The Asian Network for Clinical Laboratory Standardization (ANCLS) decided to start her First Inter-laboratory Quality Assurance survey at the business meeting during the Second Asian Colloquium on October 21-22, 2000 in Kobe, Japan. The first survey materials of Asian Quality Assurance Survey (AQuAS) were distributed in July 2001 to 21 hospitals in the field of chemistry and 22 hospitals in the field of hematology among total 24 participating laboratories from seven Asian countries: Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. The survey methods in chemistry and in hematology were somewhat different. In chemistry the survey material was considered as unknown but handled similarly to the sample from the patient. Nineteen routine tests were performed only once. The hematology samples were considered as unknown but handled similarly to control or calibration material. Five parameters were tested five times repetitively and their average for each parameter was calculated. All the results were supposed to be sent back to the office within two weeks. Although it took more than two weeks, the return rate was 100%. The analysis was performed in several ways such as all the results together, by instruments and by methods. Mean, standard deviation (SD), standard deviation index (SDI), coefficient of variation (CV) and variance index score (VIS) were to be calculated in chemistry, and in hematology the same parameter were to be calculated except CV and VIS. In the first survey, the CV in chemistry was not calculated and the analysis by instrument or by methodology was also not attempted since there were not enough participating hospitals to do such analysis. In hematology the analysis was done by instrument only. The survey process was carried out successfully though there were some difficulties in communication tools, transportation methods and handling of specimens due to different weather conditions, and returning the report in the correct unit and to the correct place. The submitted data were acceptable for analysis. There were some differences in the units of measurement in different countries or laboratories. It was necessary to convert some of the units. Some laboratories apparently do not perform certain tests such as calcium, potasium and gamma-glutamyltransferase (gamma-GT). The gamma-GT is the most frequently not performed test. With the experience of this first survey, all the members involved in the survey have been trained well to do future surveys.
The past century has seen tremendous changes in the scope and practice of pathology laboratories in tandem with the development of the medical services in Malaysia. Major progress was made in the areas of training and specialization of pathologists and laboratory technical staff. Today the pathology laboratory services have entered the International arena, and are propelled along the wave of globalization. Many new challenges have emerged as have new players in the field. Landmark developments over the past decade include the establishment of national quality assurance programmes, the mushrooming of private pathology laboratories, the establishment of a National Accreditation Standard for medical testing laboratories based on ISO 15189, and the passing of the Pathology Laboratory Act in Parliament in mid-2007. The Pathology Laboratory Act 2007 seeks to ensure that the pathology laboratory is accountable to the public, meets required standards of practice, participates in Quality Assurance programmes, is run by qualified staff, complies with safety requirements and is subject to continuous audit. The Act is applicable to all private laboratories (stand alone or hospital) and laboratories in statutory bodies (Universities, foundations). It is not applicable to public laboratories (established and operated by the government) and side-room laboratories established in clinics of registered medical or dental practitioners for their own patients (tests as in the First and Second Schedules respectively). Tests of the Third Schedule (home test blood glucose, urine glucose, urine pregnancy test) are also exempted. The Act has 13 Parts and provides for control of the pathology laboratory through approval (to establish and maintain) and licensing (to operate or provide). The approval or license may only be issued to a sole proprietor, partnership or body corporate, and then only if the entity includes a registered medical practitioner. Details of personnel qualifications and laboratory practices are left to be specified by the Director-General of Health, providing for a formal recognition process and room for revision as pathology practices evolve. Encompassed in the responsibilities of the licensee is the requirement that samples are received and results issued through, and management vested in, a registered medical or dental practitioner. This effectively prohibits "walk-ins" to the laboratory and indiscriminate public screening. The requirement for a person-in-charge in accordance with class and speciality of laboratory ensures that the laboratory is under the charge of the pathology profession. Examined carefully, the requirements of the Act are similar to laboratory accreditation, but are backed by legislation. Many of these details will be spelt out in the Regulations, and these in turn are likely to fall back on National professional guidelines, as accreditation does. Although not at first obvious, enforcement of the Act is based on self-regulation by pathology laboratory professionals. Sincere professional input is thus required to embrace its philosophy, ensure rational and transparent enforcement of legislation, and develop National guidelines for good pathology practices upon which enforcement may be based.
Sunway Medical Centre (SunMed) implemented Six Sigma, measurement uncertainty, and risk management after the CLSI EP23 Individualized Quality Control Plan approach. Despite the differences in all three approaches, each implementation was beneficial to the laboratory, and none was in conflict with another approach. A synthesis of these approaches, built on a solid foundation of quality control planning, can help build a strong quality management system for the entire laboratory.
Novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), named a pandemic by the WHO, is the current global health crisis. National and international collaboration are indispensable for combating COVID-19 and other similar potential outbreaks. International efforts to tackle this complex problem have led to remarkable scientific advances. Yet, as a global society, we can and must take additional measures to fight this pandemic. Undoubtedly, our approach toward COVID-19 was not perfect, and testing has not been deployed fast enough to arrest the epidemic early on. It is critical that we revise our approaches to be more prepared for pandemics as a united body by promoting global cooperation and commitment.