National survey on current situation of critical value reporting in 973 laboratories in China

Critical Results in Laboratory Medicine

BACKGROUND

Timely and accurate notification of critical results is crucial in laboratory medicine and mandated by accreditation standards like ISO15189. Alert lists do, however, vary widely and clinical laboratories typically rely on a combination of in-house agreed and/or literature-based critical values. Communication by phone is still the preferred method of notification, but digital communication could help improve communication of critical results.

CONTENT

We review the available evidence concerning critical result thresholds and critical result notification practices. The evidence is ranked using an adaptation of the Stockholm Hierarchy. In addition, we propose an evidence-based list of critical result thresholds for hospitalized patients that laboratories can use as a starter list and further customize based on the clinical needs of their patient population.

SUMMARY

A clear distinction between critical results and significantly abnormal results is essential for effective and timely healthcare interventions. Implementation of a policy using differentiated thresholds taking into account individual patient characteristics and how fast medical attention is needed, and the use alternative communication methods could enhance communication efficiency and reduce notification fatigue.

Critical test result management at Danish hospital laboratories: a national survey

Critical test results in clinical laboratories are crucial for timely patient care, serving as indicators of potentially life-threatening conditions. Despite their importance, a notable heterogeneity in management practices exists globally. This study investigates the current practices of managing critical results at Danish clinical biochemistry laboratories and identifies areas prone for improvement. A comprehensive online survey was distributed to all 21 Danish clinical biochemistry laboratories regarding their critical result management, including documentation practices, critical limit selection, and quality assurance measures. A total of 17 laboratories (81%) responded. The answers revealed a generally uniform approach to managing critical results, with all laboratories having 24-h reporting, local instructions and using the telephone as communication channel. However, variations were noted in documentation practices and critical limit selection. Notably, 23.5% of the laboratories reported that one out of every ten critical results was not reported, indicating a significant risk of delayed critical results. This is further complicated by the limited use of predefined timeframes for reporting and also, only few laboratories actively monitored response times. The findings emphasize the need for more standardized documentation and evaluation practices to align with international standards and to enhance patient safety. While the laboratories showed a commitment to standardized procedures, the study emphasizes the necessity of a National or Nordic guideline to supplement the ISO 15189:2022. This study is a step towards optimizing critical result management, not only in Danish clinical biochemistry laboratories but also across various laboratory specialties, thereby improving overall laboratory quality, efficiency, and patient safety.

Baseline assessment of staff perception of critical value practices in government hospitals in Kuwait

Background

Notification of laboratory-determined critical values is key for effective clinical decision making and is thus a consequential step in a patient’s health care and safety. This study presents an overview of staff reporting policies and procedures concerning critical values in Kuwaiti governmental hospitals.

Methods

A cross-sectional descriptive study design was adopted. Study subjects were affiliated with laboratories from five government hospitals (four general and one sub-specialty hospital). All laboratory staff in every hospital were included. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (version 23) was used to analyse the collected data at a significance level of ≤ 0.05. Quantitative data analysis included univariate descriptive (means, medians, standard deviations, frequencies, percentages) and bivariate (chi-squared, ANOVA and Kruskal–Wallis tests) analyses. These analyses provided associations between participating hospitals and staff perceptions towards the policies and procedures surrounding critical values.

Results

559 questionnaires were returned, a total response of 30.5% after those of 79 phlebotomists were excluded (eligible sample size n = 1833). The notification of critical values differs between participated laboratories in delivering protocol and time duration. Linked protocols between laboratories did not exist regarding policies and guidelines for applying the same procedures for critical value notification. There are differences in critical value limits among the participating laboratories.

Conclusion

This study is the first to survey laboratory staff perceptions of critical value practices in Kuwaiti government hospitals. Enhancing critical value reporting and policy is crucial for improving patient safety and to develop high-quality health services. The findings of this study can help policy makers implement future intervention studies to enhance laboratory practices in the area of critical values and improve patient safety and the quality of government hospital systems.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08329-z.

Application of Sigma metrics in the quality control strategies of immunology and protein analytes

Background

Six Sigma (6σ) is an efficient laboratory management method. We aimed to analyze the performance of immunology and protein analytes in terms of Six Sigma.

Methods

Assays were evaluated for these 10 immunology and protein analytes: Immunoglobulin G (IgG), Immunoglobulin A (IgA), Immunoglobulin M (IgM), Complement 3 (C3), Complement 4 (C4), Prealbumin (PA), Rheumatoid factor (RF), Anti streptolysin O (ASO), C‐reactive protein (CRP), and Cystatin C (Cys C). The Sigma values were evaluated based on bias, four different allowable total error (TEa) and coefficient of variation (CV) at QC materials levels 1 and 2 in 2020. Sigma Method Decision Charts were established. Improvement measures of analytes with poor performance were recommended according to the quality goal index (QGI), and appropriate quality control rules were given according to the Sigma values.

Results

While using the TEa_NCCL, 90% analytes had a world‐class performance with σ>6, Cys C showed marginal performance with σ<4. While using minimum, desirable, and optimal biological variation of TEa, only three (IgG, IgM, and CRP), one (CRP), and one (CRP) analytes reached 6σ level, respectively. Based on σ_NCCL that is calculated from TEa_NCCL, Sigma Method Decision Charts were constructed. For Cys C, five multi‐rules (1_3s/2_2s/R_4s/4_1s/6_X, N = 6, R = 1, Batch length: 45) were adopted for QC management. The remaining analytes required only one QC rule (1_3s, N = 2, R = 1, Batch length: 1000). Cys C need to improve precision (QGI = 0.12).

Conclusions

The laboratories should choose appropriate TEa goals and make judicious use of Sigma metrics as a quality improvement tool.

Prevalence, Association Relation, and Dynamic Evolution Analysis of Critical Values in Health Checkup in China: A Retrospective Study

Objective: The critical values in health checkup play a key role in preventing chronic diseases and different types of cancer. This study aimed to analyze the prevalence, association relation, and dynamic evolution of critical values in health checkups at a large physical examination center in China.

Methods: Herein, we chose 33,639 samples of physical examiners from January 2017 to December 2019. After strict exclusion processes, combined with the critical values in health checkup reporting data, 4,721 participants with at least one critical value were included. We first defined a critical value list for laboratory test, imaging, cervical cancer screening, electrocardiogram, and health checkup informed on site, and then performed a cross-sectional study to analyze the distribution and significance of critical values of 4,721 participants from different views and the association relation of 628 participants with more than one critical value and a retrospective cohort study to analyze the incidence and dynamic evolution of critical values based on 2,813 participants attending the physical examination from 2017 to 2019.

Results: A total of 4,721 participants were included in the retrospective study. The prevalence of 10 critical values from 33,639 participants was over 0.6%. The critical values of obesity, hypertension, Glucose_T, Liver_T, Kidney_T, Lipid_T, Urine_T, and Head_CT were significantly increased in men (P < 0.05), whereas the results were the opposite for the Blood_T and Thyroid_US (P < 0.01). The prevalence trend of critical values increased along with age, where the prevalence of men was higher than that of women under 60 years old (P < 0.01), while the prevalence of women increased by four times and exceeded the prevalence of men above 70 years old. Association relation analysis identified 16 and 6 effective rules for men and women, respectively, where the critical values of Urine_T and Glucose_T played the central roles. Furthermore, a retrospective dynamic evolution analysis found that the incidence of new critical values was about 10%, the incidence of persistent critical values was about 50%, and that most of the effective evolution paths tended to no critical values for men and women.

Conclusion: In conclusion, this study provides a new perspective to explore the population health status using the critical value reporting data in a physical examination center, which can assist in decision-making by health management at the population level and in the prevention and treatment of various types of cancer and chronic diseases at the individual level.

Evaluation of the analytical performance of endocrine analytes using sigma metrics

Background

(a) To evaluate the clinical performance of endocrine analytes using the sigma metrics (σ) model. (b) To redesign quality control strategies for performance improvement.

Methods

The sigma values of the analytes were initially evaluated based on the allowable total error (TEa), bias, and coefficient of variation (CV) at QC materials level 1 and 2 in March 2018. And then, the normalized QC performance decision charts, personalized QC rules, quality goal index (QGI) analysis, and root causes analysis (RCA) were performed based on the sigma values of the analytes. Finally, the sigma values were re‐evaluated in September 2018 after a series of targeted corrective actions.

Results

Based on the initial sigma values, two analytes (FT3 and TSH) with σ > 6, only needed one QC rule (1_3S) with N2 and R500 for QC management. On the other hand, seven analytes (FT4, TT4, CROT, E2, PRL, TESTO, and INS) with σ < 4 at one QC material level or both needed multiple rules (1_3S/2_2S/R_4S/4_1S/10_X) with N6 and R10‐500 depending on different sigma values for QC management. Subsequently, detailed and comprehensive RCA and timely corrective actions were performed on all the analytes base on the QGI analysis. Compared with the initial sigma values, the re‐evaluated sigma metrics of all the analytes increased significantly.

Conclusions

It was demonstrated that the combination of sigma metrics, QGI analysis, and RCA provided a useful evaluation system for the analytical performance of endocrine analytes.

Determining the Need for Repeat Testing of Blood Ethanol Concentration: Evaluation of the Synchron Blood Ethyl Alcohol Assay Kit

Background

In clinical laboratories, a common practice used to verify tests prior to reporting is repeat testing. Our objective was to evaluate the differences between the results of blood ethanol concentration (BEC) test repetitions and report on the role of repeat testing to prevent reporting of incorrect results.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of data retrieved from the Bursa Yuksek Ihtisas Training and Research Hospital’s document management system by calculating the percentage change between repeated BEC test runs. To assess for clinical relevance, the bias between two results from the same sample was compared using the 1988 Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments’ (CLIA) proficiency testing allowable total error (TEa) limits.

Results

From a total of 1,627 BEC tests performed between January 2017 and January 2018, 70% (1,133) were repeat tested. Of these, 830 resulted in BECs between 0–5 mmol/L, of which 237 (28.5%) were above the 25% acceptable TEa. Two hundred seventy-six BEC test results were greater than >14 mmol/L, and there was a good consensus between the initial and repeat test results (99%). In this group, the mean bias was 0.0% (95%, CI = -9.8–9.8%). However, three of the repeat test results were considered significantly different. There were two discordant results in the 5–14 mmol/L ethanol level, and the mean bias was 2.1% (95%, CI = -15.0–19.1%).

Conclusion

The majority of the repeated BEC test values were the same as the baseline value; therefore, there may be limited benefit in continuing such frequent repeated analyses.