Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation

Online

249,00 € / $374.00*

* Prices subject to change. Shipping costs will be added if applicable.
Publication Date:
February 2010
ISSN:
1437-4331
DOI:
10.1515/cclm.2010.096

See all formats and pricing

Online
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 249.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 374.00 *
Print
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 1577.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 2365.00 *
Print + Online
Individual Subscription Online only
Euro [D] 1893.00
RRP for USA, Canada, Mexico
US$ 2838.00 *
*Prices subject to change. Shipping costs will be added if applicable.

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Published in Association with the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine and the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine

Editor-in-Chief: Plebani, Mario

Editorial Board Member: Lippi, Giuseppe / Gillery, Philippe / Kazmierczak, Steven / Lackner, Karl J. / Melichar, Bohuslav / Siest, Gérard / Whitfield, John B. / Abi Fadel, Marianne / Alvarez Menendez, Francisco V. / Azzazy, Hassan M.E. / Diamandis, Eleftherios P. / Eckardstein, Arnold / Favaloro, Emmanuel J. / Griesmacher, Andrea / Herrmann, Wolfgang / Hoffmann, Johannes J.M.L. / Hooijkaas, Herbert / Ichihara, Kiyoshi / Kaabachi, Naziha / Kim, Jeong-Ho / Korte, Wolfgang / Kroupis, Christos / Lai, Leslie Charles / Lam, Wai Kei Christopher / Marc, Janja / Miyoshi, Eiji / Özben, Tomris / Palicka, Vladimir / Panteghini, Mauro / Queralto, Jose M. / Scartezini, Marileia / Simundic, Ana-Maria / Tsongalis, Gregory J. / Wallemacq, Pierre E. / Yan, Shengkai / Young, Ian S. / Chiu, Rossa Wai Kwun / Ghosh, Debabrata / Kappelmayer, Janos / Lehmann, Sylvain / Sypniewska, Grazyna

12 Issues per year

Increased IMPACT FACTOR 2011: 2.150
Rank 10 out of 32 in category Medical Laboratory Technology in the 2011 Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report/Science Edition

VolumeIssuePage

Issues

Assessment of critical values policies in Italian institutions: comparison with the US situation

Elisa Piva1 / Laura Sciacovelli1, 2 / Michael Laposata3 / Mario Plebani1, 2

1Department of Laboratory Medicine, University-Hospital of Padua, Padua, Italy

2Center of Biomedical Research, Castelfranco Veneto, Treviso, Italy

3Department of Pathology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, USA

Corresponding author: Prof. Mario Plebani, Dipartimento Medicina di Laboratorio, Azienda Ospedaliera-Università di Padova, Via Nicolò Giustiniani 2, 35128 Padova, Italy Fax: +39-049-663240,

Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Volume 48, Issue 4, Pages 461–468, ISSN (Online) 1437-4331, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: 10.1515/cclm.2010.096, February 2010

Publication History:
Received:
2009-11-17
Accepted:
2009-11-24
Published Online:
2010-02-04

Abstract

Background: Critical value reporting is considered an essential tool to ensure the quality of medical laboratory services. Important issues include defining cut-off values, assessing responsibility for communication and adopting information technology solutions to improve notification. Here, we report the state of critical value reporting in a large cohort of Italian laboratories and comparison with Q-Probes surveys from the College of American Pathologists as representatives of the US situation.

Methods: To compare critical value policies and procedures, formulation of critical values list with critical values limits and monitoring tools, a web-based questionnaire was formulated for 389 institutions participating in the External Quality Assessment Schemes of Veneto Region, in Italy.

Results: A total of 90 clinical laboratories submitted data. Accredited laboratories represented 82.2% of participants, but written procedures for reporting were indicated by 70.5% of participants. Relevant differences between US and Italian policies have been observed, particularly regarding who provides the notification and on the formulation of the cut-off threshold for critical values.

Conclusions: Accreditation according to international standards can decrease differences regarding the management of critical values across laboratories of different countries. However, the issues concerning critical limits should be debated and a consensus critical values list should be considered. Automated systems could offer improvements regarding some issues, such as who makes the notification, reducing the time spent in notification of critical values. Surveys for comparing and improving existing policies regarding critical values should be promoted at an international level.

Clin Chem Lab Med 2010;48:461–8.

Keywords: automated notification; critical values; patient safety; policies and procedures; result communication

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.