Achieving Quality Reproducible Results and Maintaining Compliance in Molecular Diagnostic Testing of Human Papillomavirus

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.

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 249-256
Author(s):  
Sultan Alasmari ◽  

Introduction: Laboratory examinations constitute a major factor in achieving the correct clinical diagnosis for patients. However, the ordering of unnecessary or inappropriate laboratory testing remains common, with consequent consumption of laboratory resources whether human or material. The present work evaluated the level of satisfaction of laboratory practitioners toward the appropriateness of laboratory tests ordered by physicians. Methods: This cross-sectional study involved a total of 256 medical laboratory practitioners representing different qualifications and health care sectors, who answered several questions concerning their knowledge and attitudes toward inappropriate laboratory testing ordered by physicians. Results: More than 85% of respondents agreed with the definition provided in the survey, which is substantially consistent with prior studies. More than 90% affirmed the associated drain on time and resources. However, discrepant responses were received concerning physician awareness of test availability, and participants reported laboratory staff arguments with physicians due to orders for unnecessary tests. Data showed that unnecessary orders were mainly requested by physicians of less experience. Conclusions: Ultimately, dissatisfaction was manifest among clinical laboratory professionals, and educational interventions are required to moderate request behaviors.


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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vítor Vasata Macchi Silva ◽  
José Luis Duarte Ribeiro

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to describe the activities needed to meet specified requirements to assist laboratory staff running tests and calibrations and to obtain ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation. Design/methodology/approach The relevant literature that contributes to establishing activities that help laboratory staff to obtain ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation was studied. Laboratory researchers specializing in electro-medical equipment quality control were questioned about the criteria to be observed when selecting, developing and validating analytical steps. Findings Results revealed the analytical method criteria to be observed, which demonstrated their essentially quantitative nature. Originality/value This study presents a model that improves selecting, developing and validating analytical steps and contributes to producing reliable test and calibration results. These improvements can help laboratory testing and calibration to meet clients’ needs, satisfy specified requirements and provide reliable results.


2000 ◽  
Vol 124 (8) ◽  
pp. 1201-1208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven J. Steindel ◽  
William J. Rauch ◽  
Marianne K. Simon ◽  
James Handsfield

Abstract Context.—A statistically valid inventory of the distribution, both geographic and by laboratory type, of clinical and anatomical laboratory testing in the United States is needed to assess the impact of the Clinical Laboratory Improvements Amendments of 1988 and to provide information for other health care and public health policy decisions. Objective.—To present initial US laboratory testing volume data compiled by the National Inventory of Clinical Laboratory Testing Services. Design.—Stratified random sample of laboratories performing testing in 1996 with data on the number of laboratory tests performed, identified by method and analyte. Data were collected by field tabulators (moderate- or high-complexity laboratories) or through a mail/telephone survey (waived or provider-performed microscopy laboratories) for each site. Participants.—Laboratories that were enrolled in the 1996 Online Certification Survey and Reporting System, maintained by the US Health Care Finance Administration, and that performed laboratory testing during 1996. Main Outcome Measure.—Laboratory testing distribution for 1996 in the United States by analyte, method, and specimen type. Results.—An overall response rate of 79% provided data from 757 moderate- or high-complexity laboratories and 1322 waived or provider-performed microscopy laboratories. The estimated total US testing volume for 1996 was 7.25 ± 1.09 billion tests. Laboratories performing complex testing, defined as greater than 16 method/analyte/specimen type combinations, comprised 16% of the US laboratories by survey site, but performed 80% (95% confidence limits, 43% to 100%) of the testing volume. Glucose analysis was the most frequently performed test. Automated hematology and chemistry analyzers were the most frequently used methods. Conclusions.—A statistically valid, consistent survey of the distribution of US laboratory testing was obtained. Simple analysis of these data by laboratory type and geographic region can provide insights into where laboratory testing is performed. The study design allows extensions that will facilitate collection of additional data of importance to public health and medical care delivery.


2016 ◽  
Vol 140 (12) ◽  
pp. 1371-1374 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohiedean Ghofrani ◽  
Chengquan Zhao ◽  
Diane D. Davey ◽  
Fang Fan ◽  
Mujtaba Husain ◽  
...  

Context.— Since 2008, the College of American Pathologists has provided the human papillomavirus for cytology laboratories (CHPV) proficiency testing program to help laboratories meet the requirements of the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988. Objectives.— To provide an update on trends in proficiency testing performance in the College of American Pathologists CHPV program during the 4-year period from 2011 through 2014 and to compare those trends with the preceding first 3 years of the program. Design.— Responses of laboratories participating in the CHPV program from 2011 through 2014 were analyzed using a nonlinear mixed model to compare different combinations of testing medium and platform. Results.— In total, 818 laboratories participated in the CHPV program at least once during the 4 years, with participation increasing during the study period. Concordance of participant responses with the target result was more than 98% (38 280 of 38 892). Overall performance with all 3 testing media—ThinPrep (Hologic, Bedford, Massachusetts), SurePath (Becton, Dickinson and Company, Franklin Lakes, New Jersey), or Digene (Qiagen, Valencia, California)—was equivalent (P = .51), and all 4 US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–approved platforms—Hybrid Capture 2 (Qiagen), Cervista (Hologic), Aptima (Hologic), and cobas (Roche Molecular Systems, Pleasanton, California)—outperformed laboratory-developed tests, unspecified commercial kits, and other (noncommercial) methods in ThinPrep medium (P < .001). However, certain off-label combinations of platform and medium, most notably Cervista with SurePath, demonstrated suboptimal performance (P < .001). Conclusions.— Laboratories demonstrated proficiency in using various combinations of testing media and platforms offered in the CHPV program, with statistically significant performance differences in certain combinations. These observations may be relevant in the current discussions about FDA oversight of laboratory-developed tests.


2021 ◽  
Vol 156 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S117-S117
Author(s):  
A VanSpronsen ◽  
C Nielsen ◽  
B Djukic ◽  
V Villatoro

Abstract Introduction/Objective Stewardship initiatives are a key strategy for addressing inappropriate utilization of clinical laboratory resources. These approaches require engagement of multiple types of stakeholders. Some professional groups are historically underrepresented, such as those who perform specimen collection, testing, and quality processes. A specific campaign is needed to engage these groups and highlight their expertise. Methods/Case Report We surveyed Medical Laboratory Technologists and Medical Laboratory Assistants to understand the barriers they face to participating in laboratory stewardship initiatives. These survey findings helped shape tools and resources that we created for new campaign called Lab Wisely. We also identified that one-third of existing Choosing Wisely Canada recommendations relate to laboratory testing. We categorized and tagged each recommendation to create a publicly-available searchable database which was placed on the campaign website (LabWisely.ca). Results (if a Case Study enter NA) NA Conclusion Laboratory testing is featured in a significant proportion of all Choosing Wisely Canada recommendations, supporting the idea that the clinical laboratory should be heavily involved in reducing medical overuse in healthcare. In our survey, we found that laboratory professionals face time and workload constraints, but feel a professional responsibility for ensuring appropriate resource use by all users. There was also a lack of ‘know- how’ around tangible ways to become involved. The Lab Wisely website has become a one-stop-shop for highlighting the role of technical and scientific professionals in laboratory stewardship and providing concrete tools that can be used to develop capacity in these groups. Every level of staff can and should be involved in improving the utilization of clinical laboratory services.


1999 ◽  
Vol 123 (6) ◽  
pp. 465-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
William B. Hamlin

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.


1992 ◽  
Vol 38 (7) ◽  
pp. 1205-1209 ◽  
Author(s):  
F W Sunderman

Abstract The history and origins of proficiency testing of clinical laboratories are reviewed. Since the introduction of proficiency testing in the late 1940s, dramatic improvement in laboratory performance has been demonstrated. Nonetheless, the poor performance found two decades earlier was summoned to support the passage of the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act of 1967 (CLIA '67).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document