This document provides a joint recommendation for venous blood sampling of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) and Latin American Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE-LATAM) of the Latin America Confederation of Clinical Biochemistry (COLABIOCLI). It offers guidance on the requirements for ensuring that blood collection is a safe and patient-centered procedure and provides practical guidance on how to successfully overcome potential barriers and obstacles to its widespread implementation. The target audience for this recommendation are healthcare staff members directly involved in blood collection. This recommendation applies to the use of a closed blood collection system and does not provide guidance for the blood collection with an open needle and syringe and catheter collections. Moreover, this document neither addresses patient consent, test ordering, sample handling and transport nor collection from children and unconscious patients. The recommended procedure is based on the best available evidence. Each step was graded using a system that scores the quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendation. The process of grading was done at several face-to-face meetings involving the same mixture of stakeholders stated previously. The main parts of this recommendation are: 1) Pre-sampling procedures, 2) Sampling procedure, 3) Post-sampling procedures and 4) Implementation. A first draft of the recommendation was circulated to EFLM members for public consultation. WG-PRE-LATAM was also invited to comment the document. A revised version has been sent for voting on to all EFLM and COLABIOCLI members and has been officially endorsed by 33/40 EFLM and 21/21 COLABIOCLI members. We encourage professionals throughout Europe and Latin America to adopt and implement this recommendation to improve the quality of blood collection practices and increase patient and workers safety.

Local inflammation is thought to contribute to the progression of diabetic nephropathy. The vitamin D receptor (VDR) activator paricalcitol has an antiproteinuric effect in human diabetic nephropathy at high doses. We have explored potential anti-inflammatory effects of VDR activator doses that do not modulate proteinuria in an experimental model of diabetic nephropathy to gain insights into potential benefits of VDR activators in those patients whose proteinuria is not decreased by this therapy. The effect of calcitriol and paricalcitol on renal function, albuminuria, and renal inflammation was explored in a rat experimental model of diabetes induced by streptozotocin. Modulation of the expression of mediators of inflammation by these drugs was explored in cultured podocytes. At the doses used, neither calcitriol nor paricalcitol significantly modified renal function or reduced albuminuria in experimental diabetes. However, both drugs reduced the total kidney mRNA expression of IL-6, monocyte chemoattractant protein (MCP)-1, and IL-18. Immunohistochemistry showed that calcitriol and paricalcitol reduced MCP-1 and IL-6 in podocytes and tubular cells as well as glomerular infiltration by macrophages, glomerular cell NF-κB activation, apoptosis, and extracellular matrix deposition. In cultured podocytes, paricalcitol and calcitriol at concentrations in the physiological and clinically significant range prevented the increase in MCP-1, IL-6, renin, and fibronectin mRNA expression and the secretion of MCP-1 to the culture media induced by high glucose. In conclusion, in experimental diabetic nephropathy VDR activation has local renal anti-inflammatory effects that can be observed even when proteinuria is not decreased. This may be ascribed to decreased inflammatory responses of intrinsic renal cells, including podocytes, to high glucose.

Quality indicators (QIs) are fundamental tools for enabling users to quantify the quality of all operational processes by comparing it against a defined criterion. QIs data should be collected over time to identify, correct, and continuously monitor defects and improve performance and patient safety by identifying and implementing effective interventions. According to the international standard for medical laboratories accreditation, the laboratory shall establish and periodically review QIs to monitor and evaluate performance throughout critical aspects of pre-, intra-, and post-analytical processes. However, while some interesting programs on indicators in the total testing process have been developed in some countries, there is no consensus for the production of joint recommendations focusing on the adoption of universal QIs and common terminology in the total testing process. A preliminary agreement has been achieved in a Consensus Conference organized in Padua in 2013, after revising the model of quality indicators (MQI) developed by the Working Group on "Laboratory Errors and Patient Safety" of the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC). The consensually accepted list of QIs, which takes into consideration both their importance and applicability, should be tested by all potentially interested clinical laboratories to identify further steps in the harmonization project.

Laboratory diagnostics develop through different phases that span from test ordering (pre-preanalytical phase), collection of diagnostic specimens (preanalytical phase), sample analysis (analytical phase), results reporting (postanalytical phase) and interpretation (post-postanalytical phase). Although laboratory medicine seems less vulnerable than other clinical and diagnostic areas, the chance of errors is not negligible and may adversely impact on quality of testing and patient safety. This article, which continues a biennial tradition of collective papers on preanalytical quality improvement, is aimed to provide further contributions for pursuing quality and harmony in the preanalytical phase, and is a synopsis of lectures of the third European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)-Becton Dickinson (BD) European Conference on Preanalytical Phase meeting entitled ‘Preanalytical quality improvement. In pursuit of harmony’ (Porto, 20–21 March 2015). The leading topics that will be discussed include unnecessary laboratory testing, management of test request, implementation of the European Union (EU) Directive on needlestick injury prevention, harmonization of fasting requirements for blood sampling, influence of physical activity and medical contrast media on in vitro diagnostic testing, recent evidence about the possible lack of necessity of the order of draw, the best practice for monitoring conditions of time and temperature during sample transportation, along with description of problems emerging from inappropriate sample centrifugation. In the final part, the article includes recent updates about preanalytical quality indicators, the feasibility of an External Quality Assessment Scheme (EQAS) for the preanalytical phase, the results of the 2nd EFLM WG-PRE survey, as well as specific notions about the evidence-based quality management of the preanalytical phase.

It has been well reported over recent years that most errors within the total testing process occur in the pre-analytical phase (46%–68.2%), an area that is usually outside of the direct control of the laboratory and which includes sample collection (phlebotomy). National and international (WHO, CLSI) guidelines recommend that the order of draw of blood during phlebotomy should be blood culture/sterile tubes, then plain tubes/gel tubes, then tubes containing additives. This prevents contamination of sample tubes with additives from previous tubes that could cause erroneous results. There have been a number of studies recently looking at whether order of draw remains a problem with modern phlebotomy techniques and materials, or it is an outdated practice followed simply because of historical reasons. In the following article, the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (EFLM WG-PRE) provides an overview and summary of the literature with regards to order of draw in venous blood collection. Given the evidence presented in this article, the EFLM WG-PRE herein concludes that a significant frequency of sample contamination does occur if order of draw is not followed during blood collection and when performing venipuncture under less than ideal circumstances, thus putting patient safety at risk. Moreover, given that order of draw is not difficult to follow and knowing that ideal phlebotomy conditions and protocols are not always followed or possible, EFLM WG-PRE supports the continued recommendation of ensuring a correct order of draw for venous blood collection.

Background: The inappropriate use of laboratory resources, due to excessive number of tests not really necessary for patient care or by failure to order the appropriate diagnostic test, may lead to wrong, missed or delayed diagnosis, thus potentially jeopardizing patient safety. It is estimated that 5–95% of tests are currently used inappropriately, depending on the appropriateness criteria, thus significantly contributing to the potential of generating medical errors, the third leading cause of death in the US. Content: In this review, we discuss the reasons as well as the medical and financial consequences of inappropriate utilization of laboratory tests. We then provide demand management (DM) tools as a means for overcoming this issue and also discuss their benefits, challenges, limitations and requirements for successful implementation. Summary and outlook: When based on current evidence, adapted to local conditions and developed in close collaboration with clinicians, DM is a reasonable strategy for progressing toward better management of over- and underuse of laboratory resources.