Abstract
Accurate laboratory reporting is crucial to patient diagnosis and treatment. This study identified critical success factors (CSF) for implementing a laboratory quality management system (QMS). This descriptive research used qualitative and quantitative methods to collect and analyze data from laboratory managers and staff employed in Vietnamese hospital laboratories implementing a QMS. The top five CSFs identified were: (1) staff QMS knowledge, (2) manager leadership, (3) staff commitment, (4) mentorship, and (5) hospital administration support. Identifying CSFs is critical to successful planning and implementation of QMS.
Highlights
Medical laboratories provide critical services which are used by physicians to accurately diagnose, treat and monitor patient health
A multi case analysis of critical success factor in Vietnam laboratories implementing quality management systems to earn international accreditation. 2018; Mount Pleasant, MI: Central Michigan University chi-square test found no relevant bias between the demographic responses and the factors listed by the participants
The strength of this study lies in the close alignment of the identified top five critical success factors (CSF) by the researchers and the expert panel after the analysis of participants’ responses
Summary
Medical laboratories provide critical services which are used by physicians to accurately diagnose, treat and monitor patient health. In addition to a QMS training programme, the World Health Organization developed a checklist entitled Stepwise Laboratory Quality Improvement Process Towards Accreditation to measure quality improvement within laboratories and provide continued recognition and motivation of staff to continue and sustain improvements.[4] An international effort was fielded in developing countries to educate and train laboratory management and staff on improving the accuracy and reliability of laboratory results. Several previous studies[5,6,7] have evaluated the outcome of these training programmes on laboratory quality by comparing laboratory assessments before and after QMS implementation. While this is a good first step, quantitative statistics do not identify ‘why’ a particular standard was or was not met. Adding a qualitative component allows for the identification of ‘why’ QMS implementation assessment scores often showed wide variability
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
