Quality Control Circle Practices to Reduce Specimen Rejection Rates.

PDCA cycle Pareto analysis quality control circle quality improvement specimen rejection

Journal

Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare
ISSN: 1178-2390
Titre abrégé: J Multidiscip Healthc
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101512691

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2024
Historique:
received: 19 07 2024
accepted: 25 10 2024
medline: 31 10 2024
pubmed: 31 10 2024
entrez: 31 10 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Quality assurance in laboratory testing significantly impacts patient care. The pre-analytical phase is particularly error-prone, contributing to around 70% of laboratory errors. High specimen rejection rates can delay diagnosis and treatment, cause patient discomfort, and increase healthcare costs. Quality Control Circles (QCC) have been introduced to medical institutions to improve process efficiency and reduce errors. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of QCC practices in reducing specimen rejection rates in a hospital clinical laboratory. A QCC initiative was implemented in the clinical laboratory from July 2021 to August 2022. The QCC comprised members from the clinical laboratory, nursing department, and administration. The initiative followed the PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) cycle and involved multiple quality control methods, including flowchart analysis, Pareto analysis, and Fishbone diagrams. The effectiveness of the initiative was evaluated using statistical analyses of specimen rejection rates before and after implementation. The QCC initiative led to a significant reduction in specimen rejection rates. The monthly specimen rejection rate decreased from an average of 1.13% before the intervention to 0.27% after the intervention. The most significant factors contributing to specimen rejection were identified as lack of sample collection information and blood clotting. Targeted interventions, such as appointing specimen collection liaisons, establishing a quality control team, and providing training on blood collection procedures, were implemented. These measures resulted in a notable decrease in the proportion of rejected specimens due to the identified factors. The implementation of QCC practices effectively reduced specimen rejection rates in the hospital laboratory. The study highlights the importance of systematic quality control methods and targeted interventions in improving laboratory processes. The success of the QCC initiative demonstrates its potential for broader application in other healthcare settings to enhance quality and efficiency.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
Quality assurance in laboratory testing significantly impacts patient care. The pre-analytical phase is particularly error-prone, contributing to around 70% of laboratory errors. High specimen rejection rates can delay diagnosis and treatment, cause patient discomfort, and increase healthcare costs. Quality Control Circles (QCC) have been introduced to medical institutions to improve process efficiency and reduce errors. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of QCC practices in reducing specimen rejection rates in a hospital clinical laboratory.
Methods UNASSIGNED
A QCC initiative was implemented in the clinical laboratory from July 2021 to August 2022. The QCC comprised members from the clinical laboratory, nursing department, and administration. The initiative followed the PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) cycle and involved multiple quality control methods, including flowchart analysis, Pareto analysis, and Fishbone diagrams. The effectiveness of the initiative was evaluated using statistical analyses of specimen rejection rates before and after implementation.
Results UNASSIGNED
The QCC initiative led to a significant reduction in specimen rejection rates. The monthly specimen rejection rate decreased from an average of 1.13% before the intervention to 0.27% after the intervention. The most significant factors contributing to specimen rejection were identified as lack of sample collection information and blood clotting. Targeted interventions, such as appointing specimen collection liaisons, establishing a quality control team, and providing training on blood collection procedures, were implemented. These measures resulted in a notable decrease in the proportion of rejected specimens due to the identified factors.
Conclusion UNASSIGNED
The implementation of QCC practices effectively reduced specimen rejection rates in the hospital laboratory. The study highlights the importance of systematic quality control methods and targeted interventions in improving laboratory processes. The success of the QCC initiative demonstrates its potential for broader application in other healthcare settings to enhance quality and efficiency.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39479378
doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S486276
pii: 486276
pmc: PMC11523946
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

4925-4935

Informations de copyright

© 2024 Li et al.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Dr Bijun Li reports grants from Shenzhen municipal government, during the conduct of the study; grants from Shenzhen municipal government, outside the submitted work; Dr Xinjian Cai reports grants from Shenzhen municipal government, during the conduct of the study; Dr Lili Zhan reports grants from Shenzhen municipal government, during the conduct of the study; Dr Xiaoyu Zhang reports grants from Shenzhen municipal government, during the conduct of the study; Dr Yiteng Lin reports grants from Shenzhen municipal government, during the conduct of the study; Dr Jiaomei Zeng reports grants from Shenzhen municipal government, during the conduct of the study. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

Auteurs

Bijun Li (B)

Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital & Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Shenzhen, 518116, People's Republic of China.

Xinjian Cai (X)

Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital & Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Shenzhen, 518116, People's Republic of China.

Lili Zhan (L)

Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital & Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Shenzhen, 518116, People's Republic of China.

Xiaoyu Zhang (X)

Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital & Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Shenzhen, 518116, People's Republic of China.

Yiteng Lin (Y)

Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital & Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Shenzhen, 518116, People's Republic of China.

Jiaomei Zeng (J)

Department of Nursing, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital & Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Shenzhen, 518116, People's Republic of China.

Classifications MeSH