The Cost of Implementation of the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988—The Example of Pediatric Office-Based Cholesterol Screening

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 96 (2) ◽  
pp. 230-234
Author(s):  
Andrew M. Tershakovec ◽  
S. Diane Brannon ◽  
Michael J. Bennett ◽  
Barbara M. Shannon

Objective. To measure the additional costs of office-based laboratory testing due to the implementation of the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA '88), using cholesterol screening for children as an example. Methods. Four-to ten-year-old children who received their well child care at one of seven participating pediatric practices were screened for hypercholesterolemia. The average number of analyses per day and days per month were derived from the volume of testing completed by the practices. Nurses and technicians time in the screening process were measured and personnel costs were calculated based on salary and fringe benefit rates. Costs of supplies, analyzing control samples, instrument calibration, and instrument depreciation were included. Costs estimates of screening were then completed. CLIA '88 implementation costs were derived from appropriate proficiency testing and laboratory inspection programs. Results. In six practices completing a low volume of testing, 2807 children (5 to 6 children per week) were screened during the observation period, while 414 (about 25 children per week) were screened in one high-volume practice implementing universal screening over a 4-month period. For the six low-volume practices, the cost of screening was $10.60 per child. This decreased to $5.47 for the high-volume practice. Estimated costs of CLIA '88 implementation, including additional proficiency testing and laboratory inspection, added $3.20 per test for the low-volume practices, and $0.71 per test for the high-volume testing. Conclusions. Implementation of CLIA adds significantly to the cost of office-based chemistry laboratory screening. Despite these additional expenses, the cost of testing is still within a reasonable charge for laboratory testing, and is highly sensitive to the volume of tests completed.

2003 ◽  
Vol 127 (8) ◽  
pp. 978-983 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline M. Seabrook ◽  
Roger A. Hubbard

Abstract Laboratories contemplating either the addition of new molecular tests or modifying methods approved by the Food and Drug Administration for human papillomavirus testing should be aware of a variety of procedural, performance, and regulatory issues surrounding such activity. Diagnostic medical laboratory testing in the United States is regulated by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, an agency formerly known as the Health Care Finance Administration. The regulatory vehicle of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is manifested in the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA). The CLIA program has put into place specific regulations for laboratory quality control, which includes specific recommendations for method validation. Regulations that must be followed regarding personnel, quality control, quality assurance, method validation, and proficiency testing depend on the complexity category of the individual test. All molecular diagnostic tests, including those for human papillomavirus, are considered high complexity. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services retains the authority to allow private, national accreditation organizations to “deem” that a laboratory is compliant with CLIA '88 requirements. Accreditation organizations, such as the Joint Commission for Accreditation of Hospitals, the Commission on Office Laboratory Accreditation, and the College of American Pathologists (CAP), as well as several state medical laboratory–accrediting agencies, possess the authority to deem laboratories as “CLIA-approved.” The CAP, through its Laboratory Accreditation Program, has promoted standards for laboratory performance and method validation. In general, guidelines set forth in the CAP Laboratory Accreditation Program checklists specify that all clinical laboratory testing must essentially meet those requirements defined for high-complexity testing under CLIA '88, including test validation standards, reportable/reference ranges, performance criteria, and proficiency testing.


1992 ◽  
Vol 38 (7) ◽  
pp. 1237-1244 ◽  
Author(s):  
R H Laessig ◽  
S S Ehrmeyer ◽  
B J Lanphear ◽  
B J Burmeister ◽  
D J Hassemer

Abstract Proficiency testing (PT), recognized as a quality-assurance (QA) and quality-improvement tool, also has become the cornerstone of the Health Care Financing Administration's (HCFA) regulatory strategy under the revised Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act of 1967 (CLIA '67) and the proposed Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA '88). Use of PT as a regulatory tool corrupts it for things it can do better. PT as a primary regulatory strategy has severe limitations. We explore the nature of these limitations and their implications for clinical laboratories as they impact on the long-term success of HCFA's approved regulatory PT programs in 1991 and beyond, and CLIA '88 PT, which is to be implemented in 1994.


JAMA ◽  
1974 ◽  
Vol 229 (10) ◽  
pp. 1350-1351
Author(s):  
P. A. Brown

Author(s):  
Brooke E Nichols ◽  
Sarah J Girdwood ◽  
Aaron Shibemba ◽  
Sharper Sikota ◽  
Christopher J Gill ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Routine plasma viral load (VL) testing is recommended for monitoring human immunodeficiency virus–infected patients on antiretroviral therapy. In Zambia, VL scale-up is limited due to logistical obstacles around plasma specimen collection, storage, and transport to centralized laboratories. Dried blood spots (DBSs) could circumvent many logistical challenges at the cost of increased misclassification. Recently, plasma separation cards (PSCs) have become available and, though more expensive, have lower total misclassification than DBSs. Methods Using a geospatial model created for optimizing VL utilization in Zambia, we estimated the short-term cost of uptake/correct VL result using either DBSs or PSCs to increase VL access on equipment available in-country. Five scenarios were modeled: (1) plasma only (status quo); (2) plasma at high-volume sites, DBS at low-volume sites; (3) plasma at high-volume sites, PSC at low-volume sites; (4) PSC only; (5) DBS only. Results Scenario 1 resulted in 795 342 correct results due to limited patient access. When allowing for full and partial adoption of dried specimens, access increases by 19%, with scenario 3 producing the greatest number of correct results expected (929 857). The average cost per correct VL result was lowest in the plasma + DBS scenario at $30.90 compared to $31.62 in our plasma + PSC scenario. The cost per correct result of using dried specimens only was dominated in the incremental analysis, due primarily to fewer correct results. Conclusions Adopting the partial use of dried specimens will help achieve improved VL access for patients at the lowest cost per correct result.


2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-70
Author(s):  
Kenneth Kipruto Kimengech ◽  
Stanley Kinge Waithaka ◽  
Jackson Onyuka ◽  
Christine Sekadde Kigondu

Background: Clinical Laboratory testing is a highly complex process that entails numerous procedures. Although it has been known that laboratory testing services are safe, it is increasingly becoming a common knowledge that they are not that safe. Studies have indicated that there are a number of errors that occur due to laboratory testing processes. These errors may not be realized easily during the testing process, but they make significant impact on the results given.Aims and Objective: To determine the levels of pre-analytical, analytical, and post analytical errors found in the analysis of Clinical Laboratory specimen at Kenyatta National Hospital.Materials and Methods: A prospective and descriptive study was carried out at Clinical Chemistry Laboratory, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Kenyatta National Hospital. A total of 346 request forms, specimens/samples and dispatched results were scrutinized and errors documented as per the different variables in the different phases, over a period of three months and the findings were analyzed.Results: Results of the study showed that Preanalytical errors were most common with a frequency of 148(42.8%), followed by analytical errors 114 (32.9%) and post analytical errors 84 (24.3%), respectively.Conclusions: The study concludes that pre-analytical, analytical, and post analytical errors are errors that compromise the quality of laboratory service delivery, which impacts on the patient management and diagnosis. Clinical laboratory errors can be minimized if due diligence and professionalism is adhered in the laboratory.Asian Journal of Medical Sciences Vol.8(1) 2017 64-70


1990 ◽  
Vol 36 (12) ◽  
pp. 2027-2035 ◽  
Author(s):  
K M Peddecord ◽  
H C Hammond

Abstract This report examines logical but not yet widely recognized ramifications of the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA'88), federal legislation that will require certification of all laboratories examining human specimens. Examination of the CLIA'88 committee reports and committee hearings suggest that more than the conventional approach to laboratory standards will be needed to meet the public's expectations as articulated by our elected representatives. The conventional approach to clinical testing standards seeks to assure quality by regulating the laboratory analytical process. However, little empirical evidence is available to support or refute this model, which has been used during the past 25 years. One alternative paradigm for laboratory standards is an approach that examines the total laboratory testing process, including the selection, ordering, and interpretation of the test as well as the laboratory analysis per se. The history of controversy over laboratory standards--especially personnel standards, the glacial federal regulatory rulemaking process, public expectations of fail-safe technology, among other factors--suggests the implementation of CLIA'88 will be a lengthy and vigorously debated contest. The risk of a test is seldom inherent in the test itself, but rather is a function of the context in which the test is being used to provide information for medical decision making. Our premise is that diagnostic tests must be examined in the context of the laboratory testing situation. We suggest that now is the appropriate time for laboratory professionals, practicing physicians, and the public to abandon conventional thinking regarding clinical laboratory standards. We believe that CLIA'88 reflects a shift in public expectations toward fail-safe laboratory testing and the need for additional government oversight in laboratory test quality. If these new expectations persist, CLIA'88 represents a potential landmark in the course of federal authority and the practice of medicine in the United States.


1989 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 174-178
Author(s):  
F. R. Hindriks ◽  
A. Bosman ◽  
P. F. Rademaker

The significance of indirect costs in the cost price calculation of clinical chemistry laboratory tests by way of the production centres method has been investigated. A cost structure model based on the ‘production centres’ method, the Academisch Ziekenhuis Groningen (AZG) 1-2-3 model, is used for the calculation of cost and cost prices as an add-in tool to the spreadsheet program Lotus 1-2-3. The system specifications of the AZG 1-2-3 cost structure model have been extended with facilities to impute all relevant indirect costs to cost centres by aid of allocation rules, which can be chosen freely. The inference is made that as indirect costs play a more important part in decision-making processes concerning planning and control, the specification of the relation to the cost centres should be determined in a more detailed way. The AZG 1-2-3 cost structure model has therefore been extended in order to increase the significance as a management tool for laboratory management.


1992 ◽  
Vol 38 (7) ◽  
pp. 1273-1279
Author(s):  
D J Loschen

Abstract The reaction of the clinician to the specter of regulation of any part of his or her practice mirrors the reaction of the laboratorian to the implementation of Medicare and Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments legislation in 1965 and 1967, respectively. Whether the regulatory burdens that will be visited upon these laboratories are justified or necessary is arguable; the fact of the upcoming regulation is not. The volume and breadth of testing in physicians' office laboratories (POLs) has increased exponentially since passage of the Diagnosis Related Group legislation by Congress in 1983, an increase made possible by remarkable developments in technology. State regulatory initiatives and private accrediting agencies have been perceived as being inadequate to prevent the proliferation of poorly controlled testing in the nontraditional laboratory environment. The testing menu of a given POL varies according to the scope of clinical services offered; the size of the practice group; the funding available for equipment and personnel acquisition; and the general availability of hospital, reference, and consultative laboratory services. Physicians who offer laboratory services as part of their practices must now prepare their laboratories to meet whatever requirements are mandated by regulation. This will include acquisition of trained personnel, improvement of instrumentation and methodologies, participation in proficiency testing, establishment of comprehensive quality-assurance programs, and adequate documentation of laboratory services. Organized medicine should devote its energies to assisting with needed educational processes to assure the survival of POLs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document