Health Impact Assessment and the Role of Accredited Clinical Laboratory on ISO 15189:2007 International Standard

Background: Health impact assessment (HIA) is a multidisciplinary process within which a range of evidence about the health effects of a proposal is considered in a structured framework. HIA is used to evaluate objectively the potential health effects of a project or policy before it is built or implemented. It draws on diverse methodologies and tries to balance qualitative and quantitative evidence. There are five sequential core steps in HIA, as follows: screening, scoping, appraisal of the potential health effects/impacts, decision-making, monitoring and evaluation. Medical laboratory services are essentials to patient care. However, little is known about the relationship between HIA and clinical laboratory, especially with respect to the accreditation process according to the International Standard ISO 15189:2007 (Medical laboratories- particular requirements for quality and competence). Here we would like to show our experience in this way. Methods: After a rapid appraisal, when a quality commitment was clearly defined in a stakeholder economy, we defined the scope. We spent a four-year period to prepare our unit for the standard, making changes in: personnel policies, staffing levels and competencies, laboratory information system, laboratory equipment, reporting of results, documentation, quality management system, quality and technical records, physical infrastructure, environmental conditions, coordination to existing regional and provincial-level health programs, etc. A set of quality indicators was defined for monitoring and evaluating the laboratory's contribution to patients care. Results: A continual improvement circle is working and our laboratory has been transformed to fulfil with the standard. Identification and control of nonconformities is a key point. Conclusion: HIA is a rapidly emerging practice that can help planners and clinicians to consider the health consequences of their decisions. More work is needed to document its value in laboratory-related decision-making processes. ISO 15189 is a good way to improve quality and performance in a medical laboratory.

[1]  Karen Golemboski,et al.  Improving Patient Safety: Lessons from Other Disciplines , 2011, American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science.

[2]  L. Leape,et al.  Errors in medicine. , 2009, Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry.

[3]  Samantha Clark,et al.  Miniaturization and globalization of clinical laboratory activities , 2011, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[4]  Nora Nikolac,et al.  The prevalence of preanalytical errors in a Croatian ISO 15189 accredited laboratory , 2010, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[5]  Omer Guzel,et al.  ISO 15189 accreditation: Requirements for quality and competence of medical laboratories, experience of a laboratory I. , 2009, Clinical biochemistry.

[6]  M Joffe,et al.  A glossary for health impact assessment , 2003, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[7]  Sten A Westgard,et al.  The quality of laboratory testing today: an assessment of sigma metrics for analytic quality using performance data from proficiency testing surveys and the CLIA criteria for acceptable performance. , 2006, American journal of clinical pathology.

[8]  Elizabeth Harris,et al.  Health impact assessment: a practical guide. , 2007 .

[9]  Alan Bond,et al.  Health impact assessment international best practice principles: Special publication series no 5 , 2006 .

[10]  K. Lock,et al.  Health impact assessment , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[11]  Trevor F Peter,et al.  Impact of laboratory accreditation on patient care and the health system. , 2010, American journal of clinical pathology.

[12]  J. Knottnerus,et al.  How should we define health? , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[13]  Michael Joffe,et al.  Health impact assessment in relation to other forms of impact assessment. , 2003, Journal of public health medicine.

[14]  Johan Söderberg,et al.  Preanalytical effects of pneumatic tube transport on routine haematology, coagulation parameters, platelet function and global coagulation , 2008, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[15]  Lisa M Walters Employee engagement vital to ISO 15189 success. , 2011, MLO: medical laboratory observer.

[16]  Hendriek C Boshuizen,et al.  Standard tool for quantification in health impact assessment a review. , 2010, American journal of preventive medicine.

[17]  Gulderen Yanikkaya-Demirel,et al.  ISO 15189 accreditation: Requirements for quality and competence of medical laboratories, experience of a laboratory II. , 2009, Clinical biochemistry.

[18]  Paul Lincoln,et al.  Health impact assessments in the European Union , 2008, The Lancet.

[19]  Brian L Cole,et al.  Health impact assessment: a tool to help policy makers understand health beyond health care. , 2007, Annual review of public health.

[20]  Susan R Snyder,et al.  Laboratory medicine quality indicators: a review of the literature. , 2009, American journal of clinical pathology.

[21]  Mario Plebani,et al.  Quality indicators for laboratory diagnostics: consensus is needed , 2011, Annals of clinical biochemistry.

[22]  J. Parry,et al.  Use of health impact assessment in incorporating health considerations in decision making , 2006, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

[23]  M. Plebani Errors in clinical laboratories or errors in laboratory medicine? , 2006, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[24]  Who Regional Office for Europe,et al.  Gothenburg Consensus Paper: Health Impact Assessment, Main Concepts and Suggested Approach , 1999 .

[25]  S. Lewis,et al.  International Council for Standardization in Haematology – the first 40 years , 2009, International journal of laboratory hematology.

[26]  Rajiv Bhatia,et al.  Use of health impact assessment in the U.S.: 27 case studies, 1999-2007. , 2008, American journal of preventive medicine.