Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33488088›Full record

ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2021

Total Clinical Chemistry Laboratory Errors and Evaluation of the Analytical Quality Control Using Sigma Metric for Routine Clinical Chemistry Tests.

Mulugeta Teshome, Abebaw Worede, Daniel Asmelash

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Bias in Laboratory Medicine: The Dark Side of the Moon.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2024
    Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mulugeta TeshomeDepartment of Medical Laboratory, Dessie Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Dessie, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0003-1479-5265
Abebaw WoredeDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, School of Biomedical and Laboratory Sciences, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Daniel AsmelashDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, School of Biomedical and Laboratory Sciences, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0001-8345-2982
University of Gondar · ET

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrently, the use of clinical laboratory tests is growing at a promising rate and about 80% of the clinical decisions made are based on the laboratory test results. Therefore, it is a major task to achieve quality service. This study was conducted to assess the magnitude of errors in the total testing process of Clinical Chemistry Laboratory and to evaluate analytical quality control using sigma metrics.

methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted at Dessie Comprehensive Specialized Hospital Clinical Chemistry Laboratory, Northeast Ethiopia, from 10 February 2020 to 10 June 2020. All Clinical Chemistry Laboratory test requests with their respective samples, external quality control and all daily internal quality control data during the study period were included in the study. Data were collected using a prepared checklist and analyzed using SPSS version 21.

resultsA total of 4719 blood samples with their test requests were included in the study. Out of 145,383 quality indicators, an error rate of 22,301 (15.3%) was identified in the total testing process. Of the total errors, 76.3% were pre-analytical, 2.1% were analytical and 21.6% were post-analytical errors (p<0.0001). Of the total 14 analytes in the sigma metric evaluation, except ALP, all routine clinical chemistry tests were below the standard (<3). In multivariate logistic regression, the location of patients in the inpatient department was significantly associated with the specimen rejection ((AOR=1.837, 95% CI (1.288-2.618), p=0.001).

conclusionThe study found a higher frequency of errors in the total testing process in the Clinical Chemistry Laboratory and almost all test parameters had an unsatisfactory sigma metric value.

Indexed as

analytical errorsClinical Chemistry LaboratoryEthiopiapost-analytical errorspre-analytical errorssigma metrics

Identifiers

PMID33488088
PMCPMC7815085
OpenAlexW3120111071

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.