UKNEQAS User Survey 2010-11

 

Summary of Responses

 

Participant Satisfaction Questionnaire                                August 2011

 

0. Number of Replies

45 laboratories replied to the questionnaire out of 183 sent (25.6% reply rate). Thank you to everyone who took the time out of their working day to send it back – all the information you provided will help us to improve the scheme and make sure all the improvements will benefit our participants.

 

1. Sample Delivery Times

Over the year, how would you rate the time taken to receive the EQA samples? 

n = 43, mean score = 4.3

Bad (score 1)

Poor (2)

Average (3)

Good (4)

Excellent (5)

0

1

3

22

17

 

2. Helpfulness of scheme staff? 

If you have contacted the scheme how satisfied were you with the response?

n = 33, mean score = 4.1

Bad

Poor

Average

Good

Excellent

0

1

3

21

8

 

3. User Day

Would it be a good idea to hold a user day, perhaps in conjunction with the Microbiology scheme when participants can meet staff? 

 

n = 41, mean score =3.7

Bad

Poor

Average

Good

Excellent

0

4

13

18

6

 

4. Scoring System

The scheme proposes to adopt another scoring system. Please indicate below which system you would like to see.

 

ABC

Traffic Light

Trend Analysis

Combination

Other

16

10

7

9

0

 

 

5. UK NEQAS Website (http//www.ukneqas.win-uk.net)

How often do you refer to documents and information on the website? 

n = 44

All the time

Occasionally

Rarely

Never

3

14

20

7

 

 

6. The report forms and result sheets are now available to download using the web-reporting facility, and the latter are also sent with the samples. If you would like to be notified when these documents are available on-line please provide a contact e-mail address

 

Given = 34

Not given = 10

Other = 1

 

7. Do you have any general comments about the scheme?

 

  1. I would like you to adopt the same system as other NEQAS schemes. (Regarding web-entry and reporting)
  2. Since Biochemistry’s role (from Microbiology) we have depended on paper reports. We use the Birmingham Quality site for on-line reporting. We were not fully aware of the above (UKNEQASAA) site.
  3. General NEQAS – improve on-line reporting scheme.
  4. Sometimes the return date is earlier than the arrival of the samples, or we have 1-2 days to return! (Non-UK lab in regarding delivery time)
  5. Thank you for web-reporting and electronic reports.
  6. Unable to input zero as a result.
  7. It is very well organised.
  8. Generally satisfied with the scheme.
  9. Update on problems! ie e-mail newsletter
  10.  Low level antibiotics give a high percentage error, but clinically a precise value does not have as great an impact on the patient. Maybe a level of <1mg/l should be regarded as a cut-off for vancomycin and <0.1 mg/L for gentamicin and tobramycin.

 

 

8. Do you have any suggestions for scheme improvements you would like to see?

 

  1. A new scoring system is needed that is easy to understand and where you don’t get marked down for a good result. I cannot comment on the best choice in 4 due to lack of knowledge of the systems.
  2. To consider running more than one level or high and low concentration for both gentamicin and vancomycin.
  3. We would like separate sera for testing vancomycin and gentamicin. If the gentamicin or vancomycin or both have to be repeated there often is not enough sera left.
  4. Adoption of ABC scoring system and use of the same report layout as for UKNEQAS general clinical chemistry.
  5. Other than ABC scoring, no.
  6. Traffic light gives easy visual interpretation but need trend analysis for your instruments.
  7. Combination of how you perform in comparison with other users of the same assay and an individual trend analysis. This would show more accurately how your performance overall is and high light any one off errors and enable you to see once back on track rather than the current system where it takes almost 6 months post an error to see scores reflect your performance
  8. On-line videos of good practice and appropriate procedures

 

 

 

Our Responses and Actions:

 

  1. Sometimes non-UK participants receive their samples late. In these circumstances we are prepared to accept late results
  2. Zero samples should be reported as < your lowest reportable level
  3. Although low level samples are included from time to time, because the errors are inherently likely to be high the results are not scored
  4. Communication via an e-mail newsletter is a good idea
  5. Web-reporting has caused very few problems
  6. Changes to the scoring system are under discussion
  7. Please always quote your participant number in any correspondence

 

 

Continual improvement:

 

The scheme is committed to continuing to adapt to meet the needs of participants. If you think of any ideas you would like to put forward to the scheme please contact us.