Understanding and Preventing Medical Errors in Point-of-Care Testing (and the Use of FAST-QC)

2002 ◽  
pp. 101-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald Kost
Keyword(s):  
Medical Errors ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Point Of Care Testing

Preventing Medical Errors in Point-of-Care Testing

2001 ◽  
Vol 125 (10) ◽  
pp. 1307-1315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald J. Kost
Keyword(s):  
Medical Errors ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Point Of Care Testing ◽  
Consensus Process ◽  
Process Step ◽  
Error Prevention ◽  
Group A ◽  
Emergency Systems ◽  
Group B

Abstract Objective.—To prevent medical errors, improve user performance, and enhance the quality, safety, and connectivity (bidirectional communication) of point-of-care testing. Participants.—Group A included 37 multidisciplinary experts in point-of-care testing programs in critical care and other hospital disciplines. Group B included 175 professional point-of-care managers, specialists, clinicians, and researchers. The total number of participants equaled 212. Evidence.—This study followed a systems approach. Expert specifications for prevention of medical errors were incorporated into the designs of security, validation, performance, and emergency systems. Additional safeguards need to be implemented through instrument software options and point-of-care coordinators. Connectivity will be facilitated by standards that eliminate deficiencies in instrument communication and device compatibility. Assessment of control features on handheld, portable, and transportable point-of-care instruments shows that current error reduction features lag behind needs. Consensus Process.—Step 1: United States national survey and collation of group A expert requirements for security, validation, and performance. Step 2: Design of parallel systems for these functions. Step 3: Written critique and improvement of the error-prevention systems during 4 successive presentations to group B participants over 9 months until system designs stabilized into final consensus form. Conclusions.—The consensus process produced 6 conclusions for preventing medical errors in point-of-care testing: (1) adopt operator certification and validation in point-of-care testing programs; (2) implement security, validation, performance, and emergency systems on existing and new devices; (3) require flexible, user-defined error-prevention system options on instruments as a prerequisite to federal licensing of new diagnostic tests and devices; (4) integrate connectivity standards for bidirectional information exchange; (5) preserve fast therapeutic turnaround time of point-of-care test results; and (6) monitor invalid use, operator competence, quality compliance, and other performance improvement indices to reduce errors, thereby focusing on patient outcomes. (Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2001;1307–1315)

Reducing Potential Medical Errors in Point-of-Care Testing

2002 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald J. Kost ◽  
Richard F. Louie ◽  
Zuping Tang ◽  
Judith H. Lee ◽  
Keith J. Somsanith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Errors ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Point Of Care Testing ◽  
Reducing Potential

Magnetic Digital Microfluidics for Point-of-Care Testing: Where Are We Now?

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi Zhang
Keyword(s):  
System Integration ◽  
Diagnostic Tests ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Digital Microfluidics ◽  
Controlled Environment ◽  
Point Of Care Testing ◽  
Microfluidic Platforms ◽  
Interface System ◽  
Technical Issues ◽  
Sample System

: Point-of-care (POC) testing decentralizes the diagnostic tests to the sites near the patient. Many POC tests rely microfluidic platforms for sample-to-answer analysis. Compared to other microfluidic systems, magnetic digital microfluidics demonstrate compelling advantages for POC diagnostics. In this review, we have examined the capability of magnetic digital microfluidics-based POC diagnostic platforms. More importantly, we have categorized POC settings into three classes based on “where is the point”, “who to care” and “how to test”, and evaluated the suitability of magnetic digital microfluidics in various POC settings. Furthermore, we have addressed other technical issues associated with POC testing such as controlled environment, sample-system interface, system integration and information connectivity. We hope this review would provide a guideline for the future development of magnetic digital microfluidics-based platforms for POC testing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document