Few developing countries have established laboratory quality standards that are affordable and easy to implement and monitor. To address this challenge, the World Health Organization Regional Office for Africa (WHO AFRO) established a stepwise approach, using a 0- to 5-star scale, to the recognition of evolving fulfillment of the ISO 15189 standard rather than pass-fail grading. Laboratories that fail to achieve an assessment score of at least 55% will not be awarded a star ranking. Laboratories that achieve 95% or more will receive a 5-star rating. This stepwise approach acknowledges to laboratories where they stand, supports them with a series of evaluations to use to demonstrate improvement, and recognizes and rewards their progress. WHO AFRO's accreditation process is not intended to replace established ISO 15189 accreditation schemes, but rather to provide an interim pathway to the realization of international laboratory standards. Laboratories that demonstrate outstanding performance in the WHO-AFRO process will be strongly encouraged to enroll in an established ISO 15189 accreditation scheme. We believe that the WHO-AFRO approach for laboratory accreditation is affordable, sustainable, effective, and scalable.

Accreditation is emerging as a preferred framework for building quality medical laboratory systems in resource-limited settings. Despite the low numbers of laboratories accredited to date, accreditation has the potential to improve the quality of health care for patients through the reduction of testing errors and attendant decreases in inappropriate treatment. Accredited laboratories can become more accountable and less dependent on external support. Efforts made to achieve accreditation may also lead to improvements in the management of laboratory networks by focusing attention on areas of greatest need and accelerating improvement in areas such as supply chain, training, and instrument maintenance. Laboratory accreditation may also have a positive influence on performance in other areas of health care systems by allowing laboratories to demonstrate high standards of service delivery. Accreditation may, thus, provide an effective mechanism for health system improvement yielding long-term benefits in the quality, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability of public health programs. Further studies are needed to strengthen the evidence on the benefits of accreditation and to justify the resources needed to implement accreditation programs aimed at improving the performance of laboratory systems.

The Strengthening Laboratory Management Toward Accreditation (SLMTA) program was developed to promote immediate, measurable improvement in laboratories of developing countries. The laboratory management framework, a tool that prescribes managerial job tasks, forms the basis of the hands-on, activity-based curriculum. SLMTA is implemented through multiple workshops with intervening site visits to support improvement projects. To evaluate the effectiveness of SLMTA, the laboratory accreditation checklist was developed and subsequently adopted by the World Health Organization Regional Office for Africa (WHO AFRO). The SLMTA program and the implementation model were validated through a pilot in Uganda. SLMTA yielded observable, measurable results in the laboratories and improved patient flow and turnaround time in a laboratory simulation. The laboratory staff members were empowered to improve their own laboratories by using existing resources, communicate with clinicians and hospital administrators, and advocate for system strengthening. The SLMTA program supports laboratories by improving management and building preparedness for accreditation.

BackgroundThe improvment of the quality of testing services in public laboratories is a high priority in many countries. Consequently, initiatives to train laboratory staff on quality management are being implemented, for example, the World Health Organization Regional Headquarters for Africa (WHO-AFRO) Strengthening Laboratory Management Towards Accreditation (SLMTA). Mentorship may be an effective way to augment these efforts.MethodsMentorship was implemented at four hospital laboratories in Lesotho, three districts and one central laboratory, between June 2009 and December 2010. The mentorship model that was implemented had the mentor fully embedded within the operations of each of the laboratories. It was delivered in a series of two mentoring engagements of six and four week initial and follow-up visits respectively. In total, each laboratory received 10 weeks mentorship that was separated by 6–8 weeks. Quality improvements were measured at baseline and at intervals during the mentorship using the WHO-AFRO Strengthening Laboratory Quality Improvement Process Towards Accreditation (SLIPTA) checklist and scoring system.ResultsAt the beginning of the mentorship, all laboratories were at the SLIPTA zero star rating. After the initial six weeks of mentorship, two of the three district laboratories had improved from zero to one (out of five) star although the difference between their baseline (107.7) and the end of the six weeks (136.3) average scores was not statistically significant (p = 0.25). After 10 weeks of mentorship there was a significant improvement in average scores (182.3; p = 0.034) with one laboratory achieving WHO-AFRO three out of a possible five star status and the two remaining laboratories achieving a two star status. At Queen Elizabeth II (QE II) Central Laboratory, the average baseline score was 44%, measured using a section-specific checklist. There was a significant improvement by five weeks (57.2%; p = 0.021).ConclusionThe mentorship programme in this study resulted in significant measurable improvements towards preparation for the WHO-AFRO SLIPTA process in less than six months. We recommend that mentorship be incorporated into laboratory quality improvement and management training programmes such as SLMTA, in order to accelerate the progress of laboratories towards achieving accreditation.

IntroductionLaboratory mentoring programmes can be an important vehicle to establish and solidify quality management systems and help laboratories achieve accreditation goals. Different mentoring approaches have been used with varying levels of success. The authors provide a guide to implementing a structured laboratory mentorship programme based on their practical field experience.MethodThe study is based on experience in Lesotho as well as subsequent roll out of a similar approach in the other African countries of Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Swaziland and Cameroon between 2009 and 2011.SummaryWe highlight critical elements to consider when setting up a long-term, sustainable and well-structured mentorship programme. These elements include: well-defined goals; sufficient length of mentor engagement on site; standardised approach across laboratories; measurement of progress using standardised tools; well-structured reporting mechanisms; alignment of the programme with overall Ministry of Health plans; and selection and training of the mentors. These elements will differ in application, depending on countries’ needs and available resources. A structured approach allows for scalability, comparison across laboratories and countries and an easier approach to budgeting and planning for countries intending to set up similar programmes.