ABSTRACT
The growth in the use of small portable analysers outside hospital laboratories has been a cause of concern to laboratory practitioners. This has been partly because of a perceived threat to laboratory careers and partly because of fears that the quality of testing would be poor, with a consequent danger of patients being placed at risk. The evidence in this paper indicates that the use of equipment outside laboratories is still increasing in many areas. Despite the fears which have been expressed, little attention is being given to operator training, service costs, safety and many other aspects; only rarely has responsibility for the quality of results been accepted.
Subject(s)
Chemistry, Clinical , Laboratories, Hospital , Costs and Cost Analysis , Quality Control , United Kingdom , WorkforceABSTRACT
An external quality-assessment scheme was initiated among a group of 13 clinical chemistry laboratories for the urinary analysis of calcium, chloride, creatinine, glucose, osmolality, phosphate, potassium, protein, sodium, urate and urea and also for the estimation of creatinine clearance. The greatest inter-laboratory imprecision occurred in the assay of urinary protein. The results of the survey are compared with similar schemes elsewhere and their significance discussed.
