A study of adequacy of completion of clinical biochemistry laboratory request forms
Abstract
Background: Laboratory request forms are essential communication tool between the clinicians and laboratory personnel. In view of the meagerness of studies exploring request forms as a part of preanalytical errors, we planned to evaluate the request forms received at the clinical biochemistry laboratory.
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the adequacy of the details of laboratory request forms that had been submitted to biochemistry department.
Materials and Methods: This lab audit was carried out at the clinical biochemistry laboratory of a tertiary care teaching hospital. The forms Laboratory request forms were segregated to evaluate the extent of completion of each form, completion of the columns, legibility of the clinician`s handwriting. The results were expressed in percentages.
Results: A total of three thousand and fifty (3050) request forms were analyzed. The location of the patient and referring department were missing in 35.3% and 29.4% of the forms respectively. Provisional diagnosis was provided only in 53.3% of the request forms.
Conclusion: This study concludes that the location of the patient, probable diagnosis, medical officer`s signature had not been entered in the request forms. As laboratory plays a crucial role in the patient diagnosis, incomplete data in the request form might significantly affects the lab service which in turn affects the patient’s health care system. The standard of filling of laboratory request forms needs to improve to provide a high quality lab service.
Downloads
References
2. Da Rin G. Pre-analytical workstations: a tool for reducing laboratory errors. Clin Chim Acta. 2009 Jun;404(1):68-74.doi:10.1016/j.cca.2009.03.024.
3. Plebani M. Errors in clinical laboratories or errors in laboratory medicine? Clin Chem Lab Med 2006; 44(6):750–759. doi: 10.1515/cclm.2006.123.
4. Plebani M. The detection and prevention of errors in laboratory medicine. Ann Clin Biochem. 2010 Mar; 47(Pt 2):101-10. doi: 10.1258/acb.2009.009222.
5. Olayemi E, Asiamah-Broni R. Evaluation of request forms submitted to the haematology laboratory in a Ghanaian tertiary hospital. Pan Afr Med J. 2011; 8: 33. doi:10.11604/pamj.2011.8.33.466.
6. Montesi G, Lechi A. Prevention of medication errors: detection and audit. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2009; 67(6):651–655. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2009.03422.x.
7. Adegoke O. A., Idowu A. A., Jeje O. A. Incomplete laboratory request forms as a contributory factor to preanalytical errors in a Nigerian teaching hospital.
African Journal of Biochemistry Research.2011; 5(3):82-85.
8. Burton JL, Stephenson TJ. Are clinicians failing to supply adequate information when requesting a histopathological investigation? J Clin Pathol. 2001;54(10):806-8. doi: 10.4103/1117-6806.119242.
9. Sharif MA, Mushtaq S, Mamoon N, Jamal S,Luqman M. Clinician`s Responsibility in Pre-Analytical Quality Assurance of Histopathology. Pak J Med Sci. 2007; 23 (5):720-723. doi:10.4103/0973-029X.125207. http://www.researchgate.net/publication/237438170.
10. Makary MA, Epstein J, Pronovost PJ, Millman EA, Hartmann EC, Freischlag JA. Surgical specimen identification errors: a new measure of quality in surgical care. Surgery.2007; 141(4):450-5. Epub 2007 Jan 24. [PubMed]. http:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17383521.
11. Nutt L, Zemlin AE, Erasmus RT. Incomplete laboratory request forms: the extent and impact on critical results at a tertiary hospital in South Africa. Ann Clin Biochem. 2008;45(5):463–466. doi: 10.1258/acb.2008.007252.
12. Nakhleh RE, Zarbo RJ. Surgical pathology specimen identification and accessioning: A College of American Pathologists Q-Probes Study of 1 004 115 cases from 417 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1996;120(3):227-33.
13. Carraro P, Plebani M. Errors in a stat laboratory: types and frequency 10 years later. Clin Chem. 2007;53(7):1338-42. Epub 2007 May 24.