Trends
After a hiatus of 2 years, the 2016 Quality in the Spotlight conference in Antwerp reconvened at a critical time. Some of the contentious issues confronting the Milan meeting were given broader discussion and a hopeful consensus appears to be forming.
Sometimes it seems the Ratings, Rankings, and Awards are legion in healthcare. The current system of Top 50, HealthGrades, Best Hospitals seem a bit like the Grammys: there's a category for everyone, and everyone goes home a winner. But the recent proliferation of metrics and awards are not only confusing, they are now impacting reimbursement. The new metrics being implemented by payers and the Affordable Healthcare Act threaten to impose a set of unproven or dubious benchmarks on hospitals. Which raises the question: is the laboratory safe from these metrics? and why don't we see more ranking of laboratories, methods, and instruments?
For those unable to attend the 2014 Milan Meeting: the 1st EFLM Strategic Conference on Defining analytical performance goals 15 years after the Stockholm Conference, here's a brief mini-review (with links) to the presentations.
There are many changes in store for the laboratory in 2012. Are they good changes? risky changes? Will these changes get us closer to our ultimate goals? The two Westgards look ahead.
Back in 2005, CLSI held a conference on "Quality Control for the Future." At that time, the future - specifically the future described by CLSI at the time - seemed like it was going to happen on an accelerated schedule. But that future has taken a long road to reach us, and there were some major breakdowns along the way.