Errors in the Extra-Analytical Phases of Clinical Chemistry Laboratory Testing

The total testing process consists of various phases from the pre-preanalytical to the post-postanalytical phase, the so-called brain-to-brain loop. With improvements in analytical techniques and efficient quality control programmes, most laboratory errors now occur in the extra-analytical phases. There has been recent interest in these errors with numerous publications highlighting their effect on service delivery, patient care and cost. This interest has led to the formation of various working groups whose mission is to develop standardized quality indicators which can be used to measure the performance of service of these phases. This will eventually lead to the development of external quality assessment schemes to monitor these phases in agreement with ISO15189:2012 recommendations. This review focuses on potential errors in the extra-analytical phases of clinical chemistry laboratory testing, some of the studies performed to assess the severity and impact of these errors and processes that are in place to address these errors. The aim of this review is to highlight the importance of these errors for the requesting clinician.

The CCLM contribution to improvements in quality and patient safety

Clinical laboratories play an important role in improving patient care. The past decades have seen unbelievable, often unpredictable improvements in analytical performance. Although the seminal concept of the brain-to-brain laboratory loop has been described more than four decades ago, there is now a growing awareness about the importance of extra-analytical aspects in laboratory quality. According to this concept, all phases and activities of the testing cycle should be assessed, monitored and improved in order to decrease the total error rates thereby improving patients’ safety. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) not only has followed the shift in perception of quality in the discipline, but has been the catalyst for promoting a large debate on this topic, underlining the value of papers dealing with errors in clinical laboratories and possible remedies, as well as new approaches to the definition of quality in pre-, intra-, and post-analytical steps. The celebration of the 50th anniversary of the CCLM journal offers the opportunity to recall and mention some milestones in the approach to quality and patient safety and to inform our readers, as well as laboratory professionals, clinicians and all the stakeholders of the willingness of the journal to maintain quality issues as central to its interest even in the future.