Anzeige
Erschienen in:
01.12.2018 | Original Article
Improving compliance with Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) reporting standards: A serial comparison of 523 labs over seven years
Erschienen in: Journal of Nuclear Cardiology | Ausgabe 6/2018
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhaltenAbstract
Background
The aim of this study was to evaluate reporting compliance of laboratories applying for serial accreditation by the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) and compare compliance based on laboratory characteristics.
Methods
All laboratories applying for IAC accreditation for the first time in 2008 and then twice more (2011-2014) were evaluated for compliance with 18 reporting elements. The elements were ranked into three severity groups (high/moderate/low).
Results
Reports from 523 laboratories were evaluated. The percentage of laboratories with reporting issues by cycle was 66.2% for cycle 1, 36.7% for cycle 2, and 43.8% for cycle 3 (p < .001). For most of the 18 elements, there was a significant decrease in the percentage of labs with issues. Less moderate and high severity errors were seen over time. Also, the mean non-compliant elements per laboratory decreased from 5.78 ± 2.72 at cycle 1, down to 1.25 ± 1.77 at cycle 3.
Conclusions
In facilities applying for 3 consecutive IAC accreditation cycles, reporting compliance with IAC Standards improved between cycles 1-2 and 1-3. No significant improvement occurred between cycles 2-3. Although the quality of reports improved overall, problems remain in quantifying myocardial perfusion defects, documenting report approval date, and integrating stress and imaging reports.