Formerly defined "critical values", the importance of critical results (CRs) management in patient care has grown in recent years. According to the George Lundberg definition the result becomes "critical" when, exceeding actionable thresholds, it suggests imminent danger for the patient, unless appropriate therapy is initiated promptly. As required in most important accreditation standards, such as the ISO:15,189 or the Joint Commission standards, a quality reporting system should deliver the correct result to the appropriate clinician in a time-frame that ensures patient safety. From this point of view, medical laboratories should implement a process that assures the most effective communication in a timely manner, to the referring physician or care team member. Failure in communication, particularly in this type of situation, continues to be one of the most common factors contributing to the occurrence of adverse events. In the last few decades, Information Technology (IT) in Health Care has become increasingly important. The ability to interface radiology, anatomic pathology or laboratory information systems with electronic medical records is now a real opportunity, offering much safer communication than in the past. Future achievements on performance criteria and quality indicators for the notification of CRs, should ensure a comparable examination across different institutions, adding value to clinical laboratories in controlling post-analytical processes that concern patient safety. Therefore, the novel approach to CRs should combine quality initiatives, IT solutions and a culture to strengthen professional interaction.
Keywords: Clinical decision-making; Clinical outcomes; Critical result management; Patient safety; Performance specifications.
Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.