Survey of patient perception of pre-analytical requirements for blood testing in the UK and RoI

A survey on the practice of phlebotomy in Lithuania and adherence to the EFLM-COLABIOCLI recommendations: continuous training and clear standard operating procedures as tools for better quality

Introduction

The aim of this study was to determine the level of compliance of venous blood sampling (VBS) in Lithuania with the joint recommendations of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine and the Latin American Confederation of Clinical Biochemistry (EFLM-COLABIOCLI) and to analyse possible causes of errors. A survey was conducted between April and September 2022.

Materials and methods

A self-designed questionnaire was distributed to the Lithuanian National Societies. Error frequencies and compliance score were computed. Differences between groups were analysed using Pearson's chi-square, Fisher's exact criterion, Mann-Whitney U (for two groups), or Kruskal-Wallis (for more than two groups) for categorical and discrete indicators. The association between ordinal and discrete variables was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Statistical significance was determined at P < 0.05.

Results

A total of 272 respondents completed the questionnaire. Median error rate and compliance score were 31.5% and 13/19, respectively. Significant differences were found among professional titles, standard operating procedures availability, training recency, and tourniquet purpose opinions. A negative correlation was noted between compliance and time since training (rs = - 0.28, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The findings of this study indicate that there is a significant need for improvement in compliance with the EFLM-COLABIOCLI recommendations on VBS among specialists in Lithuania. Essential measures include prioritizing ongoing phlebotomy training and establishing national guidelines. Harmonisation of blood collection practices across healthcare institutions is crucial.

Assessing Non-Laboratory Healthcare Professionals' Attitude towards the Importance of Patient Preparation for Laboratory Tests

(1) Background: Various guidelines address patient preparation and its importance for venous blood sampling, such as the GP41 guideline issued by the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and the blood collection guidelines published by the World Health Organisation. Recommendations provided by national societies or international organisations in the field of radiology, such as The Contrast Media Safety Committee of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology, or in the field of laboratory medicine, such as the Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) and the Latin American Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE-LATAM) of the Latin American Confederation of Clinical Biochemistry (COLABIOCLI), also guide this practice. There is a notable lack of understanding regarding the viewpoints held by non-laboratory healthcare professionals concerning the significance of patient preparation for laboratory testing and the impact of typical factors associated with patient preparation. This study endeavours to bridge this gap by assessing the attitude of non-laboratory healthcare professionals in Lithuania regarding these pivotal aspects. (2) Methods: A self-designed anonymous questionnaire was disseminated among 141 public healthcare institutions in Lithuania. The internal consistency of the questionnaire was evaluated by computing Cronbach's alpha. Descriptive statistics were utilised for the variables, while comparisons of attitude among groups were conducted using Mann-Whitney U (for two groups) or Kruskal-Wallis (for more than two groups) for categorical and discrete indicators. The Kruskal-Wallis post-hoc test was employed for pairwise comparisons. A significance level of p-Value < 0.05 was applied to establish statistical significance. (3) Results: A total of 158 respondents constituted two distinct groups of healthcare professionals: nurses and physicians. Most of the participants either agreed or strongly agreed that patient preparation could introduce bias into laboratory test results. Professionals with less than 20 years of work experience or those who attended training in patient preparation for sampling within a 5-year timeframe exhibited stronger agreement regarding different preanalytical factors in patient preparation and their impact on laboratory test results compared to their counterparts. (4) Conclusions: Non-laboratory healthcare professionals who participated in this survey consider proper patient preparation for laboratory testing to be a significant step towards obtaining accurate test results. They also recognize the commonly acknowledged preanalytical factors as important for ensuring reliable test results. However, attitudes towards the importance of several preanalytical factors vary depending on whether non-laboratory healthcare professionals have more or less than 20 years of work experience, as well as whether they have attended any training on this topic within the last five years or have never attended such training.

Instructions on appropriate fasting prior to phlebotomy; effects on patient awareness, preparation, and biochemical parameters

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the effect of appropriate pre-phlebotomy instructions on patients' awareness of the need to fast, their fasting status at phlebotomy, and the measurement of specific biochemical analytes and indices.

METHODS

While booking their phlebotomy appointments, two-hundred outpatients, with a wide range of pre-existing medical conditions, were recruited and randomly assigned to either control or intervention groups. The control group received no instructions while the intervention group was verbally instructed to fast for precisely 12 h prior to their appointment. Serum samples were collected from participants to quantify common biochemical analytes and serum indices, some of which were known to be influenced by fasting status, such as triglyceride and the lipaemic index. At the same appointment, participants completed a survey assessing their perception of, and adherence to, fasting requirements.

RESULTS

In the intervention group, 99% responded that they had fasted before phlebotomy vs. 16% of controls. Subjects stated they fasted for 12 h in 51% of the intervention group and 7% of the controls. Median concentrations for potassium and total bilirubin were statistically, but not clinically, significantly different. In the study, a single patient in the intervention group was found to have a lipaemic sample.

CONCLUSIONS

Without instruction, it appears few patients will fast appropriately prior to blood collection. This study suggests that most patients recall and adhere to verbal instructions regarding fasting. Though many in the control group stated they did not fast, triglyceride concentration and lipaemia were not significantly different from the intervention group, and biochemical analyses appear unaffected by fasting status.