sampling (phlebotomy) is the most common invasive procedure performed in patient care. Guidelines on the correct practice of phlebotomy are available, including the H3-A6 guideline issued by the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). As the quality of practices and procedures related to venous blood sample collection in European countries was unknown, the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase conducted an observational study in 12 European countries. The study demonstrated that the level of compliance of phlebotomy procedures with the CLSI H3-A6 guideline was unacceptably low, and that patient identification and tube labelling are amongst the most critical steps in need of immediate attention and improvement. The process of patient identification and tube labelling is an essential safety barrier to prevent patient identity mix-up. Therefore, the EFLM Working Group aims to encourage and support worldwide harmonisation of patient identification and tube labelling procedures in order to reduce the risk of preanalytical errors and improve patient safety. With this Position paper we wish to raise awareness and provide recommendations for proper patient and sample identification procedures.

Order of blood draw: Opinion Paper by the European Federation for Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE)

2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Cornes ◽  
Edmée van Dongen-Lases ◽  
Kjell Grankvist ◽  
Mercedes Ibarz ◽  
Gunn Kristensen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Working Group ◽  
Clinical Chemistry ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Laboratory Medicine ◽  
European Federation ◽  
Blood Collection ◽  
Sample Collection ◽  
Blood Draw ◽  
Preanalytical Phase ◽  
Analytical Phase

AbstractIt has been well reported over recent years that most errors within the total testing process occur in the pre-analytical phase (46%–68.2%), an area that is usually outside of the direct control of the laboratory and which includes sample collection (phlebotomy). National and international (WHO, CLSI) guidelines recommend that the order of draw of blood during phlebotomy should be blood culture/sterile tubes, then plain tubes/gel tubes, then tubes containing additives. This prevents contamination of sample tubes with additives from previous tubes that could cause erroneous results. There have been a number of studies recently looking at whether order of draw remains a problem with modern phlebotomy techniques and materials, or it is an outdated practice followed simply because of historical reasons. In the following article, the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (EFLM WG-PRE) provides an overview and summary of the literature with regards to order of draw in venous blood collection. Given the evidence presented in this article, the EFLM WG-PRE herein concludes that a significant frequency of sample contamination does occur if order of draw is not followed during blood collection and when performing venipuncture under less than ideal circumstances, thus putting patient safety at risk. Moreover, given that order of draw is not difficult to follow and knowing that ideal phlebotomy conditions and protocols are not always followed or possible, EFLM WG-PRE supports the continued recommendation of ensuring a correct order of draw for venous blood collection.

scholarly journals Improving quality in the preanalytical phase through innovation, on behalf of the European Federation for Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE)

2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Lippi ◽  
Geoffrey S. Baird ◽  
Giuseppe Banfi ◽  
Karin Bölenius ◽  
Janne Cadamuro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Working Group ◽  
Clinical Chemistry ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Laboratory Medicine ◽  
Therapeutic Monitoring ◽  
European Federation ◽  
Preanalytical Phase ◽  
Total Testing Process ◽  
The Many ◽  
High Degree

Abstract It is now undeniable that laboratory testing is vital for the diagnosis, prognostication and therapeutic monitoring of human disease. Despite the many advances made for achieving a high degree of quality and safety in the analytical part of diagnostic testing, many hurdles in the total testing process remain, especially in the preanalytical phase ranging from test ordering to obtaining and managing the biological specimens. The Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) has planned many activities aimed at mitigating the vulnerability of the preanalytical phase, including the organization of three European meetings in the past 7 years. Hence, this collective article follows the previous three opinion papers that were published by the EFLM WGPRE on the same topic, and brings together the summaries of the presentations that will be given at the 4th EFLM-BD meeting “Improving quality in the preanalytical phase through innovation” in Amsterdam, 24–25 March, 2017.

Exact time of venous blood sample collection – an unresolved issue, on behalf of the European Federation for Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE)

2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (10) ◽  
pp. 1655-1662
Author(s):  
Alexander von Meyer ◽  
Giuseppe Lippi ◽  
Ana-Maria Simundic ◽  
Janne Cadamuro
Keyword(s):  
Working Group ◽  
Clinical Chemistry ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Laboratory Medicine ◽  
Sampling Time ◽  
European Federation ◽  
Blood Collection ◽  
Sample Collection ◽  
Pilot Survey ◽  
Preanalytical Phase

AbstractObjectivesAn accurate knowledge of blood collection times is crucial for verifying the stability of laboratory analytes. We therefore aimed to (i) assess if and how this information is collected throughout Europe and (ii) provide a list of potentially available solutions.MethodsA survey was issued by the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group on Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) in 2017, aiming to collect data on preanalytical process management, including sampling time documentation, in European laboratories. A preceding pilot survey was disseminated in Austria in 2016. Additionally, preanalytical experts were surveyed on their local setting on this topic. Finally, the current scientific literature was reviewed on established possibilities of sampling time collection.ResultsA total number of 85 responses was collected from the pilot survey, whilst 1347 responses from 37 European countries were obtained from the final survey. A minority (i.e. ~13%) of responders to the latter declared they are unaware of the exact sampling time. The corresponding rate in Austria was ~70% in the pilot and ~30% in the final survey, respectively. Answers from 17 preanalytical experts from 16 countries revealed that sampling time collection seems to be better documented for out- than for in-patients. Eight different solutions for sample time documentation are presented.ConclusionsThe sample collection time seems to be documented very heterogeneously across Europe, or not at all. Here we provide some solutions to this issue and believe that laboratories should urgently aim to implement one of these.

Diagnostic efficiency in models for permissible measurement uncertainty

2017 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rainer Haeckel ◽  
Werner Wosniok ◽  
Eberhard Gurr
Keyword(s):  
Measurement Uncertainty ◽  
Clinical Chemistry ◽  
Present Report ◽  
Diagnostic Errors ◽  
Diagnostic Error ◽  
European Federation ◽  
Diagnostic Efficiency ◽  
Common Mean ◽  
Analytical Imprecision

AbstractLimits for measurement uncertainty related to analytical imprecision and bias are most appropriately defined by the magnitude of tolerable diagnostic errors. A common mean to characterize the consequence of these errors is the diagnostic efficiency, which, in the case of data from a non-diseased population, is the rate of true-positive results (specificity). Three models have been identified by the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) for defining permissible uncertainty limits. Their model 1 is based on diagnostic requirements whereas models 2 and 3 do not primarily consider diagnostic errors. The present report links tolerable diagnostic error, empirical biological variation and the technical state of the art to derive the limits for measurement uncertainty. This approach combines the essential aspects of all three EFLM models and uses the diagnostic error, the clinically most relevant aspect, as the crucial criterion for the characterization of measurement uncertainty limits. The present approach is designed for the sole purpose of quality assurance.

scholarly journals Clinical Evaluation of the Torq Zero Delay Centrifuge System for Decentralized Blood Collection and Stabilization

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 1019
Author(s):  
Kyungjin Hong ◽  
Gabriella Iacovetti ◽  
Ali Rahimian ◽  
Sean Hong ◽  
Jon Epperson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Chemistry ◽  
Blood Collection ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Sample Collection ◽  
Rapid Separation ◽  
Cell Counts ◽  
Collection Device ◽  
Precision Study ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Blood Specimens

Blood sample collection and rapid separation—critical preanalytical steps in clinical chemistry—can be challenging in decentralized collection settings. To address this gap, the Torq™ zero delay centrifuge system includes a lightweight, hand-portable centrifuge (ZDrive™) and a disc-shaped blood collection device (ZDisc™) enabling immediate sample centrifugation at the point of collection. Here, we report results from clinical validation studies comparing performance of the Torq System with a conventional plasma separation tube (PST). Blood specimens from 134 subjects were collected and processed across three independent sites to compare ZDisc and PST performance in the assessment of 14 analytes (K, Na, Cl, Ca, BUN, creatinine, AST, ALT, ALP, total bilirubin, albumin, total protein, cholesterol, and triglycerides). A 31-subject precision study was performed to evaluate reproducibility of plasma test results from ZDiscs, and plasma quality was assessed by measuring hemolysis and blood cells from 10 subject specimens. The ZDisc successfully collected and processed samples from 134 subjects. ZDisc results agreed with reference PSTs for all 14 analytes with mean % biases well below clinically significant levels. Results were reproducible across different operators and ZDisc production lots, and plasma blood cell counts and hemolysis levels fell well below clinical acceptance thresholds. ZDiscs produce plasma samples equivalent to reference PSTs. Results support the suitability of the Torq System for remotely collecting and processing blood samples in decentralized settings.

scholarly journals Longitudinal sampling is required to maximize detection of intrahost A/H3N2 virus variants

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
B F Koel ◽  
R M Vigeveno ◽  
M Pater ◽  
S M Koekkoek ◽  
A X Han ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Neutralizing Antibodies ◽  
De Novo ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Influenza Viruses ◽  
Surface Proteins ◽  
H3n2 Virus ◽  
Virus Population ◽  
Sample Collection ◽  
Routine Surveillance ◽  
H3n2 Influenza

Abstract Seasonal human influenza viruses continually change antigenically to escape from neutralizing antibodies. It remains unclear how genetic variation in the intrahost virus population and selection at the level of individual hosts translates to the fast-paced evolution observed at the global level because emerging intrahost antigenic variants are rarely detected. We tracked intrahost variants in the hemagglutinin and neuraminidase surface proteins using longitudinally collected samples from 52 patients infected by A/H3N2 influenza virus, mostly young children, who received oseltamivir treatment. We identified emerging putative antigenic variants and oseltamivir-resistant variants, most of which remained detectable in samples collected at subsequent days, and identified variants that emerged intrahost immediately prior to increases in global rates. In contrast to most putative antigenic variants, oseltamivir-resistant variants rapidly increased to high frequencies in the virus population. Importantly, the majority of putative antigenic variants and oseltamivir-resistant variants were first detectable four or more days after onset of symptoms or start of treatment, respectively. Our observations demonstrate that de novo variants emerge, and may be positively selected, during the course of infection. Additionally, based on the 4–7 days post-treatment delay in emergence of oseltamivir-resistant variants in six out of the eight individuals with such variants, we find that limiting sample collection for routine surveillance and diagnostic testing to early timepoints after onset of symptoms can potentially preclude detection of emerging, positively selected variants.

scholarly journals A Roadmap to Inform Development, Validation and Approval of Digital Mobility Outcomes: The Mobilise-D Approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynn Rochester ◽  
Claudia Mazzà ◽  
Arne Mueller ◽  
Brian Caulfield ◽  
Marie McCarthy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Disease Status ◽  
Proximal Femoral Fracture ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Physical Mobility ◽  
High Level

Health care has had to adapt rapidly to COVID-19, and this in turn has highlighted a pressing need for tools to facilitate remote visits and monitoring. Digital health technology, including body-worn devices, offers a solution using digital outcomes to measure and monitor disease status and provide outcomes meaningful to both patients and health care professionals. Remote monitoring of physical mobility is a prime example, because mobility is among the most advanced modalities that can be assessed digitally and remotely. Loss of mobility is also an important feature of many health conditions, providing a read-out of health as well as a target for intervention. Real-world, continuous digital measures of mobility (digital mobility outcomes or DMOs) provide an opportunity for novel insights into health care conditions complementing existing mobility measures. Accepted and approved DMOs are not yet widely available. The need for large collaborative efforts to tackle the critical steps to adoption is widely recognised. Mobilise-D is an example. It is a multidisciplinary consortium of 34 institutions from academia and industry funded through the European Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking. Members of Mobilise-D are collaborating to address the critical steps for DMOs to be adopted in clinical trials and ultimately health care. To achieve this, the consortium has developed a roadmap to inform the development, validation and approval of DMOs in Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and recovery from proximal femoral fracture. Here we aim to describe the proposed approach and provide a high-level view of the ongoing and planned work of the Mobilise-D consortium. Ultimately, Mobilise-D aims to stimulate widespread adoption of DMOs through the provision of device agnostic software, standards and robust validation in order to bring digital outcomes from concept to use in clinical trials and health care.

scholarly journals How to meet ISO15189:2012 pre-analytical requirements in clinical laboratories? A consensus document by the EFLM WG-PRE

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pieter Vermeersch ◽  
Glynis Frans ◽  
Alexander von Meyer ◽  
Seán Costelloe ◽  
Giuseppe Lippi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Management System ◽  
Clinical Chemistry ◽  
European Federation ◽  
Consensus Recommendation ◽  
Iso 15189 ◽  
Consensus Document ◽  
Analytical Phase ◽  
Total Testing Process ◽  
Analytical Requirements ◽  
Analytical Requirement

Abstract The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15189:2012 standard aims to improve quality in medical laboratories through standardization of all key elements in the total testing process, including the pre-analytical phase. It is hence essential that accreditation bodies, assessing laboratories against ISO15189:2012, pay sufficient attention to auditing pre-analytical activities. However, there are significant differences in how technical auditors interpret the pre-analytical requirements described in ISO15189:2012. In this consensus document, the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Pre-analytical Phase (WG-PRE) sets out to review pre-analytical requirements contained in ISO15189:2012 and provide guidance for laboratories on how to meet these requirements. The target audience for this consensus document is laboratory professionals who wish to improve the quality of the pre-analytical phase in their laboratory. For each of the ISO requirements described in ISO15189:2012, members of EFLM WG-PRE agreed by consensus on minimal recommendations and best-in-class solutions. The minimal consensus recommendation was defined as the minimal specification which laboratories should implement in their quality management system to adequately address the pre-analytical requirement described in ISO15189:2012. The best-in-class solution describes the current state-of-the-art in fulfilling a particular pre-analytical requirement in ISO15189:2012. We fully acknowledge that not every laboratory has the means to implement these best-in-class solutions, but we hope to challenge laboratories in critically evaluating and improving their current procedures by providing this expanded guidance.

scholarly journals Use of patient complaints to identify diagnosis-related safety concerns: a mixed-method evaluation

2021 ◽  
pp. bmjqs-2020-011593
Author(s):  
Traber D Giardina ◽  
Saritha Korukonda ◽  
Umber Shahid ◽  
Viralkumar Vaghani ◽  
Divvy K Upadhyay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Record ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Diagnostic Errors ◽  
Diagnostic Error ◽  
Diagnostic Process ◽  
Healthcare Organisation ◽  
Safety Concerns ◽  
Patient Complaints ◽  
Malpractice Claims

BackgroundPatient complaints are associated with adverse events and malpractice claims but underused in patient safety improvement.ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the use of patient complaint data to identify safety concerns related to diagnosis as an initial step to using this information to facilitate learning and improvement.MethodsWe reviewed patient complaints submitted to Geisinger, a large healthcare organisation in the USA, from August to December 2017 (cohort 1) and January to June 2018 (cohort 2). We selected complaints more likely to be associated with diagnostic concerns in Geisinger’s existing complaint taxonomy. Investigators reviewed all complaint summaries and identified cases as ‘concerning’ for diagnostic error using the National Academy of Medicine’s definition of diagnostic error. For all ‘concerning’ cases, a clinician-reviewer evaluated the associated investigation report and the patient’s medical record to identify any missed opportunities in making a correct or timely diagnosis. In cohort 2, we selected a 10% sample of ‘concerning’ cases to test this smaller pragmatic sample as a proof of concept for future organisational monitoring.ResultsIn cohort 1, we reviewed 1865 complaint summaries and identified 177 (9.5%) concerning reports. Review and analysis identified 39 diagnostic errors. Most were categorised as ‘Clinical Care issues’ (27, 69.2%), defined as concerns/questions related to the care that is provided by clinicians in any setting. In cohort 2, we reviewed 2423 patient complaint summaries and identified 310 (12.8%) concerning reports. The 10% sample (n=31 cases) contained five diagnostic errors. Qualitative analysis of cohort 1 cases identified concerns about return visits for persistent and/or worsening symptoms, interpersonal issues and diagnostic testing.ConclusionsAnalysis of patient complaint data and corresponding medical record review identifies patterns of failures in the diagnostic process reported by patients and families. Health systems could systematically analyse available data on patient complaints to monitor diagnostic safety concerns and identify opportunities for learning and improvement.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document