4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Implementation, management and continuous quality improvement of point-of-care testing in an academic health care setting

Journal

CLINICA CHIMICA ACTA
Volume 307, Issue 1-2, Pages 49-59

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/S0009-8981(01)00432-6

Keywords

quality assurance; laboratory management; point-of-care; glucose; blood gas; coagulation; accreditation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Point-of-care testing (POCT) has economic and medical benefits in the areas of immediate medical management, resource utilization and time management. Starting with bedside glucose, the Mount Sinai Medical Center has, over the past 11 years, implemented 23 POC tests, spanning complexity from blood gas/electrolyte testing to occult blood, in compliance with all regulatory and accreditation requirements. QC,data are reviewed on a daily and weekly basis and all patient results are in the electronic medical record. A variety of healthcare workers; nurses, physicians, respiratory therapists and technologists, perform testing. Since POCT impacts on a variety of hospital departments, proper implementation and management requires a multi-disciplinary team approach with focus on the financial, regulatory, quality assurance and data integration issues. Established in 1996, the institutional committee, with laboratory leadership, handles the establishment, compliance review and future direction setting of the program. In 1999, over 1300 individuals performed over 440,000 POC tests within the institution. A formalized continuous quality improvement (CQI) program for the POCT program was developed in the fall of 1999. All testing sites are reviewed on a monthly basis for various quality indicators that cover QC performance, maintenance performance, proficiency testing, patient identification, and alert value confirmations. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available