CMPT is in it annual report season which means it is time
for my doing my annual Management Review.
Over the years I have learned to enjoy the process.
In many respects it is like eating olives or
drinking coffee; the first time you to do one it is not particularly pleasant,
but over time they all become an “acquired taste” and they actually become
better than “not bad”.
I recognize that my career path is probably a little
different from others because I spend a lot of time in and around some of the
intricacies of Quality, and so I regularly look at the management review
requirements in a variety of documents including ISO 9001:2008 (Quality Systems),
ISO 17025:2005 (Calibration and Testing Laboratories), ISO 15189:2007 (Medical
Laboratories) and ISO 17043:2010 (Proficiency Testing Providers).
All of them have a lot in common.
All of them in one way or another speak to
reviewing existing policies and procedures, the results of audits and
assessments (both internal and external), customer feedback, comments and
complaints, and the processes of finding non-conformities or opportunities for
improvement and ensuring that the appropriate corrective and preventive actions have been
undertaken.
There are a few differences too. 15189 addresses a few additional issues, such
as monitoring turnaround time (boo-hiss. Whatawasta time!) and reviewing an
evaluation of suppliers (This is a good idea that should exist in all the other
review requirements.) and the review of quality
indicators for monitoring the laboratory’s contribution to patient care. I personally think this is a good idea, but
an example of really poor writing. I
think this is about readability and relevancy of reports, and maybe about test menus. But neither of these are issues one would or
could follow with an indicator.
9001 offers some
additional elements as well that contribute greatly to quality, including in
the laboratory. And laboratorians would
be well advised to supplement their assessment with some or all of these
because they help keep the quality system on track and current. There is an expectation to review the
organizational structure. Laboratorians
have learned all too well about the impacts of organizational change, including
both the positive and the negative aspects.
You want your workers to follow the policies and procedures set for your
laboratory. They likely will be unaware
of organizational changes that have a direct effect on those policies and
procedures. If you don’t make the
required adjustments, don’t be too surprised when problems result. This year in my review there were six policies
that needed updating to adjust for changes that have occurred over the last
year.
And let me take this one
step further. As the change management
folks are fond of saying, the only constant in the medical laboratory is
change. Programs and patient care issues
come and go on an irregularly irregular basis.
One day there is a haemodialysis program, the next day it is gone. One day there is a leukemia ward, and then it
is moved to another facility. A new
patient care initiative is dropped in.
Suddenly there is a new and urgent demand for three new tests. If management does not keep these issues in
mind, then meaningful strategic planning is impossible. At least the annual management review process
creates the opportunity to bring these issues to front-of-mind and to make some
stabs at learning from what happened last year, and planning for next
year.
So management review is not only a nice thing to do, it
provides management with the tools to make good forward thinking plans and
decisions.
Remember when management
review in the medical laboratory only meant making sure that the standard
operating procedures had a current date and signature.
Pass the olives please.
community members who go through the auditing process–which can be anxiety inducing–but you make a great point about how strong systems and dedication to continuous improvement are what management systems are all about. Thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteiso 9000
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete