Effectiveness of Laboratory Practices to Reduce Specimen Labeling Errors at the Time of Specimen Collection in Healthcare Settings: A Laboratory Medicine Best Practices (LMBP) Systematic Review

Abstract

Background Specimen labeling errors have long plagued the laboratory industry putting patients at risk of transfusion-related death, medication errors, misdiagnosis, and patient mismanagement. Many interventions have been implemented and deemed to be effective in reducing sample error rates. The objective of this review was to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of laboratory practices/ interventions to develop evidence based recommendations for the best laboratory practices to reduce labeling errors. Content The standardized LMBP™ A-6 methods were used to conduct this systematic review. Total evidence included 12 studies published during the time periods of 1980 to September 2015. Combined data from seven studies found that the interventions developed as a result of improved communication and collaboration between the laboratory and clinical staff resulted in substantial decrease in specimen labeling errors (Median relative percent change in labeling errors: −75.86; IQI: −84.77, −58.00). Further data from subset of four studies showed a significant decrease in specimen labeling errors after the institution of the standardized specimen labeling protocols (Median relative percent decrease in specimen labeling errors: −72.45; IQI: −83.25, −46.50). Summary Based on the evidence included in this review, the interventions that enhance the communication and collaboration between laboratory and healthcare professionals can decrease the specimen identification errors in healthcare settings. However, more research is needed to make the conclusion on the effectiveness of other evaluated practices in this review including training and education of the specimen collection staff, audit and feedback of labeling errors, and implementation of new technology (other than barcoding).

Feasibility and acceptability of an iris biometric system for unique patient identification in routine HIV services in Kenya

“…Unique patient identification is an integral part of healthcare service delivery. Correctly identifying patients is critical when undergoing clinical procedures, reporting of test and procedure results, as well as managing administrative functions such as scheduling and billing [1][2][3]. Unique identification of individuals is essential in case-based disease surveillance.…”

Assessment of the Use of Patient Vital Sign Data for Preventing Misidentification and Medical Errors

“…A variety of solutions to this problem have been proposed ranging from procedural [ 7 ] and wrist band information [ 7 ] changes to bedside checks [ 15 ], real-time audits [ 16 ], training changes [ 17 ], and increasing “communication and collaboration” between providers and laboratory staff [ 18 ]. Technological solutions such as improved wristband technologies [ 19 ], the use of neural network image processing to identify patient sex to identify and reduce errors [ 20 ], using RFID and wireless technologies [ 21 ] and “proximity-based medical record retrieval” [ 22 ] have been proposed.…”

Automation of plate inoculation and reading reduces process time in the clinical microbiology laboratory, compared to a manual workflow

“…[3][4][5][6][7][8][9] In addition, manual processes are susceptible to specimen contamination, labeling error, and variability in culture quality. 10,11 To address these and other common problems encountered in the clinical laboratory, automation can be employed to streamline and standardize laboratory workflows. Several studies have shown improved laboratory workflow efficiency, 3-5, 10, 12-16 result reproducibility, 4,5,13,[15][16][17][18][19] and decreased incidence of errors 10,13,[18][19][20][21] following the implementation of automation-related processes.…”