ABSTRACT
Background: Laboratories across the world are successfully using quality indicators (QIs) to monitor their performance. We aimed to analyze the effectiveness of using the peer group comparison and statistical tools such as sigma metrics for periodic evaluation of QIs and identify potential errors in the preanalytical, analytical, and postanalytical phases. Methods: We evaluated the monthly QIs for 1 year. A total of 11 QIs were evaluated across the three phases of the total testing process, using percentage variance, and sigma metric analysis. Results: Our study observed that based on sigma metric analysis, the performance was good for all the QIs except for the number of samples with the inappropriate specimen hemolyzed samples, clotted samples, and turnaround time (Sigma value < 3). The percentage variance of QIs in all the phases was plotted in a Pareto chart, which helped us in identifying turnaround time and internal quality control performance are the key areas that contribute to almost 80% of the errors among all the QIs. Conclusion: Laboratory performance evaluation using QIs and sigma metric analysis helped us in identifying and prioritizing the corrective actions in the key areas of the total testing process.
