Conference abstract
Laboratory assessment, Northern Region, 2017
Pan African Medical Journal - Conference Proceedings. 2017:3(117).01
Nov 2017.
doi: 10.11604/pamj-cp.2017.3.117.475
Archived on: 01 Nov 2017
Contact the corresponding author
Keywords: WHO Stepwise Laboratory Improvement Process Towards Accreditation (SLIPTA), clinical laboratory, audit
Oral presentation
Laboratory assessment, Northern Region, 2017
Francis Broni1,2,&, Joseph Opare1, Frederick Wurapa1, Kofi Nyarko1, Donne Ameme1, Edwin Afari1
1Ghana Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Program, Accra, Ghana, 2Ghana Health Service, Ghana
&Corresponding author
Francis Broni, Ghana Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Programme, Accra, Ghana
Introduction: laboratory service is an integral component of diseases surveillance and health care delivery. Tamale Central Hospital is government owned health facility with Clinical Laboratory which serves the Tamale Metropolis and the surroundings. The laboratory is mandated to perform routine and specialized Laboratory investigation. The Tamale Central Hospital Laboratory has never been audited. We assessed the laboratory to identify deficiencies and strengths so as to prescribe recommendations to ensure that the Laboratory meets the International Organization for Standardization requirements.
Methods: we conducted an on-site visit and interviewed the staff of the laboratory. The WHO Stepwise Laboratory Improvement Process Towards Accreditation (SLIPTA) checklist for Clinical and Public Health Laboratories to assess and scored the laboratory was used. Each section was scored based on mark allocated to the question. Scores were summarized and presented in tables and figures.
Results: the laboratory has eight (8) technical staff. The laboratory works for 24 hours, from Monday to Sunday. The laboratory receives an average of 300 samples per day and performs about 750 tests a day. The overall audit score for the laboratory was 83 (32%).
Conclusion: the performance of the laboratory is unsatisfactory. All the sections assessed were below average. Management of the laboratory was inadequate and the laboratory was not adhering to good laboratory practices. Management should immediately appoint a quality laboratory manager.
