Using standard and institutional mentorship models to implement SLMTA in Kenya.
Using standard and institutional mentorship models to implement SLMTA in Kenya.
复制标题
DOI：
10.4102/ajlm.v3i2.220
复制
发表时间：
2014
影响因子：
1.1
通讯作者：
Mwangi J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Makokha EP;Mwalili S;Basiye FL;Zeh C;Emonyi WI;Langat R;Luman ET;Mwangi J
肯尼亚拥有几个高性能的国际认可的研究实验室，而大多数公共部门实验室历来缺乏有效的质量管理体系。2010年，肯尼亚将首批8个区域实验室和4个国家实验室纳入了“加强实验室管理迈向认证”方案。为了解决区域实验室缺乏导师的挑战，三个实验室与附近的认可研究实验室配对或“结对”，以提供机构导师，而其他五个实验室则接受标准导师。本研究考察了最初SLMTA小组中的八个区域实验室的结果，重点是指导模式。在三个SLMTA研讨会期间，还穿插了为期三个月的改进项目实施和辅导。使用逐步实验室质量改进认证过程（SLIPTA）审核清单在基线、中期和退出时对进展进行评估，并将分数转换为0 - 5星级量表。基线时，8个实验室的平均得分为32%;所有实验室均低于一星级水平。在中期，所有实验室都测量了改进。不过，三个结对实验室平均提升了32个百分点，达到了一星到三星，而五个非结对实验室平均提升了10个百分点，仍然是零星级。退出时，结对实验室平均额外增加12个百分点（总共44个），达到二至四颗星;非结对实验室平均额外增加28个百分点（总共38个），达到一至三颗星。结对模式所使用的伙伴关系为卫生部和本地区最先进的研究实验室之间未来的合作带来了希望，以提高实验室质量。如果存在此类实验室，它们可能是宝贵的资源，应审慎使用，以加速通过可持续土地管理和技术援助启动的可持续质量改进。
Kenya is home to several high-performing internationally-accredited research laboratories, whilst most public sector laboratories have historically lacked functioning quality management systems. In 2010, Kenya enrolled an initial eight regional and four national laboratories into the Strengthening Laboratory Management Toward Accreditation (SLMTA) programme. To address the challenge of a lack of mentors for the regional laboratories, three were paired, or ‘twinned’, with nearby accredited research laboratories to provide institutional mentorship, whilst the other five received standard mentorship. This study examines results from the eight regional laboratories in the initial SLMTA group, with a focus on mentorship models. Three SLMTA workshops were interspersed with three-month periods of improvement project implementation and mentorship. Progress was evaluated at baseline, mid-term, and exit using the Stepwise Laboratory Quality Improvement Process Towards Accreditation (SLIPTA) audit checklist and scores were converted into a zero- to five-star scale. At baseline, the mean score for the eight laboratories was 32%; all laboratories were below the one-star level. At mid-term, all laboratories had measured improvements. However, the three twinned laboratories had increased an average of 32 percentage points and reached one to three stars; whilst the five non-twinned laboratories increased an average of 10 percentage points and remained at zero stars. At exit, twinned laboratories had increased an average 12 additional percentage points (44 total), reaching two to four stars; non-twinned laboratories increased an average of 28 additional percentage points (38 total), reaching one to three stars. The partnership used by the twinning model holds promise for future collaborations between ministries of health and state-of-the-art research laboratories in their regions for laboratory quality improvement. Where they exist, such laboratories may be valuable resources to be used judiciously so as to accelerate sustainable quality improvement initiated through SLMTA.