Upload
patience-pierce
View
215
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
QUALITY PATIENT CARE THROUGH PROFICIENCY TESTING
Not Just Talking Quality, But Investing in Quality
Naval Medical Center San DiegoLaboratory DepartmentQuality Assurance Unit
What I really need to know besides my “A,B,Cs”?
QA QC POCT PT
OBJECTIVES Discuss regulatory aspects and impact of
proficiency testing (PT) Approaches to effectively manage and fully
utilize PT List investigative techniques used to determine
causes of poor PT performance and describe effective corrective actions
Understand how “Linearity” relate to the accreditation process
Explain techniques to perform the appropriate verifications of AMR and CRR
Common Analytical Exception codes
CAP Proficiency Testing
Allows laboratories to evaluate their performance and improve the accuracy of the patient results
Results evaluated using comparable peer groups from comprehensive database of laboratories
PROFICIENCY TESTING DO’s
Samples are tested on all shifts by technicians who routinely test patient samples
All surveys performed are treated as real patient samples. This includes using the same test methods for quality control, patient testing, workload accounting, verification and reporting of results. NOTE: This only applies to analytes that are tested
in-house.
Personnel who routinely analyze patient samples will integrate all PT within the routine workload
Proficiency Testing DON’Ts
Test samples differently than patient specimens
Have the same people always do testing
Refer samples to another laboratory Discuss results before reporting Use PT sample for other purposes
before submission date deadline
ENROLLMENT
Required for all analytes listed in the PT Enrollment Guide- Updated annually- Available at CAP website
www.cap.org-Included with order renewal forms
Why perform Linearity and Calibration Verification???
Requirements: CAP Laboratory Accreditation Program Checklist Question CHM.13400 (one of several relating to Calibration Verification) and Current CLIA Regulations Section 493.1255 for most analytes.
Linearity evaluations give information about what’s occurring “near the extremes," the high and low ends of the measurement range.
LN Surveys are particularly useful in calibration verification – identify imprecision problems before they become noticeable in other ways.
Calibration Verification provides proof that the measurement system calibration has not changed since the last calibration event.
Why does AMR need to be verified?
Example: typical serum glucose method Low calibrator = reagent blank (0 mg/dL) High calibrator = 356 mg/dL AMR = 10-600 mg/dL
The AMR is based on the expectation that the signal is linearly related to glucose concentration over the 10-600 mg/dL range.
Verification of the AMR expectation is required because the calibrators do not define the complete measurement range.
Clinically Reportable Range
Extension of the AMR based on clinical requirements.
Established once when method is implemented
Does not need to be verified on a recurring schedule
Values outside the CRR are reported as < or > a numeric value.
Checklist question: Are dilution protocols and diluents (or concentration protocols) specified for all methods for which the CRR exceeds the AMR?
AMR: how close to low and high limits
• To verify acceptable clinical performance
For low limit: use clinical judgment, e.g. creatinine, 0.2 or 0.3 mg/dL
For high limit: within 10-15% of upper limit of AMR
Reviewing your LN Evaluation Report
Example of LN2 Report (Calcium)
Example of LN2 Report (Calcium)
Example of a Non-Linear Result
Loss of recovery at the high end of the AMR
-Check reagents, calibrators, QC
-Are the results clinically significant?
PARTICIPATION
In addition to enrolling and testing samples, you must:-Ensure results are sent either electronically or via fax-Ensure they are sent by the deadline-Ensure all faxed pages are received
NOTE: Non-participation (failure to receive results)= UNSATISFACTORY
SATISFACTORY PT PERFORMANCE
80% for regulated analytes and other analytes that have at least 5 challenges per PT event
Percentage varies for analytes with fewer than 5 challenges
REPORTED CAUSES OF PT FAILURES
CLERICAL ERRORS
Post Analytic Phase Same importance as testing errors Examples:
Transcription Method/Reagent/Instrument codes Missing Information (TNP, </>, etc)
TECHNICAL ISSUES
Directly attributable to human actions:
Reconstitution Specimen Mix-up Improper Specimen Handling Incorrect Instrument Handling Failure to follow testing kit instructions Morphologic Misinterpretations
Methodologic Issues
Mechanical difficulties Instrument Software Problems Frequency of CALIBRATION Inadequate Reagent Performance Inadequate Maintenance Other instrument malfunctions
Exception Codes
ANALYTICAL PROBLEM(Leave the result area blank and fill the bubble for the appropriate Exception Code).
11 Unable to analyze (documentation be provided by laboratory).
22 Result is outside method/ instrument reportable range.
33 Specimen determined to be unsatisfactory after contacting the CAP.
*It is the laboratory’s responsibility to document theappropriate use of these exception codes should this berequested during a laboratory inspection.
Additional Tips
Keep original worksheets and instrument print-outs with the PT file
Make sure every less than acceptable result is followed up and documented
Confirm that corrective actions make sense and actually fix the problem
UNSATISFACTORY PT PERFORMANCE
Laboratories that have unsatisfactory performance for 1 or more analytes on an event will receive PTES Exception Summary (PTES) report. Investigate the problem Determine cause Implement Corrective Action RESPONSE TO LAP is not required
UNSUCCESSFUL PT PERFORMANCE
Is unsatisfactory performance on 2 of 3 PT events
Laboratory will receive a PT Exception Summary (PTES) report
Laboratory must suspend testing or implement plan of corrective action
LAP must approve laboratory’s action
PT Monitoring by Accreditation Program
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
Design a process to verify clerical entries prior to result submission
Retrain testing personnel as to the proper procedures for sample preparation, testing and reporting
Modify/Narrow QC acceptance range to detect problems sooner
Evaluate/increase frequency of calibration Perform Instrument Function Verification
(Precision, Linearity, Correlation) Revise Procedure to reflect corrective
actions
Example of Unsuccessful Proficiency Testing Performance:
IgA FAILED on two out of 3 events.
What will be your course of action:
1. Continue testing and provide CAP with credible program of corrective action
2. Voluntarily cease patient testing and investigate the failure
3. Conduct thorough investigation
IgA Unity Laboratory Comparison Report
<2.0
SDI/CVR
IgA Levy Jennings
POOR CALIBRATION
Identified Cause of Failure: Poor Calibration
Corrective Measures to prevent reoccurrence:
Daily review of calibration and QC
More frequent monitoring of LJ charts to catch trends and shifts that could indicate calibration curve issue
Method validation of IgA method was performedPrecisionLinearityCorrelation Studies
CONCLUSION:
Proficiency Testing monitors laboratories' continuing performance in a way that:
–Improves patient care –Protects the public’s health
References:
www.cap.org