Clinical audit and the contribution of the laboratory to clinical outcome
Introduction
Over the last few years the health profession in the UK has seen a drive towards more emphasis on medical audit, clinical audit, clinical effectiveness, evidence-based medicine and clinical outcome. In the USA, on the other hand, medical audit and quality assurance programs have been in routine use in hospitals for more than two decades [1]. These concepts appear to form part of the continued attempts to introduce ways of assessing clinical performance and the contribution of health care measures to patient outcome. Audit as a performance review has also been carried out by formal review of organisational performance. Examples of this exist in the form of Professional Standards Review Organisations (PRSO) in the USA and Clinical Pathology Accreditation (CPA) and the King's Fund Centre Organisational Audit in the UK 2, 3.
Section snippets
Assessment of clinical performance
In an attempt to assess clinical performance, medical audit was introduced as part of the White Paper health reforms of the National Health Service in the UK and later on expanded to clinical audit to include all health care professionals and not just doctors [4]. Clinical Audit has been defined as “the systematic and critical analysis of the quality of care, including the procedures used for the diagnosis, treatment and care, the associated use of resources and the resulting outcome and
Clinical outcome in relation to the laboratory
The clinical laboratory function has to be seen as an extension of the clinical activity that starts with a consultation at outpatient department or an inpatient clinical assessment, As a process in the aid of diagnosis or monitoring of intervention, it is justifiable for the activity to come under the scrutiny of clinical audit as well. However, many would now accept that there is to be more emphasis in future on the contribution of the laboratory, as a clinical information system, to patient
Linking clinical audit to improved patient outcome
Clinical audit and the assessment of performance of clinical services are going through a difficult period. In the UK, and after the initial hype following the publication of the White Paper, many have started to question the role and effectiveness of clinical audit 24, 36. Clinical audit is one of these concepts which everyone thinks is a good idea but no one knows what is the best way to implement it in practice or agree that it is good value for money. Clinical audit is being increasingly
References (37)
Linking analytic performance goals to medical outcome
Clin Chim Acta
(1997)Medical audit
BMJ
(1974)Accreditation pilot study: A year later
J Clin Pathol
(1991)- Kings Fund. Organisational Audit: Guidance to Local Steering Group, London: Kings Fund Centre,...
- Department of Health. Working for patients, Working Paper 6 (Medical Audit), London: HMSO,...
- National Health Service Management Executive. Clinical audit in Hospital and Community Health Services: Allocation of...
- Royal College of Physicians. Medical Audit: A first report. London: Royal College of Physicians of London,...
Making audit truly educational
Postgrad Med J
(1990)- Kolb DA. Experimental Learning, Experience as the Source of Learning and Development, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice...
- et al.
The need for evidence-based medicine
BMJ
(1995)
Evidence-based medicine: An approach to clinical problem solving
BMJ
Evidence-based medicine
BMJ
Comparison of appropriateness of cholesterol testing in general practice with the recommendations of national guidelines: An audit of patient records in 20 general practices
Quality in Health Care
A prospective audit of the use of a prostate clinic
Br J Urol
Ideas towards audit in clinical biochemistry
Ann Clin Biochem
Medical audit in clinical pathology
J Clin Pathol
Clinical audit in the UK. Does it have a future?
Ann Clin Biochem
Audit in laboratory medicine
Eur J Clin Chem Clin Biochem
Cited by (9)
Lack of improvement after audit assessing the management of voiding dysfunction in patients with spinal cord injury: Necessity for institutional guidelines
2011, International Journal of SurgeryCitation Excerpt :Although urological complications are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with SCI,8 a consensus regarding the best treatment modality has not been reached yet.9 Clinical audits are an essential component of a health care system and are conducted on a regular basis to assess the performance and quality of care provided by an institution.10,11 Although indigenously developed management protocols exist, consensus on standard treatment guidelines for management of voiding dysfunction in patients with SCI is lacking and these patients are managed either on the basis of institutional protocols, or individual judgment of managing physicians.12–15
Quality specifications in EQA schemes: From theory to practice
2004, Clinica Chimica ActaCharting the course of medical laboratories in a changing environment
2002, Clinica Chimica ActaExternal quality assessment schemes: Need for recognised requirements
2001, Clinica Chimica ActaClinical audit in the laboratory
2009, Journal of Clinical Pathology