Although there were notable differences, our findings were in broad agreement with those of most other sub-Saharan African series, but differed markedly from those in the Western world and other high income countries. Further studies are required to identify the environmental factors for the high prevalence of nonfamilial retinoblastoma and possibly acute myeloid leukemia.

BackgroundThe laboratory request form (LRF) is a communication link between laboratories, requesting physicians and users of laboratory services. Inadequate information or errors arising from the process of filling out LRFs can significantly impact the quality of laboratory results and, ultimately, patient outcomes.ObjectiveWe assessed routinely-submitted LRFs to determine the degree of correctness, completeness and consistency.MethodsLRFs submitted to the Department of Haematology (DH) and Blood Transfusion Services (BTS) of Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital in Kano, Nigeria, between October 2014 and December 2014, were evaluated for completion of all items on the forms. Performance in four quality indicator domains, including patient identifiers, test request details, laboratory details and physician details, was derived as a composite percentage.ResultsOf the 2084 LRFs evaluated, 999 were from DH and 1085 from BTS. Overall, LRF completeness was 89.5% for DH and 81.2% for BTS. Information on patient name, patient location and laboratory number were 100% complete for DH, whereas only patient name was 100% complete for BTS. Incomplete information was mostly encountered on BTS forms for physician’s signature (60.8%) and signature of laboratory receiver (63.5%). None of the DH and only 9.4% of BTS LRFs met all quality indicator indices.ConclusionThe level of completion of LRFs from these two departments was suboptimal. This underscores the need to review and redesign the LRF, improve on training and communication between laboratory and clinical staff and review specimen rejection practices.