Search

Clinical decision-making in emergency medicine is under constant pressure from demand and performance requirements, with blood tests being a fundamental part of this. However, the preanalytical process has received little attention. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the quality of preanalytical phase processes in European emergency departments (EDs) from the perspectives of the three main providers: clinicians, nurses, and laboratory specialists. This online survey, distributed among European EDs and laboratories, was supported by the European Society for Emergency Nursing (EUSEN), European Society for Emergency Medicine (EuSEM), and the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM). The size of the centres, the European region, the responder's profession and the country's economic condition were used as co-variables. We included 376 responses from all ED-related professions from 306 European centres. In 66.9% of all ED visits, at least one blood test was performed. Tests were requested mostly by nurses (44.6%) using electronic Order/Entry systems (65.4%). Only a minority (19%) reported not using laboratory quality indicators (QIs). Most responders defined the TAT starting point "when the laboratory receives the sample" (66.1%), defining the goal to be "less than 60 min" (69.9%), but only 42.4% of the centres estimated achieving this goal. Our survey illustrates the current situation on preanalytical blood sample processing in European EDs from the clinical and laboratory perspectives. The results emphasise the importance of the IT infrastructure and QI usage in this process and highlight some differences between European regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: An accurate knowledge of blood collection times is crucial for verifying the stability of laboratory analytes. We therefore aimed to (i) assess if and how this information is collected throughout Europe and (ii) provide a list of potentially available solutions. Methods: A survey was issued by the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group on Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) in 2017, aiming to collect data on preanalytical process management, including sampling time documentation, in European laboratories. A preceding pilot survey was disseminated in Austria in 2016. Additionally, preanalytical experts were surveyed on their local setting on this topic. Finally, the current scientific literature was reviewed on established possibilities of sampling time collection. Results: A total number of 85 responses was collected from the pilot survey, whilst 1347 responses from 37 European countries were obtained from the final survey. A minority (i.e. ~13%) of responders to the latter declared they are unaware of the exact sampling time. The corresponding rate in Austria was ~70% in the pilot and ~30% in the final survey, respectively. Answers from 17 preanalytical experts from 16 countries revealed that sampling time collection seems to be better documented for out- than for in-patients. Eight different solutions for sample time documentation are presented. Conclusions: The sample collection time seems to be documented very heterogeneously across Europe, or not at all. Here we provide some solutions to this issue and believe that laboratories should urgently aim to implement one of these. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Published evidence on the risk of additive carryover during phlebotomy remains elusive. We aimed to assess potential carryover of citrated and heparinized blood and the relative volume needed to bias clinical chemistry and coagulation tests. Methods: We simulated standardized phlebotomies to quantify the risk of carryover of citrate and heparin additives in distilled water, using sodium and lithium as surrogates. We also investigated the effects of contamination of heparinized blood samples with increasing volumes of citrated blood and pure citrate on measurements of sodium, potassium, chloride, magnesium, total and ionized calcium and phosphate. Likewise, we studied the effects of contamination of citrated blood samples with increasing volumes of heparinized blood on heparin (anti-Xa) activity, lithium, activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), prothrombin time (PT) and thrombin time (TT). We interpreted these results based on measurement deviations beyond analytical, biological and clinical significance. Results: Standardized phlebotomy simulations revealed no significant differences in concentration of surrogate markers. Clinically significant alterations were observed after contamination of heparinized blood samples with volumes of citrated blood beyond 5–50 μL for ionized calcium and beyond 100–1000 μL for sodium, chloride and total calcium. Investigations of pure citrate carryover revealed similar results at somewhat lower volumes. Heparinized blood carryover showed clinically significant interference of coagulation testing at volumes beyond 5–100 μL. Conclusions: Our results suggest that during a standardized phlebotomy, heparin or citrate contamination is highly unlikely. However, smaller volumes are sufficient to severely alter test results when deviating from phlebotomy guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document provides a joint recommendation for venous blood sampling of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) and Latin American Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE-LATAM) of the Latin America Confederation of Clinical Biochemistry (COLABIOCLI). It offers guidance on the requirements for ensuring that blood collection is a safe and patient-centered procedure and provides practical guidance on how to successfully overcome potential barriers and obstacles to its widespread implementation. The target audience for this recommendation are healthcare staff members directly involved in blood collection. This recommendation applies to the use of a closed blood collection system and does not provide guidance for the blood collection with an open needle and syringe and catheter collections. Moreover, this document neither addresses patient consent, test ordering, sample handling and transport nor collection from children and unconscious patients. The recommended procedure is based on the best available evidence. Each step was graded using a system that scores the quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendation. The process of grading was done at several face-to-face meetings involving the same mixture of stakeholders stated previously. The main parts of this recommendation are: 1) Pre-sampling procedures, 2) Sampling procedure, 3) Post-sampling procedures and 4) Implementation. A first draft of the recommendation was circulated to EFLM members for public consultation. WG-PRE-LATAM was also invited to comment the document. A revised version has been sent for voting on to all EFLM and COLABIOCLI members and has been officially endorsed by 33/40 EFLM and 21/21 COLABIOCLI members. We encourage professionals throughout Europe and Latin America to adopt and implement this recommendation to improve the quality of blood collection practices and increase patient and workers safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Laboratory Medicine / Laboratoriums Medizin is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Hemolytic samples are one of the most challenging preanalytical issues in laboratory medicine. Even causes leading to hemolytic specimen are various, including phlebotomy practices. Respective educational interventions as well as the reduction of the number of people involved in blood collections are claimed to influence the sample quality for the better. In our hospital 70 junior doctors were in charge of routine phlebotomy until 2012, when this task was shifted to 874 nurses, including a preceding training in phlebotomy and preanalytics. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of this training effect and the increase of people involved on sample quality. Methods: The hemolysis index (HI) of 43,875 samples was measured before (n = 21,512) and after (n = 22,363) the switch of blood collection responsibilities. Differences in overall hemolysis rates and the amount of plasma samples with a concentration of free hemoglobin (fHb) above 0.5 g/L and 1 g/L were calculated. Results: Overall HI as well as the percentage of samples with an fHb concentration > 0.5 g/L decreased after the responsibility for phlebotomy changed. The rate of samples with an fHb concentration > 1 g/L remained unchanged. Conclusions: Hemolysis rates were reduced upon passing phlebotomy tasks from untrained physicians on to a trained nursing staff. We therefore conclude that the number of people performing phlebotomy seems to play a minor role, compared to the effect of a standardized training. However, whether a reduction in the number of people involved in blood collection could lead to further improvement of sample quality, remains to be investigated in future studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the ISO (International Organization for Standardization) 6710: 2017 Blood Collection Tube Standards developed by the manufacturers of blood collection tubes in the year 2017. It states that the standard harmonizes the cap color of the blood collection systems in all laboratories. It highlights the role of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Klinische Chemie und Laboratoriumsmedizin e.V. (DGKL) in providing assistance in the implementation of color code.