Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29043193›Full record

ArticleAfrican journal of laboratory medicine2014

Progressing beyond SLMTA: Are internal audits and corrective action the key drivers of quality improvement?

Robert N Maina, Doris M Mengo, Abdikher D Mohamud, Susan M Ochieng, Sammy K Milgo, Connie J Sexton, Sikhulile Moyo, Elizabeth T Luman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in African journal of laboratory medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Robert N MainaKenya Accreditation Service (KENAS), Kenya.
Doris M MengoKenya Accreditation Service (KENAS), Kenya.
Abdikher D MohamudKenya Accreditation Service (KENAS), Kenya.
Susan M OchiengKenya Accreditation Service (KENAS), Kenya.
Sammy K MilgoKenya Accreditation Service (KENAS), Kenya.
Connie J SextonUS Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, United States.
Sikhulile MoyoBotswana-Harvard AIDS Institute Partnership, Princes Marina Hospital, Botswana.
Elizabeth T LumanUS Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, United States.

Funding

PS08-842, PEPFAR LABORATORY TRAINING PROJECTU2GPS001285 · PS · AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR CLINICAL PATHOLOGY · PI CASTLE, SHANNON H · 2008 to 2014
$26.2M
NCHHSTP CDC HHS U2G PS001285
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundKenya has implemented the Strengthening Laboratory Management Toward Accreditation (SLMTA) programme to facilitate quality improvement in medical laboratories and to support national accreditation goals. Continuous quality improvement after SLMTA completion is needed to ensure sustainability and continue progress toward accreditation.

methodsAudits were conducted by qualified, independent auditors to assess the performance of five enrolled laboratories using the Stepwise Laboratory Quality Improvement Process Towards Accreditation (SLIPTA) checklist. End-of-programme (exit) and one year post-programme (surveillance) audits were compared for overall score, star level (from zero to five, based on scores) and scores for each of the 12 Quality System Essential (QSE) areas that make up the SLIPTA checklist.

resultsAll laboratories improved from exit to surveillance audit (median improvement 38 percentage points, range 5-45 percentage points). Two laboratories improved from zero to one star, two improved from zero to three stars and one laboratory improved from three to four stars. The lowest median QSE scores at exit were: internal audit; corrective action; and occurrence management and process improvement (< 20%). Each of the 12 QSEs improved substantially at surveillance audit, with the greatest improvement in client management and customer service, internal audit and information management (≥ 50 percentage points). The two laboratories with the greatest overall improvement focused heavily on the internal audit and corrective action QSEs.

conclusionWhilst all laboratories improved from exit to surveillance audit, those that focused on the internal audit and corrective action QSEs improved substantially more than those that did not; internal audits and corrective actions may have acted as catalysts, leading to improvements in other QSEs. Systematic identification of core areas and best practices to address them is a critical step toward strengthening public medical laboratories.

Identifiers

PMID29043193
PMCPMC5637794

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.