Medical practice assessment during the phlebotomy: clinical audit of blood sampling.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Latifa Merzougui
Dhekra Chebi
Soukaeina Ben Ouness
Salwa Khafacha
Lamine Dhidah
Houyem Said Laatiri

Abstract

Introduction: phlebotomy is taking a venous blood sample for a medical biology analysis .If the taking of a sample is poorly executed, the results for this sample may be inaccurate and mislead the clinician, or the inconvenience of the patient having to undergo a new levy. The three main problems associated with errors in the collection are: hemolysis, contamination and mislabelling. We conduct CLINICAL AUDIT to evaluate compliance of activities in relation to the recommendations. Our objective was to determine the compliance rate of the different steps of the phlebotomy procedure and propose corrective actions. Material and Methods: it is an observational study which follows a forward-looking approach based on direct observation of blood collection procedures in 2015.Results:330 acts of phlebotomy were audited in 11 services. The overall compliance rate phlebotomy was 57.7%. The overall compliance rate ‘’patient prescribing and preparation "was 94.4%; "equipment preparation" was 85.3%. There was a lack of tourniquets, holders and hydro-alcoholic solutions. The overall compliance rate "collection procedure" was 45.1%, the overall compliance rate for hand hygiene is low (28%), wearing gloves (20%) and the use of antiseptics (44.4%). The overall compliance rate "sample identification" was 61.3% (tube labeling (45.7%) and compliance of the laboratory worksheet (76.9%). the overall compliance rate "Transport" was 49.4%. There was a lack of bag or holders for transport. Conclusion: The results obtained allowed to propose an improvement plan to improve this practice. In fact, the ultimate purpuse of medical practice assessment is to improve the quality of care.

Keywords:

clinical audit; medical practice assessment; phlebotomy; blood sampling.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

References

  1. Organisation Mondiale de la Santé. Lignes directrices de l'OMS applicables aux prélèvements sanguins : meilleures pratiques en phlébotomie. Genève:OMS; 2010.
  2. Sacar S1, Turgut H, Kaleli I, Cevahir N, Asan A, Sacar M, et al. Poor hospital infection control practice in hand hygiene, glove utilization, and usage of tourniquets. Am J Infect Control. 2006 Nov;34(9):606-9. DOI:10.1016/j.ajic.2006.02.006
  3. Little MA, Hussein T, Lambert M, Dickson SJ. Percutaneous blood sampling practice in a large urban hospital. Clinical Medicine. 2007 Jun;7(3):243-9.
  4. Green SF. The cost of poor blood specimen quality and errors in preanalytical processes. ClinBiochem. 2013;46(3):1175-9.
  5. Da Rin G. Pre-analytical workstations: A tool for reducing laboratory errors. ClinChimActa. 2009 Jun;404(1):68-74. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2009.03.024.
  6. Simundic AM, Church S, Cornes MP, Grankvist K, Lippi G, NyboM,et al. Compliance of blood sampling procedures with the CLSI H3-A6 guidelines: An observational study by the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) working group for the preanalytical phase (WG-PRE). ClinChem Lab Med. 2015 Aug;53(9):1321-31. DOI 10.1515/cclm-2014-1053
  7. Zuhair M.Mohammedsaleh ZM, Mohammedsaleh F. A review article of the reduce errors in medical laboratories. Global Jounal of Health Science. 2015 Jul 29;7(1):46-51.DOI: 10.5539/gjhs.v7n1p46
  8. Chevillon I, Larrose C, Moreau N, OrsonneauJL.Conservation des échantillons de sang avant analyse des paramètres biochimiques les plus courants. Ann Biol Clin.1998;56(2):200-4.
  9. Wallin O , Söderberg J , Van Guelpen B , Stenlund H , Grankvist K , Brulin C. Preanalytical venous blood sampling practices demand improvement — A survey of test-request management, test-tube labelling and information search procedures. ClinChimActa.2008 ;391(8):91-7.
  10. Susan RS et al. Effectiveness of barcoding for reducing patient specimen and laboratory testing identification errors: A Laboratory Medicine Best Practices systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Biochemistry. 2012; 45:988-998 ClinBiochem. 2012 Sep; 45(0): 988-998.
  11. Hill PM1, Mareiniss D, Murphy P, Gardner H, Hsieh YH, Levy F, Kelen GD. Significant reduction of laboratory specimen labeling errors by implementation of an electronic ordering system paired with a bar-code specimen labeling process. Ann Emerg Med. 2010 Dec;56(6):630-6. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2010.05.028. Epub 2010 Sep 6.
  12. Wagar EA, Stankovic AK, Raab S, Nakhleh RE, Walsh MK.. Specimen Labeling Errors A Q-Probes Analysis of 147 Clinical Laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008 Oct;132:1617-1622.
  13. Gilor S, Gilor C. Common laboratory artifacts caused by inappropriate sample collection and transport: how to get the most out of a sample. Top Companion Anim Med. 2011 May;26(2):109-18. doi: 10.1053/j.tcam.2011.02.003.
  14. Scaggiante R et al. Acute hepatitis C virus infection in a nurse trainee following a needlestick injury. World Journal of Gastroenterol ogy.2013 Jan 28;19(4):581-585.DOI:10.3748/wjg.v19.i4.581