Quality Assurance in a Respiratory Laboratory: How compliant are you?

This study attempts to scrutinize the real-world adherence to a quality assurance within an respiratory lab, where designated time is allocated. The aim was to establish a local benchmark for performance monitoring, taking account of reasonable workplace considerations and providing a comparative reference for compliance. Three years of QA examinations were extracted. Biological Control and Linearity was assessed. A permissible variance of ±7 days from predetermined dates QA activitieswas employed. Non-compliance dates were tallied and scrutinized to identify reasons. Absolute compliance was calculated as the ratio of all executed examinations compared to the predetermined dates for QA checks. Adjusted compliance cosidered "reasonable causes" of non-compliance (staffing, bank holidays, clinical duties, equipment maintenance, conference attendance). When adjusted for reasonable circumstances, biological control checks demonstrated rates of 72% (2020-21), 78% (2021-22), and 87% (2022-23). In contrast, linearity checks exhibited higher rates of 86%, 97%, and 99% during the corresponding years. Dates of non-compliance with no articulable reason were 9.6%, 1.92% and 0% in respective years. The results indicate an improvement in compliance and the execution of QA procedures over the three-year period. This study highlights that designated time for QA activities within a working department result in a relatively high compliance rate. Staffing emerged as a primary factor influencing non-compliance, suggesting potential mitigation in centres with increased personnel. A shared understanding of the importance and rationale behind QA is likely to foster a sense of collective responsibility with the team.