Regulatory compliance vs. NEXUS quality for laboratory tests

Abstract

In the U.S., all clinical laboratory testing is regulated by the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) (http://www.phppo.cdc.gov/clia/regs/toc.aspx). The CLIA link test quality and adherence to a body of testing regulations intended to ensure accurate, reliable, and timely patient test results. The goal of the CLIA legislation was to ensure a minimum, fundamental level of quality. In the context of “NEXUS,” quality must “go beyond getting the ‘right’ answer on the ‘right’ patient that can be interpreted against ‘right’ reference values. CLIA regulations with specific minimum, performance requirements, or safeguards, are designed to prevent testing errors. The US Institute of Medicine found that testing processes fail as a result of human error, lack of documentation, and lack of test management. In the latest (2004) interpretations of CLIA regulations, the minimum quality control requirement continues to be analyzing at least two external, liquid quality control materials per test per day. In 1995, we proposed that the responsibility for achieving quality test results shifts from the sole purview of the laboratory director to an “alliance” of laboratory professionals, manufacturers, and regulators. The EQC (equivalent quality control) concept as proposed is a positive step in achieving this alliance. With the obvious lack of scientific and statistical robustness, EQC falls far short of ensuring quality. Achieving the “NEXUS Vision” for quality laboratory testing will not come solely from laboratory professionals. The NEXUS is about how to ensure the full-quality assessment of the testing process – pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical.