A comprehensive review of the SLMTA literature part 1: Content analysis and future priorities

Assessment of laboratory capacity in conflict-affected low-resource settings using two World Health Organization laboratory assessment tools

OBJECTIVES

Laboratory diagnostic services are essential to drive evidence-based treatment decisions, manage outbreaks, and provide population-level data. Many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) lack sufficient diagnostic capacity, often further exacerbated in conflict-affected areas. This project assessed laboratory services in conflict-affected LMICs to understand gaps and opportunities for improving laboratory capacity.

METHODS

The World Health Organization Laboratory Assessment Tool Facility Questionnaire (WHO Laboratory Tool) and Stepwise Laboratory Improvement Process Towards Accreditation (SLIPTA) checklist were used to assess five laboratories in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and five in Gaza, Palestine. Total scores and percentage outcomes by indicator were calculated.

RESULTS

Average WHO Laboratory Tool score across all facilities was 41% (range 32-50%) in DRC and 78% (range 72-84%) in Gaza. Lowest scoring indicators in DRC were Biorisk management (13%, range 8-21%), Documentation (14%, range 6-21%), and in Gaza, were Facilities (59%, range 46-75%) and Documentation (60%, range 44-76%). Highest scoring indicators in DRC were Facilities (70%, range 45-83%) and Data and Information Management (61%, range 38-80%), and in Gaza were Data Information and Management (96%) and Public Health Function (91%, range 88-94%). In DRC, no laboratory achieved a SLIPTA star rating. In Gaza, two laboratories had a 3-star SLIPTA rating, one had a 2-star rating and two had a 1-star rating.

CONCLUSIONS

Laboratory systems in conflict-affected LMICs have significant gaps. Implementating improvement strategies in such settings may be especially challenging.

Addressing quality and safety in anatomic pathology in low- and middle-income countries

The World Health Organization (WHO) has created a sustainable development goal of reducing preventable mortality from cancer in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) by 30% by 2030. Central to achieving this goal is the creation and maintenance of quality anatomic pathology services (APS). Within the last decade, quality assurance programs and patient safety measures have become a major focus of research for upper middle- and high-income countries (UMHICs), which has led to marked documented improvement in the quality of services provided by laboratories, as well as a decrease in patient safety events. We propose that as APS are developed in LMICs, the lessons learned by UMHICs are necessary to incorporate to produce quality and safe services toward obtaining the aforementioned goal. Furthermore, data suggests that Quality Improvement work requires change at the macrosystems and microsystems levels to achieve these goals. Here, we propose five "microsystems" strategies for professional organizations, healthcare institutions in LMICs and UMHICs that would accelerate quality improvement programs/systems implementation in APS in LMICs.

Critical success factors for Vietnamese laboratories striving to implement quality management systems

Accurate laboratory reporting is crucial to patient diagnosis and treatment. This study identified critical success factors (CSF) for implementing a laboratory quality management system (QMS). This descriptive research used qualitative and quantitative methods to collect and analyze data from laboratory managers and staff employed in Vietnamese hospital laboratories implementing a QMS. The top five CSFs identified were: (1) staff QMS knowledge, (2) manager leadership, (3) staff commitment, (4) mentorship, and (5) hospital administration support. Identifying CSFs is critical to successful planning and implementation of QMS.

Introduction of quality management in a National Reference Laboratory in Germany

Background

High quality diagnostic services are crucial for tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis, treatment and control. A strong laboratory quality management system (QMS) is critical to ensuring the quality of testing and results. Recent initiatives to improve TB laboratory quality have focused on low and middle-income countries, but similar issues also apply to high-income countries.

Methods and findings

Using a multipronged approach reviews of facilities, equipment, processes (purchasing, pre-analytic, analytic and post-analytic), staff, health and safety, documentation, information management and organization based on the ISO 15189 and the twelve quality system essentials were conducted between October 2015 and January 2016 at the National TB Reference Laboratory in Germany. Outcome assessment included proportion of smear positive slides, proportion of contaminated liquid cultures and DNA contamination rates before and after implementation of QMS. The odds ratio for these outcomes was calculated using a before/after comparison. Reviews highlighted deficiencies across all twelve quality system essentials and were addressed in order of priority and urgency. Actions aimed at improving analytical quality, health and safety and information management were prioritised for initial implementation in parallel with each other. The odds ratio for a sample to be tested as microscopically positive increased by 2.08 (95%CI 1.41–3.06) comparing the time before with the time after implementation of quality managed fluorescence microscopy. Liquid culture contamination rates decreased from 23.6- 7.6% in April-July 2016 to <10% in November 2017-March 2018. The proportion of negative controls showing evidence of DNA contamination decreased from 38.2% in 2013 to 8.1% in 2017, the corresponding odds ratio was 0.14 (95%CI 0.07–0.29).

Conclusion

This study showed marked improvement on quality indicators after implementation of a QMS in a National TB Reference Laboratory. The challenges and lessons learned in this study are valuable not just for high-income settings, but are equally generalizable to other laboratories.

Clinical Referral Laboratories in Rwanda

Objectives

We investigated the quality system performance in Rwandan referral laboratories to determine their progress toward accreditation.

Methods

We conducted audits across five laboratories in 2017, using the Stepwise Laboratory Quality Improvement Process Towards Accreditation checklist. Laboratories were scored based on the World Health Organization grading scale (0-5 stars scale) and compared with earlier audits.

Results

Between 2012 and 2017, only one laboratory progressed (from four to five stars). Four of the five laboratories decreased to one (three laboratories) and zero (one laboratory) stars from four and three stars. Management reviews, evaluation, audits, documents, records, and identification of nonconformities showed a low performance.

Conclusions

Four of five laboratories are not moving toward accreditation. However, this target is still achievable by energizing responsibilities of stakeholders and monitoring and evaluation. This would be possible because of the ability that laboratories showed in earlier audits, coupled with existing health policy that enables sustainable quality health care in Rwanda.

Implementation research: a mentoring programme to improve laboratory quality in Cambodia

OBJECTIVE

To implement a mentored laboratory quality stepwise implementation (LQSI) programme to strengthen the quality and capacity of Cambodian hospital laboratories.

METHODS

We recruited four laboratory technicians to be mentors and trained them in mentoring skills, laboratory quality management practices and international standard organization (ISO) 15189 requirements for medical laboratories. Separately, we trained staff from 12 referral hospital laboratories in laboratory quality management systems followed by tri-weekly in-person mentoring on quality management systems implementation using the LQSI tool, which is aligned with the ISO 15189 standard. The tool was adapted from a web-based resource into a software-based spreadsheet checklist, which includes a detailed action plan and can be used to qualitatively monitor each laboratory's progress. The tool - translated into Khmer - included a set of quality improvement activities grouped into four phases for implementation with increasing complexity. Project staff reviewed the laboratories' progress and challenges in weekly conference calls and bi-monthly meetings with focal points of the health ministry, participating laboratories and local partners. We present the achievements in implementation from September 2014 to March 2016.

FINDINGS

As of March 2016, the 12 laboratories have completed 74-90% of the 104 activities in phase 1, 53-78% of the 178 activities in phase 2, and 18-26% of the 129 activities in phase 3.

CONCLUSION

Regular on-site mentoring of laboratories using a detailed action plan in the local language allows staff to learn concepts of quality management system and learn on the job without disruption to laboratory service provision.

A comprehensive review of the SLMTA literature part 2: Measuring success

Background

Since its introduction in 2009, the Strengthening Laboratory Management Toward Accreditation (SLMTA) programme has been implemented in 617 laboratories in 47 countries.

Objective

We completed a systematic review of the published literature on SLMTA. The review consists of two companion papers; this article examines quantitative evidence presented in the publications along with a meta-analysis of selected results.

Methods

We identified 28 published articles with data from SLMTA implementation. The SLMTA programme was evaluated through audits based on a standard checklist, which is divided into 12 sections corresponding to the 12 Quality System Essentials (QSEs). Several basic service delivery indicators reported by programmes were also examined. Results for various components of the programme were reviewed and summarised; a meta-analysis of QSE results grouped by the three stages of the quality cycle was conducted for 126 laboratories in 12 countries.

Results

Global programme data show improved quality in SLMTA laboratories in every country, with average improvements on audit scores of 25 percentage points. Meta-analysis identified Improvement Management as the weakest stage, with internal audit (8%) and occurrence management (16%) showing the lowest scores. Studies documented 19% – 95% reductions in turn-around times, 69% – 93% reductions in specimen rejection rates, 76% – 81% increases in clinician satisfaction rates, 67% – 85% improvements in external quality assessment results, 50% – 66% decreases in nonconformities and 67% increases in staff punctuality.

Conclusions

The wide array of results reported provides a comprehensive picture of the SLMTA programme overall, suggesting a substantive impact on provision of quality laboratory services and patient care. These comprehensive results establish a solid data-driven foundation for program improvement and further expansion.

Decentralised facility-based training as an alternative model for SLMTA implementation: The Cameroon experience

Background

The Strengthening Laboratory Management Toward Accreditation (SLMTA) programme is designed to build institutional capacity to help strengthen the tiered laboratory system. Most countries implement the SLMTA three-workshop series using a centralised model, whereby participants from several laboratories travel to one location to be trained together.

Objectives

We assessed the effectiveness and cost of conducting SLMTA training in a decentralised manner as compared to centralised training.

Methods

SLMTA was implemented in five pilot laboratories in Cameroon between October 2010 and October 2012 by means of a series of workshops, laboratory improvement projects and on-site mentorship. The first workshop was conducted in the traditional centralised approach. The second and third workshops were decentralised, delivered on-site at each of the five enrolled laboratories. Progress was monitored by repeated audits using the Stepwise Laboratory Quality Improvement Process Towards Accreditation (SLIPTA) checklist.

Results

Audit scores for all laboratories improved steadily through the course of the programme. Median improvement was 11 percentage points after the first (centralised) training and an additional 24 percentage points after the second (decentralised) training. The estimated per-laboratory cost of the two training models was approximately the same at US$21 000. However, in the decentralised model approximately five times as many staff members were trained, although it also required five times the amount of trainer time.

Conclusion

Decentralised SLMTA training was effective in improving laboratory quality and should be considered as an alternative to centralised training.

Progressing beyond SLMTA: Are internal audits and corrective action the key drivers of quality improvement?

Background

Kenya has implemented the Strengthening Laboratory Management Toward Accreditation (SLMTA) programme to facilitate quality improvement in medical laboratories and to support national accreditation goals. Continuous quality improvement after SLMTA completion is needed to ensure sustainability and continue progress toward accreditation.

Methods

Audits were conducted by qualified, independent auditors to assess the performance of five enrolled laboratories using the Stepwise Laboratory Quality Improvement Process Towards Accreditation (SLIPTA) checklist. End-of-programme (exit) and one year post-programme (surveillance) audits were compared for overall score, star level (from zero to five, based on scores) and scores for each of the 12 Quality System Essential (QSE) areas that make up the SLIPTA checklist.

Results

All laboratories improved from exit to surveillance audit (median improvement 38 percentage points, range 5–45 percentage points). Two laboratories improved from zero to one star, two improved from zero to three stars and one laboratory improved from three to four stars. The lowest median QSE scores at exit were: internal audit; corrective action; and occurrence management and process improvement (< 20%). Each of the 12 QSEs improved substantially at surveillance audit, with the greatest improvement in client management and customer service, internal audit and information management (≥ 50 percentage points). The two laboratories with the greatest overall improvement focused heavily on the internal audit and corrective action QSEs.

Conclusion

Whilst all laboratories improved from exit to surveillance audit, those that focused on the internal audit and corrective action QSEs improved substantially more than those that did not; internal audits and corrective actions may have acted as catalysts, leading to improvements in other QSEs. Systematic identification of core areas and best practices to address them is a critical step toward strengthening public medical laboratories.