ArticleRevista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social2024
[Pre-analytical quality assessment in the microbiology laboratory].
Article in Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Errors in the pre-analytical phase of the microbiology laboratory reduce patient safety and generate additional expenses. In Mexico we do not have systems for evaluation and monitoring of the pre-analytical phase; quality indicators are proposed for continuous improvement. Objective: Identify the main reasons for rejection of respiratory samples in the microbiology laboratory and evaluate the usefulness of preanalytical quality indicators. Material and methods: Cross-sectional study. Review of microbiology laboratory applications from August 2022 to July 2023, calculated the frequency of rejection and identification of the main reasons for it, it was analyzed using quality indicators based on the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC). Results: Of 3530 processing requests, 582 were for respiratory samples (16.48%), 44 samples rejected due to pre-analytical errors (7.56%), the main causes identified: Transcription error 22.7%, identification error 20.4%, Samples that do not comply Murray-Washington criteria 25.0%, Errors in obtaining/collecting samples 20.4%, Samples with defects in conservation 4.5%, Unidentified samples: 6.8. Conclusions: The main causes of rejection were identified; upon analysis with the preanalytical quality indicators, they were found at desirable levels and in reference ranges; only 4 were useful for long-term implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.