Spanish 
Chinese 
Russian 
German 
French 
Japanese 
Portuguese 
Hindi Research Article
Identification of Preanalytical Errors in the Clinical Laboratory of North Indian Tertiary Care Hospital
| Monika Gupta1*, Dharamveer Yadav2, Sandhya Mishra2 and Praveen Sharma3 | |
| 1Department of Biochemistry, Dr. S. N. Medical College, Jodhpur, India | |
| 2Department of Biochemistry, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, India | |
| 3Department of Biochemistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, India | |
| Corresponding Author : | Monika Gupta Department of Biochemistry Dr. S. N. Medical College, Jodhpur, India Tel: +91-9413841965 E-mail: maturemona@gmail.com |
| Received: August 19, 2015 Accepted: September 08, 2015 Published: September 15, 2015 | |
| Citation: Gupta M, Yadav D, Mishra S, Sharma P (2015) Identification of Preanalytical Errors in the Clinical Laboratory of North Indian Tertiary Care Hospital. Biochem Physiol 4:181. doi: 10.4172/2168-9652.1000181 | |
| Copyright: © 2015 Gupta M, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. | |
Abstract
Introduction: In an era where mechanization of laboratory automation has drastically reduced the errors due to the analytical phase of testing, errors due to the preanalytical phase are largely responsible for the decrease in quality of clinical laboratory results.
Materials and methods: The present study was conducted at one of the tertiary care hospital at State Capital to find out the incidence of preanalytical errors between inpatients and outpatients samples collected into vacuated (Serum and EDTA) tubes and without evacuated (Serum and EDTA) tubes.
Results: The frequency of total errors observed was 25.80% and 27.96% for inpatients samples collected into BD Vacutainer® tubes and without evacuated tubes respectively while for outpatients it was 20.75% and 29.27%. The total errors (30.24%) irrespective of the blood container used were 34.92% and 25.55% for inpatients and outpatients, respectively.
Conclusions: Preanalytical variables can produce unpredictable and unfavorable impacts on the wellbeing of patients because of preanalytical variables which could affect more than 30% of laboratory results.
