Quality Assurance for Small Laboratories

Gilmer, P. Ridgway

doi:10.1093/labmed/13.12.737

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…laboratories, presumably with greater resources than the smaller laboratories, may have up-to-date technology, better quality control, and a higher degree of specialization, and may provide more training opportunities for their laboratory personnel. Some characteristics of small or low-volume laboratories have been addressed by others (5,7,8). Since the error rates reported were averages, it is not implied that all of the laboratories that tested small numbers of patient specimens produced results of poor quality; nor is it implied that small laboratories are not capable of producing results of good quality.…”

Section: 7mentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between performance in three of the Centers for Disease Control microbiology proficiency testing programs and the number of actual patient specimens tested by participating laboratories

Griffin¹,

Mehaffey²,

Cook³

et al. 1986

J Clin Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The performance of laboratories enrolled in three of the Centers for Disease Control microbiology performance evaluation programs was studied in relation to the number of actual patient specimens tested by the laboratories. Laboratories were grouped according to the number of specimens tested weekly to compare performance among the groups. Results of the study showed that laboratories, as a group, that tested large numbers of specimens performed better than laboratories that tested small numbers. The infrequency of performing certain tests or identifying certain microbial species can be an important factor in laboratory error. One strategy for laboratories that cannot resolve internal problems associated with low testing volumes would be to limit their testing to procedures that are done well.

show abstract

Section: 7mentioning

confidence: 99%