IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0228687.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pre-analytical error for three point of care venous blood testing platforms in acute ambulatory settings: A mixed methods service evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas R Fanshawe
  • Margaret Glogowska
  • George Edwards
  • Philip J Turner
  • Ian Smith
  • Rosie Steele
  • Caroline Croxson
  • Jordan S T Bowen
  • Gail N Hayward

Abstract

Introduction: Point of care blood testing to aid diagnosis is becoming increasingly common in acute ambulatory settings and enables timely investigation of a range of diagnostic markers. However, this testing allows scope for errors in the pre-analytical phase, which depends on the operator handling and transferring specimens correctly. The extent and nature of these pre-analytical errors in clinical settings has not been widely reported. Methods: We carried out a convergent parallel mixed-methods service evaluation to investigate pre-analytical errors leading to a machine error reports in a large acute hospital trust in the UK. The quantitative component comprised a retrospective analysis of all recorded error codes from Abbott Point of Care i-STAT 1, i-STAT Alinity and Abbott Rapid Diagnostics Afinion devices to summarise the error frequencies and reasons for error, focusing on those attributable to the operator. The qualitative component included a prospective ethnographic study and a secondary analysis of an existing ethnographic dataset, based in hospital-based ambulatory care and community ambulatory care respectively. Results: The i-STAT had the highest usage (113,266 tests, January 2016-December 2018). As a percentage of all tests attempted, its device-recorded overall error rate was 6.8% (95% confidence interval 6.6% to 6.9%), and in the period when reliable data could be obtained, the operator-attributable error rate was 2.3% (2.2% to 2.4%). Staff identified that the most difficult step was the filling of cartridges, but that this could be improved through practice, with a perception that cartridge wastage through errors was rare. Conclusions: In the observed settings, the rate of errors attributable to operators of the primary point of care device was less than 1 in 40. In some cases, errors may lead to a small increase in resource use or time required so adequate staff training is necessary to prevent adverse impact on patient care.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas R Fanshawe & Margaret Glogowska & George Edwards & Philip J Turner & Ian Smith & Rosie Steele & Caroline Croxson & Jordan S T Bowen & Gail N Hayward, 2020. "Pre-analytical error for three point of care venous blood testing platforms in acute ambulatory settings: A mixed methods service evaluation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-18, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0228687
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228687
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0228687
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0228687&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0228687?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0228687. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.