Abstract
Since the use of assisted reproduction techniques became routine, needs have changed in the quest to optimise laboratory results, and the establishment of quality indicators and standards is now of fundamental importance. For this reason, various reference texts have been published in 2016, such as the Embryology Laboratory Indicator Quality Guidelines issued by the ASEBIR Quality Interest Group (GICa-ASEBIR) and, more recently, the Handbook of Good Clinical Practice in Assisted Reproduction issued by the SEF Ethics and Good Practices interest group (MBP-SEF). We believe it would be useful to scrutinise these indicators and determine which ones are common to the two documents. To do so, we have classified the indicators according to two variables. Firstly, by type (effectiveness and safety) and secondly, by degree of coincidence: similar (present in both documents and similarly defined); discrepant (present in both documents but with discordant definitions); and unique (only described in one of the two documents). Our analysis of the two texts shows that eight indicators of effectiveness are similar and three are discrepant. In addition, one safety indicator was found to be discrepant, two indicators were unique to the GICa-ASEBIR document and five were unique to the MBP-SEF. These results highlight the presence of significant differences in the quality indicators proposed and the need, in our opinion, for greater standardisation.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.