Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)
Published in Association with the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)
Editor-in-Chief: Plebani, Mario
Ed. by Gillery, Philippe / Lackner, Karl J. / Lippi, Giuseppe / Melichar, Bohuslav / Payne, Deborah A. / Schlattmann, Peter / Tate, Jillian R.
IMPACT FACTOR increased in 2015: 3.017
Rank 5 out of 30 in category Medical Laboratory Technology in the 2014 Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report/Science Edition
SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.873
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.982
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2015: 2.238
“Pre-pre” and “post-post” analytical error: high-incidence patient safety hazards involving the clinical laboratory
1Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
2Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
Conflicts of interest: Drs. Laposata and Dighe are founding stockholders in American Medical Diagnostics.
Citation Information: Clinical Chemical Laboratory Medicine. Volume 45, Issue 6, Pages 712–719, ISSN (Online) 14374331, ISSN (Print) 14346621, DOI: 10.1515/CCLM.2007.173, June 2007
- Published Online:
Data from recent studies suggest that the highest incidence of laboratory-related errors occurs in the pre-analytical phase of laboratory testing. However, few studies have examined the frequency of errors in laboratory test selection and interpretation. A survey of physicians who use our clinical laboratory demonstrated that the largest number of test ordering errors appear to involve physicians simply ordering the wrong test. Diagnostic algorithms providing guidance for test selection in specific disorders are also used as the basis for the establishment of reflex protocols in the clinical laboratory. The provision of an expert-driven interpretation by laboratory professionals resulted in improvements both in the time to and the accuracy of diagnosis. A survey of our physician staff has shown that in the absence of such an interpretation, for patients being assessed for a coagulation disorder, approximately 75% of the cases would have involved some level of test result misinterpretation.
Clin Chem Lab Med 2007;45:712–9.
Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.