AN AUDIT OF SEROLOGICAL TESTS CARRIED OUT AT CLINICAL LABORATORY OF AYUB TEACHING HOSPITAL, ABBOTTABAD

Sirajuddin Hassan Ally, Ayesha Ahmed, Ruhila Hanif*

Department of Pathology and *Biochemistry, Ayub Medical College, Abbottabad

Background: Clinical audit is an important tool for reviewing and improving the quality of service in clinical laboratories. Here we present an audit of total serology test requests and the frequency of positive tests out of these in a calendar year. Methods: This is an audit of serology tests carried out at Microbiology section of Clinical Laboratory of Ayub Teaching Hospital, Abbottabad. We counted all the serology test requests for the year 2004. These tests requests were grouped month wise. The frequency of positive tests out of the total test requests were calculated. The tests included Widal, Toxoplasma, Brucella, Anti DNA, Anti Nuclear factor (ANF), Rheumatoid Arthritis Factor (RAF), HIV, HBsAg, HCV, Intra Chromatographic Technique for tuberculosis (ICT-TB), Purified Protein Derivative (PPD), Venereal Disease Research Laboratory (VDRL) test, Anti-Streptolysin-O-test (ASOT) and pregnancy test. Results and Conclusions: This audit gives a clear idea of trends of test requests in our hospital. It reflects accuracy of clinicians’ judgment in some tests and failure in others, prevalence of different diseases, seasonal variation in number of test requests for some tests and impact of awareness campaigns on attitude of clinicians towards certain diseases. This will help us in planning our laboratory requirements to improve quality.

Keywords: Serology, Audit, Clinical laboratory


INTRODUCTION

‘Laboratory-clinic communication’ is fundamental in achieving and maintaining quality in laboratory services. Modern health care in this era of ‘Evidence based medicine’ has put a lot of pressure on the laboratory services too. The trend now is that laboratory medicine should follow a clinical rather than a technological logic. Appropriate test requesting and interpretation coupled with a patient-oriented vision improves the outcomes for patients, and so ensures the best cost containment strategy.1
                    Recently dramatic changes have occurred in the organization, number and type of tests, and role of medical laboratories in healthcare. The role of laboratory professionals has undergone a radical change, which calls for greater analytical accuracy, more stringent test selection, and interpretation of results.2
                    The lack of good quality research in the field not only contributes to inappropriate utilization of laboratory services but also to wasting significant resources. Evidence-based laboratory medicine tries to combat this problem by combining methods from epidemiology, biostatistics, clinical and social sciences with basic sciences to evaluate the role of investigations in clinical decision making and outcomes for patients.3 
                    Evidence-based laboratory medicine aims to advance clinical diagnosis and management of diseases through systematic researching and disseminating generalisable new knowledge which meets the standards of critical review on clinically effective practice of laboratory investigations. The use of evidence in laboratory medicine requires systematically compiled databases of standardized and critically appraised information on the test characteristics and diagnostic accuracy of laboratory investigations.4
                    Service quality in medical laboratories is influenced by a number of variables. Medical laboratories have long recognized the need for total quality management that incorporates the continuous improvement of all stages, such as the pre-analytical, analytical and post-analytical phases, of the diagnostic process, in addition to the traditional internal and external quality control of analytical procedures. Based on national and international experience, continuous improvement of quality and its external assessment are of high priority in order to guarantee a reliable, effective and cost-effective diagnostic service. The process of constant questioning and reviewing the evidence for rational diagnosis of diseases provides a practical tool to identify gaps in our knowledge and thus it generates new research ideas in laboratory medicine.5
        Clinical audit is an important tool for reviewing and improving the quality of service in clinical laboratories. Here we present an audit of total serology test requests and the frequency of positive tests in a calendar year. This will give an idea of trends of test requests in our hospital. This will help us in planning our laboratory requirements to improve quality.

 

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is an audit of serology tests carried out at Microbiology section of Clinical Laboratory of Ayub Teaching Hospital, Abbottabad. This laboratory caters for a 1000 bed tertiary care hospital that is the main teaching hospital of Ayub Medical College. All the laboratory investigations from wards (in-patients) and OPD (outdoor) are referred to clinical laboratory. In addition other primary and secondary care hospitals of the area refer to this laboratory for many investigations. We counted all the serology test requests for the year 2004. These tests requests were grouped month wise. The frequency of positive tests out of the total test requests were calculated. The serology tests carried out during the year 2004 included Widal, Toxoplasma, Brucella, Anti DNA, Anti Nuclear factor (ANF), Rheumatoid Arthritis Factor (RAF), HIV, HBsAg, HCV, Intra Chromatographic Technique for tuberculosis (ICT-TB), Purified Protein Derivative (PPD), Venereal Disease Research Laboratory (VDRL), Anti-Streptolysin-O-test (ASOT) and pregnancy test.

RESULTS

The results of this audit are summarized in tables 1 to 5.

DISCUSSION

Serology laboratory is very important in diagnosis of a number of diseases.

                    Tuberculosis is of great public health concern globally, and the impact is most felt in developing countries of Asia and Africa. Laboratory plays a very important role in diagnosis and management (monitoring prognosis)of the disease.6,7 An early and accurate diagnosis of TB is perhaps the most significant intervention step in TB control. Early diagnosis permits expedited treatment and limitation of spread. An effective TB laboratory program plays an essential role in the early and accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment of TB.8

Table-1: Widal, Toxoplasma and Brucella tests in 2004

 

Month

WIDAL

TOXOPLASMA

BRUCELLA

Total Tests Done

Total No. of Positive (%)

Total Tests Done

Total No. of Positive (%)

Total Tests Done

Total No. of Positive (%)

January

78

37 (47.73%)

18

5 (27.77%)

52

21 (40.38%)

February

84

51 (60.71%)

20

11 (55%)

41

19 (46.34%)

March

168

74 (44.04%)

25

11 (44%)

84

28 (33.33%)

April

253

106 (41.89%)

35

13 (37.14%)

123

32 (26.01%)

May

270

116 (42.96%)

34

17 (50%)

126

30 (23.80%)

June

311

101 (32.47%)

37

17 (45.94%)

155

24 (15.48%)

July

341

104 (30.49%)

45

5 (11.11%)

117

20 (17.09%)

August

197

95 (48.22%)

29

17 (58.62%)

41

10 (24.39%)

September

332

98 (29.51%)

38

13 (34.21%)

102

10 (9.80%)

October

187

90 (48.12%)

30

14 (46.66%)

78

15 (19.23%)

November

88

34 (38.63%)

29

13 (44.82%)

55

15 (27.27%)

December

122

52 (42.62%)

32

15 (46.87%)

67

10 (14.92%)

Total

2431

958 (39.40%)

372

151 (40.59%)

1041

234 (22.47%)

Table-2: Anti DNA, ANF and RAF tests in 2004

 

Month

Anti DNA

ANF

RAF

Total Tests Done

Total No. of Positive (%)

Total Tests Done

Total No. of Positive (%)

Total Tests Done

Total No. of Positive (%)

January

34

0 (0%)

34

1 (2.94%)

45

13 (28.88%)

February

2

0 (0%)

15

0 (0%)

60

17 (28.83%)

March

3

0 (0%)

14

1 (7.14%)

68

15 (22.05%)

April

0

0 (0%)

2

0 (0%)

100

24 (24%)

May

0

0 (0%)

1

0 (0%)

94

17 (18.08%)

June

7

0 (0%)

3

0 (0%)

92

12 (13.04%)

July

23

2 (8.69%)

38

0 (0%)

122

15 (12.29%)

August

20

0 (0%)

13

0 (0%)

84

11 (13.09%)

September

26

0 (0%)

21

0 (0%)

67

20 (29.85%)

October

34

0 (0%)

23

0 (0%)

77

24 (31.16%)

November

26

1 (3.84%)

27

0 (0%)

48

12 (25%)

December

33

3 (9.09%)

31

1 (3.22%)

66

14 (21.21%)

Total

208

6 (2.88%)

222

3 (1.35%)

923

194 (21.01%)


Table-3: HIV, HBsAg and HCV tests in 2004

 

 

Month

HIV

HBsAg

HCV

Total Tests Done

Total No. of Positive (%)

Total Tests Done

Total No. of Positive (%)

Total Tests Done

Total No. of Positive (%)

January

22

1 (4.54%)

244

5 (3.2%)

189

17 (8.9%)

February

20

0 (0%)

229

8 (3.5%)

191

20 (10.4%)

March

64

0 (0%)

415

7 (1.6%)

384

21 (5.5%)

April