Laboratory Medicine and Quality Assurance

Table. 3.

Number (%) of errors by each survey item

Type of errors ABO cell (N=37,656) ABO serum (N=37,656) ABO result (N=37,656) RhD grade (N=18,575) RhD results (N=18,575) XM–CAT (N=4,547) XM–tube 37℃ LISS (N=195) XM–tube 37℃ Alb (N=13,222) XM–tube LISS (N=227) XM–tube saline (N=14,148) XM–tube AHG (N=12,969) XM result (N=16,385)
Incorrect interpretation of hemag­glutination grade 405 (1.1) 1,503 (4.0) 32 (0.1) 498 (2.7) 9 (0.0) 18 (0.4) 3 (1.5) 354 (2.7) 5 (2.2) 229 (1.6) 806 (6.2) 297 (1.8)
Errors in result entry 25 (0.1) 105 (0.3) 10 (0.0) 6 (0.0) 9 (0.0) 0 0 5 (0.0) 0 4 (0.0) 1 (0.0) 17 (0.1)
Limitations of test methods 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 146 (0.9)
Specimen change 4 (0.0) 4 (0.0) 2 (0.0) 2 (0.0) 2 (0.0) 6 (0.1) 1 (0.0) 9 (0.1) 1 (0.4) 6 (0.0) 49 (0.4) 71 (0.4)
Others 5 (0.0) 6 (0.0) 3 (0.0) 0 0 0 0 3 (0.0) 0 4 (0.0) 2 (0.0) 14 (0.1)

Abbreviations: XM, cross-matching; CAT, column agglutination technology; LISS, low-ionic strength saline; Alb, albumin; AHG, indirect anti-human globulin test.

Lab Med Qual Assur 2023;45:115~119 https://doi.org/10.15263/jlmqa.2023.45.3.115
© Lab Med Qual Assur