Year :
2024
| Month :
June
| Volume :
18
| Issue :
6
| Page :
DC01 - DC06
Full Version
Continual Improvement in Clinical Bacteriology Laboratory with Quality Indicators: A Retrospective Observational Study
Published: June 1, 2024 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2024/68601.19514
Mrudul Randive, Desma D Souza, Alka Shinde, Madhurima Nair, Ankita Chaurasia, Ashima Jamwal, Sujata Chavan, Sujata Baveja
1. Associate Professor, Department of Microbiology, LTM Medical College and General Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
2. Associate Professor (Additional), Department of Microbiology, LTM Medical College and General Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
3. Associate Professor (Additional), Department of Microbiology, LTM Medical College and General Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
4. Senior Resident, Department of Microbiology, DY Patil School of Medicine, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
5. Senior Resident, Department of Microbiology, Homi Bhabha Cancer Hospital, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India.
6. Senior Resident, Department of Microbiology, Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Chandigarh, India.
7. Senior Laboratory Technician, Department of Microbiology, LTM Medical College and General Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
8. Professor and Head, Department of Microbiology, LTM Medical College and General Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Correspondence Address :
Dr. Mrudul Randive,
601, Orion Tower 1, Opposite NHSS, GB Road, Thane, Maharashtra-400615, India.
E-mail: drmrudul.randive@gmail.com
Abstract
Introduction: Healthcare management is undergoing significant changes with the evolution of new and re-emerging infections. A clinical microbiologist plays an important role in giving an accurate and timely report to the clinicians. Quality Indicators (QIs) act as a measure of the quality of services offered by the laboratory and are tools to monitor and evaluate the laboratory’s performance throughout the Total Testing Process (TTP).
Aim: To measure the performance of the clinical bacteriology laboratory using QIs.
Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was conducted in the Department of Microbiology at Lokmanya Tilak Municipal Medical College and General Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. The study evaluated QIs from the records of 94,624 samples received in the bacteriology section of the clinical Microbiology laboratory between January 2018 and March 2021. Data analysis was conducted over a six-month period from December 2021 to May 2022. In 2018, one QI was identified for each phase, with an additional QI added in each phase to the pre-existing QI in 2019. In 2020, a QI was added in the preanalytical phase only. In 2021, the acceptable limit for one preanalytical QI was reduced from 2% to 1%. Data analysis was performed using an Excel sheet.
Results: Data from records of 94,624 clinical bacteriology samples collected over 39 months were analyzed retrospectively. The preanalytical indicators included the number of samples rejected (135, 0.14%) and the number of requisition forms with three patient identifiers (59,645, 93.95%). Analytical phase QIs consisted of the average External Quality Assurance Scheme (EQAS) performance score (97.44% from January 2018 to March 2021) and outliers in the Internal Quality Control (IQC) (25 from January 2019 till March 2021). Failures in the IQC were not assessed in 2018. Postanalytical phase QIs included Turnaround Time (TAT) (average of 2.55 days for aerobic growth) and reporting time for critical alerts, which was within 24 hours of alert finding (100% for smear and culture-positive results).
Conclusion: Regular monitoring of QIs helps to identify potential errors. This laboratory chose to analyse and monitor its processes using practically feasible QIs. It was found that the laboratory consistently maintained its performance throughout the study period.
Keywords
External quality assurance scheme, Internal quality control failure, National accreditation board for testing and calibration laboratories
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2024/68601.19514
Date of Submission: Dec 12, 2023
Date of Peer Review: Jan 24, 2024
Date of Acceptance: Apr 16, 2024
Date of Publishing: Jun 01, 2024
AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? No
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. No
PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Dec 13, 2023
• Manual Googling: Jan 27, 2024
• iThenticate Software: Apr 15, 2024 (10%)
ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin
EMENDATIONS: 8
|