Seven years of data was analysed retrospectively (2004 – 2010) to establish if there was any relationship between the GYN conventional cytology module and the Performance Measures data. The results showed that those laboratories that had major errors in the GYN module had more Performance Measures outside the national standard and vice versa. However there was no absolute correlation of the data and this helped to identify the necessity for separate benchmarks.
Before the analysis of retrospective data was undertaken, the Cytopathology Performance Review Committee considered the use of 2 major errors as the benchmark for the GYN module. The analysis showed that from 2004 – 2010;
- 4 – 14 laboratories had 1 major error per year, whereas 0 – 1 laboratory had 2 or 3 major errors per year.
- , 10 – 26 laboratories had 1 unacceptable response,
- 0 – 7 laboratories had 2 unacceptable responses,
- 0 – 3 laboratories had 3 unacceptable responses and
- 0 – 1 laboratory had 4 unacceptable responses per year.
Document download
This publication is available as a downloadable document.
The Role of External Quality Assurance in Identifying Poor Laboratory Performance(PDF 518 KB)