The Association of Clinical Genetic Science (ACGS)
Quality Subcommittee
would like to invite you to attend a workshop on
General Genetic Laboratory
Reporting Guidelines
Friday 11th October 2013
West Midlands Regional Genetics Laboratory,
Birmingham Womens’ Hospital, Birmingham
Details are currently being finalised but in order to help plan the workshop
programme we would appreciate if your laboratory could complete the following
questionnaire.
This meeting will be funded by the ACGS. To facilitate a productive workshop,
delegate numbers will be limited to one individual per laboratory. Travel costs will be
met by the ACGS. Full details will be circulated shortly but in the meantime if you
have any queries then please contact the Quality Subcommittee Secretary, Amy
Roe (Amy.Roe@bartshealth.nhs.uk).
Page 1 of 4
The ACGS Quality Subcommittee Questionnaire 2013
General Genetic Laboratory Reporting Guidelines
A key role for the ACGS Quality Subcommittee is the co-ordination and promotion of best practice through peer
reviewed guidelines. We acknowledge that currently there is no consistency between elements of the service that are
common to all. Therefore the Quality Subcommittee will host a one day workshop in Birmingham on the 11th October
2013 to discuss such issues with the aim to publish ‘GENERAL’ best practice guidelines across the specialities.
To ensure the success of this workshop, we would appreciate if you would complete this questionnaire by Friday 20th
September 2013 and return by email to the Quality Subcommittee Secretary, Amy Roe
(Amy.Roe@bartshealth.nhs.uk). Your response will aid in the planning of this workshop, and allow input from all
laboratories.
Please indicate your laboratory type.
Cytogenetics laboratory
Molecular Genetics laboratory
Genetics Laboratory (responding on behalf of a merged laboratory)
Other (please give details in the comments box below)
COMMENTS:
1.
Best Practice Guidelines Reporting Times across the specialities are currently stated in both calendar days
and working days e.g. ACC Prenatal Diagnosis BPG (2009) v1.00 for a full karyotype long term culture is
95% reported within 14 calendar days, and the CMGS/ACC QF-PCR for the Diagnosis of aneuploidy BPG
(2012) v3.91 rapid test guideline is 97% of samples should receive reports within 3 working days.
The Quality Subcommittee have identified that this inconsistency needs to be addressed and proposes that
all reporting times will be measured in calendar days. This reflects the time the patient is waiting on their
test result and therefore it is a reflection of the time it takes to perform the test. Such a change may result in
the need to amend the recommended turnaround times (TAT) currently in place.
Do you agree that promotion of best practice should be consistent?
Yes
No
Do you agree that the measurement of reporting times should be consistent?
Yes
No
Do you agree that the measurement of reporting times should be in calendar days?
Yes
No
Which measure does your laboratory currently use?
Working days
Calendar days
Mixture of both
Page 2 of 4
If the BPG recommended the use of calendar days then would your laboratory comply?
Yes
No
If “No” then please state your reasons in the box below
COMMENTS:
2.
The ACGS Quality Subcommittee acknowledges that the collection of genetic laboratory activity data plays
an important role in allowing laboratories to benchmark and audit the services provided. The ACGS plan to
continue and expand the collection of activity data previously carried out by the CMGS and ACC. We are
aware that there is some inconsistency across laboratories regarding recording data, and therefore TATs.
Please select how you record your data from the options given below:
Day 0 = when sample received by laboratory
Day 1 = when sample received by laboratory
Mixture of both
If you would like to comment further then please use the box below
COMMENTS:
3.
Laboratories were recently asked to complete a questionnaire to gather information relating to the grade of
staff that might be considered appropriate for the authorisation of reports once staff competence has been
demonstrated. There is currently no consistency in recommendation within the profession for AfC band
required for authorisation of reports. Cytogenetics BPG states “Validation of reports shall be carried out by a
clinical scientist at the professional level of at least Band 8a” whereas Molecular Genetics BPG states “The
authoriser must be deemed competent to approve the report”. The data collected demonstrated that a
majority of laboratories did not feel that it was necessary for all reports to be authorised by a Clinical
Scientist at band 8.
Do you agree that BPGs need to be consistent?
Yes
No
Do you agree that BPGs should state that reports are authorised by staff assessed as competent by
the laboratory rather than stating a minimum AfC band?
Yes
4.
No
If your laboratory would like to raise any further issues to be discussed at this workshop then please give full
details in the box below and provide your email address in case we need to contact you for information. It
Page 3 of 4
may not be possible to include all issues during this workshop but we will try to cover as many as possible
within the timeframe.
Thank you for completing this questionnaire.
Please email to Amy.Roe@bartshealth.nhs.uk by Friday 20th September 2013.
Page 4 of 4