Laessig R H, Ehrmeyer S S, Lanphear B J, Burmeister B J, Hassemer D J
State Laboratory of Hygiene, University of Wisconsin, Madison 53706.
Clin Chem. 1992 Jul;38(7):1237-44; discussion 1245-50.
Proficiency testing (PT), recognized as a quality-assurance (QA) and quality-improvement tool, also has become the cornerstone of the Health Care Financing Administration's (HCFA) regulatory strategy under the revised Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act of 1967 (CLIA '67) and the proposed Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA '88). Use of PT as a regulatory tool corrupts it for things it can do better. PT as a primary regulatory strategy has severe limitations. We explore the nature of these limitations and their implications for clinical laboratories as they impact on the long-term success of HCFA's approved regulatory PT programs in 1991 and beyond, and CLIA '88 PT, which is to be implemented in 1994.
能力验证(PT)被视为一种质量保证(QA)和质量改进工具,也已成为医疗保健财务管理局(HCFA)根据1967年修订的《临床实验室改进法案》(CLIA '67)以及1988年拟议的《临床实验室改进修正案》(CLIA '88)所制定监管策略的基石。将能力验证用作监管工具会使其在本可做得更好的方面受到损害。将能力验证作为主要监管策略存在严重局限性。我们探讨这些局限性的本质以及它们对临床实验室的影响,因为它们会影响到HCFA在1991年及以后批准的监管能力验证计划以及将于1994年实施的CLIA '88能力验证计划的长期成功。