Risk assessment of pre-analytical errors and their impact on patient safety in a tertiary care centre in South India

• Published in: IP Journal of Diagnostic Pathology and Oncology Vol. 5; no. 4; pp. 415 - 418
• Main Authors: Raghavan A.T.M, Venkat, Sweta, Kulkarni, K, Shanmugasamy, S, Sowmya
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 28.12.2020
• ISSN: 2581-3714; 2581-3706
• DOI: 10.18231/j.jdpo.2020.080

To identify the different preanalytical errors encountered in the central laboratory and to adopt the corrective measures to overcome them. To identify the cause of the preanalytical errors. To evaluate the impact of corrective measures and their role on patients safety The study comprised of 500 samples over a period of one year in Central Laboratory, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute, Pondicherry. The study included all the samples collected from the patients that are sent to the Central laboratory, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute, departments like Pathology, Biochemistry and Microbiology. The samples were received along with the patients request form which included the patients details like name, age, sex, treating clinician, place of admission or where from the sample was collected, nature of the sample, the name of the test, clinical diagnosis etc. Amongst 500 samples received, preanalytical errors were detected in 263(52.6%) samples. Majority 83.6% were from inpatient wards, whereas 16.4% samples were from outpatient departments.58.1% of samples were from Hematology, 21.6% of samples were from Biochemistry and 20.1% of samples were from Microbiology. 54.3% of samples were blood samples, 42.9% of were serum samples and 2.6% of were urine samples. The most common pre-analytical error encountered was insufficient volume accounting to 27.7% and least encountered pre-analytical error was Lipemic sample accounting to 7.2%. Failure Mode and Effects Analysis(FMEA) was applied and insufficient volume, diluted sample, mismatch name, clotted sample and lipemic sample were graded as very high with scale of 8. Insufficient information alone was graded as high grade with scale 7. It is the need of the hour to adopt adequate, effective corrective strategies to curb the pre-analytical errors in the laboratory, thereby ensuring safety and satisfaction to the patients and clinicians, which would pave the way for an efficient heath care system.