Table 3.
Overview of survey responses after the 2016 and 2017 ESP colon EQA scheme
| Question | 2016 survey respondents | 2017 survey respondents | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| # observations | % observations | # observations | % observations | |
| Case-specific questions | ||||
| Total number of errors analyzed | 35 | 100.0 | 24 | 100.0 |
| Phase in the total testing process | ||||
| Pre-analytical | 12 | 34.3 | 6 | 25.0 |
| Analytical | 10 | 28.6 | 12 | 50.0 |
| Post-analytical | 13 | 37.1 | 6 | 25.0 |
| Type of problem | ||||
| Clerical error | 6 | 17.1 | 2 | 8.3 |
| Interpretation error | 5 | 14.3 | 3 | 12.5 |
| Methodological problem | 3 | 8.6 | 7 | 29.2 |
| Personnel error | 5 | 14.3 | 6 | 25.0 |
| Problem with the tissue | 10 | 28.6 | 2 | 8.3 |
| Reagent problem | 2 | 5.7 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Technical problem | 3 | 8.6 | 4 | 16.7 |
| Missing data | 1 | 2.9 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Detection of the error* | FE, p < 0.05 | |||
| Before release of the EQA results | 1 | 2.9 | 6 | 25.0 |
| After release of the EQA results | 25 | 71.4 | 17 | 70.8 |
| Missing data | 9 | 25.7 | 1 | 4.2 |
| Corrective/preventive actions* | Χ2 (9) = 18.6, p < 0.05 | |||
| Contact manufacturer | 2 | 5.7 | 5 | 20.8 |
| None | 6 | 17.1 | 8 | 33.3 |
| Optimization/implementation of documents | 1 | 2.9 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Protocol revision | 15 | 42.9 | 5 | 20.8 |
| Protocol revision + subsequent staff training | 0 | 0.0 | 2 | 8.3 |
| Retesting of samples | 1 | 2.9 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Staff training | 6 | 17.1 | 3 | 12.5 |
| Unknown | 3 | 8.6 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Missing data | 1 | 2.9 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Change method | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 4.2 |
| Person involved in follow-up° | FE, p < 0.05 | |||
| Lead laboratory technician* | 12 | 34.3 | 1 | 4.2 |
| Laboratory technician | 9 | 25.7 | 5 | 20.8 |
| Pathologist | 10 | 28.6 | 5 | 20.8 |
| Molecular biologist | 17 | 48.6 | 14 | 58.3 |
| Quality manager | 2 | 5.7 | 3 | 12.5 |
| Laboratory director* | 4 | 11.4 | 9 | 37.5 |
| Scientific employee | 1 | 2.9 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Medical geneticist | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 4.2 |
| Missing data | 5 | 14.3 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Laboratory-specific questions | ||||
| Total number of laboratories responded | 21 | 100.0 | 18 | 100.0 |
| General change of method/protocol based on the EQA results | ||||
| Yes | 12 | 57.1 | 4 | 22.2 |
| No | 9 | 42.9 | 10 | 55.6 |
| Maybe | 0 | 0.0 | 2 | 11.1 |
| Missing data | 0 | 0.0 | 2 | 11.1 |
| Person involved in interpretation of the results° | ||||
| Lead laboratory technician | 3 | 14.3 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Laboratory technician | 8 | 38.1 | 6 | 33.3 |
| Pathologist | 8 | 38.1 | 6 | 33.3 |
| Molecular biologist | 15 | 71.4 | 15 | 83.3 |
| Molecular biology consultant | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 5.6 |
| Laboratory director | 2 | 9.5 | 2 | 11.1 |
| Clinical biologist (MD) | 1 | 4.8 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Engineer | 1 | 4.8 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Medical geneticist | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 5.6 |
| Training of the personnel involved in interpretation of the result° | ||||
| By school degree | 4 | 19.0 | 2 | 11.1 |
| External: attending workshops | 3 | 14.3 | 2 | 11.1 |
| External: training by manufacturer | 4 | 19.0 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Internal and external (not specified) | 1 | 4.8 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Internal only (not specified) | 1 | 4.8 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Internal: exchange with other lab/EQA | 1 | 4.8 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Internal: learning from colleagues with gradually more independence | 6 | 28.6 | 5 | 27.8 |
| Internal: participation to laboratory meetings | 4 | 19.0 | 1 | 5.6 |
| Internal: performing validations | 4 | 19.0 | 3 | 16.7 |
| None | 3 | 14.3 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Missing data | 0 | 0.0 | 6 | 33.3 |
| Person involved in reporting of the results° | ||||
| Lead laboratory technician | 2 | 9.5 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Laboratory technician | 2 | 9.5 | 4 | 22.2 |
| Pathologist | 10 | 47.6 | 6 | 33.3 |
| Molecular biologist | 11 | 52.4 | 12 | 66.7 |
| Quality manager | 1 | 4.8 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Laboratory director | 3 | 14.3 | 3 | 16.7 |
| Clinical biologist (MD) | 1 | 4.8 | 0 | 0.0 |
| Medical geneticist | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 5.6 |
| Administrative staff | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 5.6 |
| Request for retesting the sample* | Χ2 (3) = 22.5, p < 0.001 | |||
| No | 1 | 4.8 | 4 | 22.2 |
| Yes, always | 6 | 28.6 | 4 | 22.2 |
| Yes for routine practice but not in EQA | 1 | 4.8 | 10 | 55.6 |
| Missing data | 13 | 61.9 | 0 | 0.0 |
No missing data was observed for a specific question unless specified in the table. °Multiple options could be selected, which is why percentages add up to more than 100.0%. *Statistical difference