Analysis of Quality Indicators in Molecular Laboratory of a Tertiary Care Hospital in India

Introduction: Quality indicators are important parameters to enhance the quality of the clinical laboratory services. Due to the extensive testing processes, errors cannot be completely avoided in a clinical laboratory. To minimize errors, however, adequate training, QC checks, and regular procedure evaluations are beneficial. Objective(s): The objective of the study was to establish and evaluate quality indicators on an ongoing basis as an effort to increase quality. Method(s): This retrospective study, different quality indicators in a molecular laboratory in northern Gujarat were assessed over the course of a year (September 2020-August 2021). Data of total 8176 samples were summarized. Each Quality indicator was examined at the end of the month after being divided into the pre, analytical, and post-analytical stages, respectively. Result(s): As summarization of total 8176 samples, we found a cumulative error rate for all quality indicators of 346 (4.23%). Preanalytical errors were the most common 180 (2.20%), followed by analytical errors 114 (1.39%), and post analytical errors 52 (0.63%). Conclusion(s): There is no question that by continuously striving to develop the outcome of these quality indicators through the adoption of corrective measures over time, the quality of laboratory services and patient care would be improved.Copyright © 2023, Dr Yashwant Research Labs Pvt Ltd. All rights reserved.

Evaluation of Online Critical Care Fellowship Programs.

Background The objective of this study was to assess the accessibility and content of the critical care fellowship websites provided on the Electronic Residency Application Services (ERAS) website. Methods Using the online information provided by ERAS, we compiled a list of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited critical care fellowship programs. Each of the links provided by ERAS was evaluated by a standard search on Google as follows: the program name + "critical care fellowship". After assembling the working links, those websites were subsequently evaluated based on the program description, application process, and educational content. Results We reviewed 59 critical care fellowship programs that were obtained from ERAS. Of the 59 programs, one retracted its participation and was not included in the study, and six other programs were excluded due to repeated links on ERAS, nonworking links, and websites without any content. We analyzed the data collected from the remaining 52 programs. Our data shows a general lack of information being provided to prospective critical care candidates. Conclusions ERAS is a major source of information for prospective fellows looking for critical care fellowships in the current match. Unfortunately, the majority of the programs evaluated lack substantial information for prospective candidates. Despite many websites containing adequate information regarding program descriptions, there was a lack of information regarding the application process and educational activities.

The response of total testing process in clinical laboratory medicine to COVID-19pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Following a pandemic, laboratory medicine is vulnerable to laboratory errors due to the stressful and high workloads. We aimed to examine how laboratory errors may arise from factors, e.g., flexible working order, staff displacement, changes in the number of tests, and samples will reflect on the total test process (TTP) during the pandemic period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 12 months, 6 months before and during the pandemic, laboratory errors were assessed via quality indicators (QIs) related to TTP phases. QIs were grouped as pre-, intra- and postanalytical. The results of QIs were expressed in defect percentages and sigma, evaluated with 3 levels of performance quality: 25th, 50th and 75th percentile values. RESULTS: When the pre- and during pandemic periods were compared, the sigma value of the samples not received was significantly lower in pre-pandemic group than during pandemic group (4.7σ vs. 5.4σ, P = 0.003). The sigma values of samples transported inappropriately and haemolysed samples were significantly higher in pre-pandemic period than during pandemic (5.0σ vs. 4.9σ, 4.3σ vs. 4.1σ; P = 0.046 and P = 0.044, respectively). Sigma value of tests with inappropriate IQC performances was lower during pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period (3.3σ vs. 3.2σ, P = 0.081). Sigma value of the reports delivered outside the specified time was higher during pandemic than pre-pandemic period (3.0σ vs. 3.1σ, P = 0.030). CONCLUSION: In all TTP phases, some quality indicators improved while others regressed during the pandemic period. It was observed that preanalytical phase was affected more by the pandemic.

The Pandemic's impacts on patients without Covid-19 on multidisciplinary aspects in emergency medicine care.

The emergence of Covid-19 has caused a pandemic and is a major public health concern. Covid-19 has fundamentally challenged the global health care system in all aspects. However, there is a growing concern for the subsequent detrimental effects of continuing delays or adjustments on time-dependent treatments for Covid-19 negative patients. Patients arriving to the ED with STEMIs and acute CVA are currently presumed to have delays due to Covid-19 related concerns. The objective of this paper is to evaluate the implications of the Covid-19 pandemic on non-Covid19 patients in emergency care settings. We conducted a retrospective study from February 2020 to April 2020 and compared this to a parallel period in 2019 to assess the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on three distinct non-Covid-19 ED diagnosis that require immediate intervention. Our primary outcome measures were time to primary PCI in acute STEMI, time to fibrinolysis in acute CVA, and time to femoral hip fracture correction surgery. Our secondary outcome measure included a composite outcome of length of stay in hospital and mortality. From 1 February 2020 to 30 April 2020, the total referrals to ED diagnosed with STEMI, Hip fracture and CVA of which required intervention were 197 within Covid-19 group 2020 compared to 250 in the control group 2019. Mean duration to intervention (PCI, surgery and tPA, respectively) did not differ between COVID-19 group and 2019 group. Among femoral hip fracture patients', the referral numbers to ED were significantly lower in Covid-19 era (p = 0.040) and the hospitalization stay was significantly shorter (p = 0.003). Among CVA patients', we found statistical differences among the number of referrals and the patients' age. Coping with the Covid-19 pandemic presents a challenge for the general healthcare system. Our results suggest that with proper management, despite the obstacles of isolation policies and social distancing, any negative impact on the quality of health care for the non-Covid-19 patients can be minimized in the emergency department setting.