Error evaluation in the laboratory testing process and laboratory information systems

Abstract

Introduction: The laboratory testing process consists of five analysis phases featuring the total testing process framework. Activities in laboratory process, including those of testing, are error-prone and affect the use of laboratory information systems. This study seeks to identify error factors related to system use and the first and last phases of the laboratory testing process using a proposed framework known as total testing process-laboratory information systems.
 Materials and Methods: We conducted a qualitative case study in two private hospitals and a medical laboratory. We collected data using interviews, observations, and document analysis methods involving physicians, nurses, an information technology officer, and the laboratory staff. We employed the proposed framework and Lean problem-solving tools namely Value Stream Mapping and A3 for data analysis.
 Results: Errors in laboratory information systems and the laboratory testing process were attributed to failure to fulfill user requirements, poor cooperation between the information technology unit and laboratory, the inconsistency of software design in system integration, errors during inter-system data transmission, and lack of motivation in system use. The error factors are related to system development elements, namely, latent failures that considerably affected the information quality and system use. Errors in system development were also attributed to poor service quality.
 Conclusion: Complex laboratory testing process and laboratory information systems require rigorous evaluation in minimizing errors and ensuring patient safety. The proposed framework and Lean approach are applicable for evaluating the laboratory testing process and laboratory information systems in a rigorous, comprehensive, and structured manner.

Artificial intelligence in the pre-analytical phase: State-of-the art and future perspectives

“…The typical collection volume is between 0.1-0.5 mL and multiple (replaceable) types of blood tubes can be used. According to recent evaluations of some of these devices, patients indicate that blood drawing using these self-microsampling tools enabled more convenient blood drawings compared with finger-pricking and test results were comparable to those obtained with a standard blood collection technique (37,38).…”

Evaluating health information systems-related errors using the human, organization, process, technology-fit (HOPT-fit) framework

“…13,45,46 Unrealistic planning, 46,47 inadequate user involvement, unclear user requirements, limited and complex system modules, conflicting priorities, and detachment of local settings during system selection are disastrous and costly. [48][49][50][51][52] Design HIT design can prevent new errors and pose safety risks, such as poor function aid or unclear manual, poor user interface, limited data sharing, and inefficient workflow. 1 System usefulness is affected by unnecessary software complexity that does not support the process, wastes development effort, and requires extra training and support.…”

Assessment of the Impact of Lean Tools on the Safety of the Shoemaking Industry

“…Olakotan [33], after applying the VSM tool to the clinical decision support system that generates medication alerts, detected that it was possible to identify several wastes throughout the clinical procedures. Arifin [34], in an attempt to identify the error factors in laboratories, concluded that Lean tools are applicable to assessments of the laboratory process in a structured and rigorous manner.…”