The association of imaging equipment age with other quality metrics and successful laboratory accreditation by the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission.

Abstract

Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) accreditation is granted or delayed depending on the fulfillment of several quality metrics. Investing in up-to-date equipment might reflect a commitment to quality. Data from echocardiography (n=3079) and nuclear cardiology (n=1835) accreditation applications submitted between 2012 and 2014 were evaluated to determine the mean age of laboratory equipment. Laboratory quality was assessed by the number of missing quality metrics, and a composite quality score was calculated as the sum of missing quality metrics. A lower score thus represented better laboratory quality. The relationship between equipment age and quality was explored as an interaction term between equipment age and the composite quality score and was incorporated into regression models for prediction of accreditation status. During the study period, 49% of echocardiography and 42% of nuclear laboratories were granted accreditation without delay. For both echocardiography and nuclear laboratories, there was a statistically significant trend toward an increasing number of missing quality metrics with increasing quartiles of equipment age. The interaction between equipment age and the composite quality score was a significant predictor of delay of accreditation for both echocardiography and nuclear cardiology laboratories, with a stronger association for 1st-time applicants. Among sites applying for accreditation in both modalities simultaneously, accreditation in one modality predicted the accreditation decision for the other. Laboratory quality is an important determinant of IAC accreditation, and equipment age is an effect modifier of this relationship. Contemporary equipment likely reflects a commitment to quality, for both echocardiography and nuclear laboratories.