Abstract:Bijun Li, 1, &ast Xinjian Cai, 1, &ast Lili Zhan, 1 Xiaoyu Zhang, 1 Yiteng Lin, 1 Jiaomei Zeng 2 1 Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital & Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Shenzhen, 518116, People's Republic of China; 2 Department of Nursing, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital & Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Shenzhen, 518116, People's Republic of China &astThese authors contributed equally to this work Correspondence: Xinjian Cai, Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital & Shenzhen Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Baohe Road No. 113, Longgang District, Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province, People's Republic of China, Tel +86 13411968175, Email Background: Quality assurance in laboratory testing significantly impacts patient care. The pre-analytical phase is particularly error-prone, contributing to around 70% of laboratory errors. High specimen rejection rates can delay diagnosis and treatment, cause patient discomfort, and increase healthcare costs. Quality Control Circles (QCC) have been introduced to medical institutions to improve process efficiency and reduce errors. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of QCC practices in reducing specimen rejection rates in a hospital clinical laboratory. Methods: A QCC initiative was implemented in the clinical laboratory from July 2021 to August 2022. The QCC comprised members from the clinical laboratory, nursing department, and administration. The initiative followed the PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) cycle and involved multiple quality control methods, including flowchart analysis, Pareto analysis, and Fishbone diagrams. The effectiveness of the initiative was evaluated using statistical analyses of specimen rejection rates before and after implementation. Results: The QCC initiative led to a significant reduction in specimen rejection rates. The monthly specimen rejection rate decreased from an average of 1.13% before the intervention to 0.27% after the intervention. The most significant factors contributing to specimen rejection were identified as lack of sample collection information and blood clotting. Targeted interventions, such as appointing specimen collection liaisons, establishing a quality control team, and providing training on blood collection procedures, were implemented. These measures resulted in a notable decrease in the proportion of rejected specimens due to the identified factors. Conclusion: The implementation of QCC practices effectively reduced specimen rejection rates in the hospital laboratory. The study highlights the importance of systematic quality control methods and targeted interventions in improving laboratory processes. The success of the QCC initiative demonstrates its potential for broader application in other healthcare settings to enhance quality and efficiency. Keywords: quality control circle, specimen rejection, quality improvement, PDCA cycle, Pareto analysis Quality assurance remains an enduring concern in laboratory testing due to its impact on patient care and the overall value of the laboratory. 1 Laboratory testing comprises three distinct phases: pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical. 2 Notably, the pre-analytical phase is susceptible to approximately 70% of laboratory errors. 3 Laboratory professionals encounter notable challenges during the pre-analytical phase, including patient misidentification, inappropriate container usage, and missing or mislabeled samples. 4,5 Laboratories establish specific technical requirements for each analysis, and specimens failing to meet these criteria are rejected. 6 In such instances, it is crucial to promptly inform the nurse that the sample is unsuitable for testing and request the collection of a new sample. 7 Specimen rejection rate serves as an indicator of the pre-analytical process's effectiveness, encompassing sample collection and transportation within the laboratory workflow. 6 Specimen rejection has significant clinical implications as it can lead to discomfort for patients during repeated blood collection and potential risks like hematoma and iatrogenic anemia. 8 Additionally, the rejection of specimens causes delays in conducting and reporting the requested tests. 9 Thus, -Abstract Truncated-

Causes and Impact of Specimen Rejection in A Clinical Chemistry Laboratory

Pre-analysis quality control of inpatients′ blood samples and the cause analysis of unqualiifed specimen

Cause analysis and countermeasure of the rejection of blood specimens

Analysis of Rejected Specimens in the Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine from 2007 to 2010

Effect of Pre-Analytical Errors in Laboratory Testing Facilities: The Way Forward

Analyzing clinical laboratory specimen rejection rates at a specialized hospital in Ethiopia: A 2-year document review

Quality Control Circle Practices to Reduce Specimen Rejection Rates

An Overview of Complete Blood Count Sample Rejection Rates in a Clinical Hematology Laboratory Due to Various Preanalytical Errors

Inadvertent omission of a specimen integrity comment – an overlooked post-analytical error

A-209 Preanalytical Phase Errors Constitute the Vast Majority of Errors in Clinical Laboratory Testing

Preanalytical Errors in Hematology: Insights From a Tertiary Care Hospital

Assessment of Pre-analytical Errors and Fostering Strategies to Enhance Accurate Results and Efficient Turnaround Times in the Cytology Laboratory of a Tertiary Care Hospital

Impact of blood collection devices on clinical chemistry assays

Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Critical Result Notification Protocol of Biochemistry Laboratory at a Tertiary Care Hospital

Effects of different specimen pretreatment methods on the measurement of thyrotropin stimulating hormone in serum

New solutions to old problems: A practical approach to identify samples with intravenous fluid contamination in clinical laboratories

Particulate matter in water: an overlooked source of preanalytical error producing erroneous chemistry test results

Increased Patient Satisfaction and a Reduction in Pre-Analytical Errors Following Implementation of an Electronic Specimen Collection Module in Outpatient Phlebotomy

Measuring the impact: Severity of harm from laboratory errors in 195 tests

The rise in preanalytical errors during COVID-19 pandemic

Pre-analytical quality of common clinical samples of bacteriology and mycology