Krouwer Consulting
 

 

Home
Up
Modeling
Freq. of Med. Errors
Frequency of Medical Errors II
Six Sigma
Six Sigma II
Six Sigma III
Outliers
Equivalent QC
Equivalent QC2
Sys. not People
Near Miss
Detection
Recovery
Risk Management
FMEA FRACAS
Fault Tree Example
Beware the Technical Administrator
Discrepant Analysis
FMEA Validation
Proficiency Testing and Six Sigma
It's Up To the Lab Director
Bland Altman Plots
Risk Management II
Unit Use QC
The reverse Pareto – not a good
Risk Management III
Pedigree of Approaches to Reduce Error
What it Takes to Get New Ideas Accepted
FMEA FRACAS FTs Pareto
When to conduct FMEA
Error Reporting Systems for Clin
Customer Misuse
Fault Isolation
Uniformity of Claims
Outliers in QC and Proficiency Testing
The quality of quality initiativ
Publishing in journals or on web
FDA Waiver Guidance
Pay for Performance
Pay for performance II
Performance vs. Attribute Goals
ISO Terminology
Latent Errors
Preventable medical errors
Troponin I
GUM Comment
More on GUM
Standards Issues
Slow Qual. Progress
More QC?
Report Writing
Software Validation
Dump Data

Risk management and the clinical laboratory

The conventional wisdom is that errors in the clinical lab are usually (>90%) associated with pre-analytical and post-analytical processes rather than the analytical process. Yet much of the effort in preventing errors in assays deals with the analytical process.

There have been several ISO standards devoted to quality in the clinical laboratory:

ISO 15189 - Medical laboratories -- Particular requirements for quality and competence
ISO 17025 - General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories
ISO 13485 - Medical devices -- Quality management systems -- Requirements for regulatory purposes

There is also an ISO standard devoted to risk management.

ISO 14971 - Medical devices -- Application of risk management to medical devices

None of the standards will be of much help to reduce errors in the clinical laboratory

For example, in the first three standards, under the section “corrective action” in one standard it is stated that the laboratory shall establish a policy and procedure for implementing corrective action. Another standard goes into more detail by stating that an investigation process shall be included to determine the underlying cause(s) of the problem. Because of copyrights, I can’t reproduce these sections, but I don’t see that people in a clinical laboratory would say after reading this section – “aha, now I know exactly what to do”

The standard on risk management is much more informative but does not provide detailed guidance on risk management tools or a worked example that would help a clinical laboratory to set up a risk management program. Moreover, this standard is for manufacturers, not users of devices such as clinical laboratories. This is an important point, since process errors within a clinical laboratory can and have contributed to patient harm, including deaths (1).

Some comments on ISO 14971 - edited 11/21/07

See:

http://jkrouwer.wordpress.com/2007/11/21/iso-14971-and-residual-risk/

http://jkrouwer.wordpress.com/2007/11/06/some-iso-14971-risk-control-measures-won%e2%80%99t-reduce-risk/

http://jkrouwer.wordpress.com/2007/11/04/improvement-is-needed-for-risk-management-guidance-for-in-vitro-medical-devices/

http://jkrouwer.wordpress.com/2007/11/01/who-made-iso-king/

EP18 to the rescue

The CLSI standard EP18 is currently being revised, EP22 and EP23 are new documents in preparation. All documents deal with aspects of risk management.

EP18 has a new title: Risk Management Techniques to Identify and Control Laboratory Error Sources

EP18 describes how to use two tools: FMEA – in order to reduce potential errors, and FRACAS – in order to prevent the recurrence of observed errors. Each is illustrated with worked examples.

A remaining issue

There is no current regulatory requirement for a clinical laboratory to perform risk management as described by EP18. Moreover, as this document has been developed, clinical laboratory subcommittee members expressed some reluctance to use these “industry tools”. There is no easy answer to this.

Perhaps, the fact that adverse events traced to clinical laboratory error (1) are amenable to prevention using these tools will help. The risk of litigation and fines (2) might also be a motivating factor. The rest of the hospital does have a regulatory obligation to perform at least one FMEA per year.

References

1.       Pennsylvania  Dept. of health - health department announces preliminary results of St. Agnes investigation http://www.dsf.health.state.pa.us/health/cwp/view.asp?A=190&Q=229407

2.       Pennsylvania  Dept. of health - health department orders St. Agnes medical center to pay $447,500 fine  http://www.dsf.health.state.pa.us/health/cwp/view.asp?A=190&Q=229960