all common checklist

Master

Every patientdeserves theGOLD STANDARD ...

All Common Checklist

CAP Accreditation Program

College of American Pathologists325 Waukegan RoadNorthfield, IL 60093-2750www.cap.org 04.21.2014

Disclaimer and Copyright NoticeOn-site inspections are performed with the edition of the Checklists mailed to a facility at the completionof the application or reapplication process, not necessarily those currently posted on the Web site. Thechecklists undergo regular revision and a new edition may be published after the inspection materials aresent.

For questions about the use of the Checklists or Checklist interpretation, email [email protected] or call800-323-4040 or 847-832-7000 (international customers, use country code 001).

The Checklists used for inspection by the College of American Pathologists' Accreditation Programs havebeen created by the CAP and are copyrighted works of the CAP. The CAP has authorized copying anduse of the checklists by CAP inspectors in conducting laboratory inspections for the Commission onLaboratory Accreditation and by laboratories that are preparing for such inspections. Except as permittedby section 107 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. sec. 107, any other use of the Checklists constitutesinfringement of the CAP's copyrights in the Checklists.The CAP will take appropriate legal action to protectthese copyrights.

All Checklists are ©2014. College of American Pathologists. All rights reserved.

2 of 37

04.21.2014All Common Checklist

[email protected]

All Common Checklist

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY OF CHANGES.....................................................................................................................4UNDERSTANDING THE CAP ACCREDITATION CHECKLIST COMPONENTS..................................6INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................6DEFINITION OF TERMS........................................................................................................................6ALL COMMON CHECKLIST..................................................................................................................9

PROFICIENCY TESTING.....................................................................................................................................................9QUALITY MANAGEMENT..................................................................................................................................................14

GENERAL ISSUES......................................................................................................................................................14PROCEDURE MANUAL...............................................................................................................................................18RESULTS REPORTING...............................................................................................................................................21REAGENTS..................................................................................................................................................................22INSTRUMENTS AND EQUIPMENT............................................................................................................................26

Instrument and Equipment Maintenance/Function Checks...................................................................................26Thermometers.......................................................................................................................................................28Temperature-Dependent Instruments, Equipment, and Environments..................................................................29

TEST METHOD VALIDATION/VERIFICATION...................................................................................................................30METHOD PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS..........................................................................................................31REFERENCE INTERVALS...........................................................................................................................................36

3 of 37


ON-LINE CHECKLIST AVAILABILITY

Participants of the CAP accreditation programs may download the checklists from the CAP Web site (www.cap.org)by logging into e-LAB Solutions. They are available in different checklist types and formatting options, including:

● Master — contains ALL of the requirements and instructions available in PDF, Word/XML or Excel formats● Custom — customized based on the laboratory's activity (test) menu; available in PDF, Word/XML or Excel

formats● Changes Only — contains only those requirements with significant changes since the previous checklist

edition in a track changes format to show the differences; in PDF version only. Requirements that havebeen moved or merged appear in a table at the end of the file.

SUMMARY OF CHECKLIST EDITION CHANGESAll Common Checklist

04/21/2014 Edition

The information below includes a listing of checklist requirements with significant changes in the current editionand previous edition of this checklist. The list is separated into three categories:

1. New2. Revised:

● Modifications that may require a change in policy, procedure, or process for continued compliance;or

● A change to the Phase3. Deleted/Moved/Merged:

● Deleted● Moved — Relocation of a requirement into a different checklist (requirements that have been

resequenced within the same checklist are not listed)● Merged — The combining of similar requirements

NOTE: The listing of requirements below is from the Master version of the checklist. The customized checklistversion created for on-site inspections and self-evaluations may not list all of these requirements.

NEW Checklist Requirements

Effective DateRequirement04/21/2014COM.0425004/21/2014COM.0430007/29/2013COM.2995004/21/2014COM.3052504/21/2014COM.3055004/21/2014COM.3057504/21/2014COM.3060004/21/2014COM.3062504/21/2014COM.3065004/21/2014COM.3067504/21/2014COM.3070004/21/2014COM.3072504/21/2014COM.3075004/21/2014COM.3077504/21/2014COM.3080007/29/2013COM.4045007/29/2013COM.4063007/29/2013COM.40640

4 of 37


REVISED Checklist Requirements

Effective DateRequirement04/21/2014COM.0120004/21/2014COM.0140007/29/2013COM.0150007/29/2013COM.0170004/21/2014COM.0180004/21/2014COM.0190004/21/2014COM.0420007/29/2013COM.1010007/29/2013COM.1020007/29/2013COM.1025007/29/2013COM.3025004/21/2014COM.3035007/29/2013COM.3040007/29/2013COM.3045004/21/2014COM.4000004/21/2014COM.4025004/21/2014COM.4040007/29/2013COM.4050004/21/2014COM.4062007/29/2013COM.50000

DELETED/MOVED/MERGED Checklist Requirements

Effective DateRequirement04/20/2014COM.10400

5 of 37


UNDERSTANDING THE CAP ACCREDITATIONCHECKLIST COMPONENTS

All checklist requirements contain a requirement number, subject header, phase, and a declarative statement.Some requirements also contain a NOTE and/or Evidence of Compliance.

The NOTE portion of a checklist requirement provides additional detail to assist in interpreting the requirement.

Evidence of Compliance is intended to:● Suggest specific examples of acceptable documentation; some elements are required● Assist in inspection preparation and for managing ongoing compliance● Drive consistent understanding of requirements

If a policy or procedure is referenced within a requirement, it is only repeated in the Evidence of Compliance ifsuch statement adds clarity. All policies or procedures covered in the CAP checklists must be documented. Aseparate policy or procedure may not be needed for items in EOC if it is already addressed by an overarchingpolicy.

The Master version of the checklist also contains references and the inspector R.O.A.D. instructions (Read,Observe, Ask, Discover), which can provide valuable insight for the basis of requirements and on how compliancewill be assessed.

INTRODUCTION

The All Common Checklist (COM) contains a core set of requirements that apply to all areas performing laboratorytests and procedures. In some instances, the same requirement exists in both the COM Checklist and in adiscipline-specific checklist, but with a different checklist note that has a more specific requirement. In thesesituations, the discipline-specific requirement takes precedence over the COM requirement.

One COM Checklist is provided for inspection of each laboratory section or department. If more than one inspectoris assigned to inspect a section, each inspector must be familiar with the COM requirements and ensure that alltesting is in compliance.

Certain requirements are different for waived versus nonwaived tests. Refer to the checklist headings and explanatorytext to determine applicability based on test complexity. The current list of tests waived under CLIA may be foundat http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfClia/analyteswaived.cfm

Note for non-US laboratories: Checklist requirements apply to all laboratories unless a specific disclaimer ofexclusion is stated in the checklist.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

Annual - Every 12 calendar months

Biennial - Every 24 calendar months

Calibrator, historical - The set of archived results of a single-point calibrator that demonstrates stability of theassay over time

Check - Examination to determine the accuracy, quality or presence of any attribute of a test system

Confirmation - Substantiation of the correctness of a value or process

6 of 37


http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfClia/analyteswaived.cfm

Correlation - Establishment of agreement between two or more measured values

Credentialing - The process of obtaining, verifying, and assessing the qualifications of a practitioner to providecare in a health care organization

Digital image analysis - The computer-assisted detection or quantification of specific features in an image followingenhancement and processing of that image, including immunohistochemistry, DNA analysis, morphometric analysis,and in situ hybridization

Equipment - Single apparatus or set of devices or apparatuses needed to perform a specific task

Examination - In the context of checklist requirements, examination refers to the process of inspection of tissuesand samples prior to analysis. An examination is not an analytical test.

FDA - In the context of checklist requirements, FDA should be taken to mean the national, state, or provincialauthority having jurisdiction over in vitro diagnostic test systems.

Function Check - Confirmation that an instrument or item of equipment operates according to manufacturer'sspecifications before routine use, at prescribed intervals, or after minor adjustment (e.g. base line calibration,balancing/zero adjustment, thermometer calibration, reagent delivery).

High complexity - Rating given by the FDA to commercially marketed in vitro diagnostic tests based on their risksto public health. Tests in this category are seen to have the highest risks to public health.

Instrument - An analytical unit that uses samples to perform chemical or physical assays (e.g. chemistry analyzer,hematology analyzer)

Instrument platform - Any of a series of similar or identical analytical methods intended by their manufacturer togive identical patient results across all models

Laboratory Director - The individual who is responsible for the overall operation and administration of the laboratory,including provision of timely, reliable and clinically relevant test results and compliance with applicable regulationsand accreditation requirements.This individual is listed on the laboratory's CAP and CLIA certificate (as applicable).

Maintenance - Those activities that prolong the life of an instrument or minimize breakdowns or mechanicalmalfunctions. Examples include cleaning, changing parts, fluids, tubing, lubrication, electronic checks, etc.

Moderate complexity - Rating given by the FDA to commercially marketed in vitro diagnostic tests based on theirrisks to public health

Modification of manufacturer's instructions - Any change to the manufacturer's supplied ingredients ormodifications to the assay as set forth in the manufacturer's labeling and instructions, including specimen type,instrumentation or procedure that could affect its performance specifications for sensitivity, specificity, accuracy,or precision or any change to the stated purpose of the test, its approved test population, or any claims related tointerpretation of the results

Nonwaived - Tests categorized as either moderately complex (including provider-performed microscopy) or highlycomplex by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), according to a scoring system used by the FDA

Performance verification - The set of processes that demonstrate an instrument or an item of equipment operatesaccording to expectations upon installation and after repair or reconditioning (e.g. replacement of critical components)

Policy - 1) Set of basic principles or guidelines that direct or restrict the facility's plans, actions, and decisions; 2)Statement that tells what should or should not be done; intent, rules, guidelines

7 of 37


Procedure - 1) Specified way to carry out an activity of a process (also referred to by ISO as "work instructions";2) Set of steps performed that tells "how to do it" to achieve a specified outcome, including decisions to be made

Process - 1) Set of interrelated or interacting activities that transforms inputs into outputs; 2) Series of events,stages, or phases that takes place over time that tells "what happens" or "how it works"

Reagent - Any substance in a test system other than a solvent or support material that is required for the targetanalyte to be detected and its value measured in a sample.

Report errors - A report element (see GEN.41096) that is either incorrect or incomplete

Section Director - The individual who is responsible for the medical, technical and/or scientific oversight of aspecialty or section of the laboratory.

Semiannual - Every 6 calendar months

Subject to U.S. Regulations - Laboratories located within the United States and laboratories located outside ofthe US that have obtained or applied for a CLIA certificate to perform laboratory testing on specimens collectedin the US for the assessment of the health of human beings.

Telepathology - The practice in which the pathologist views digitized or analog video or still image(s), and rendersan interpretation that is included in a formal diagnostic report or document in the patient record.

Testing personnel - Individuals responsible for performing laboratory assays and reporting laboratory results

Test - A qualitative, semiqualitative, quantitative, or semiquantitative procedure for detecting the presence of, ormeasuring an analyte

Test system - The process that includes pre-analytic, analytic, and post-analytic steps used to produce a testresult or set of results. A test system may be manual, automated, multi-channel or single-use and can includereagents, components, equipment or instruments required to produce results. A test system may encompassmultiple identical analyzers or devices. Different test systems may be used for the same analyte.

Validation - A defined process by which a laboratory confirms that a laboratory-developed or modifiedFDA-cleared/approved test performs as intended or claimed.

Verification - The process by which a laboratory determines that an FDA-cleared/approved test performs accordingto the specifications set forth by the manufacturer.

Waived - A category of tests defined as "simple laboratory examinations and procedures which have an insignificantrisk of an erroneous result." Laboratories performing waived tests are subject to minimal regulatory requirements.

8 of 37


ALL COMMON CHECKLIST

PROFICIENCY TESTING

Definitions:

Proficiency testing (PT) is defined as determination of laboratory testing performance by means of interlaboratorycomparisons, in which a PT program periodically sends multiple specimens to members of a group of laboratoriesfor analysis and/or identification; the program then compares each laboratory's results with those of other laboratoriesin the group and/or with an assigned value…(adapted from Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute HarmonizedTerminology Database; available at http://www.clsi.org/).

Alternative assessment is defined as determination of laboratory testing performance by means other than PT--forexample, split-sample testing, testing by a different method, etc.

Inspector Instructions:

● Sampling of proficiency testing policies and procedures● Sampling of evaluations of unacceptable proficiency testing results● Sampling of proficiency testing records including worksheets, instrument read-outs,

reporting forms, physically signed attestation statement and laboratory director/designeereview

● Records of semi-annual alternative assessment testing, if applicable● Evaluations of ungraded proficiency testing results, if applicable

● How do you ensure proficiency testing samples are rotated among all testing personnel?● In what situations would you repeat a proficiency testing sample?● What do you consider unacceptable proficiency testing performance and how do you

determine corrective action?● How do you evaluate ungraded proficiency testing?

● Select a representative sample of unacceptable proficiency testing results and followdocumentation from original testing to final determination of root cause. Determine ifthe procedures and processes produce a thorough investigation with appropriatecorrective action taken

Phase IIPT ProcedureCOM.01000

The laboratory has written procedures for proficiency testing sufficient for the extent andcomplexity of testing done in the laboratory.

NOTE: The laboratory must have written procedures for the proper handling, analysis, review andreporting of proficiency testing materials. There must be written procedure(s) for investigation andcorrection of problems that are identified by unacceptable proficiency testing results.The laboratoryshould also have procedure(s) for investigation of results that, although acceptable show bias ortrends suggesting a problem.

CAP-accredited laboratories must participate in proficiency testing (PT) (when available throughCAP or a CAP-accepted alternate provider) for all patient tests designated by CAP. The current list

9 of 37


http://www.clsi.org/

of analytes for which CAP requires PT is available on the CAP website [http://www.cap.org/] or byphoning 800-323-4040 (or 847-832-7000), option 1.

The CAP office audits PT participation to assure that accredited laboratories participate in PT asappropriate.

Phase IIUngraded PT ChallengesCOM.01100

The laboratory has a procedure for assessing its performance on PT challenges that wereintended to be graded, but were not.

NOTE: This requirement addresses PT challenges that were intended to be graded, but were not,for reasons such as: 1) the laboratory submitted its results after the cut-off date, 2) the laboratorydid not submit results, 3) the laboratory did not complete the result form correctly (for example,submitting the wrong method code or recording the result in the wrong place). Also, if possible, thelaboratory should assess its performance on PT challenges that were not graded because of lackof consensus. For guidance on the approach to these situations, refer to appendix I in the CAPLaboratory Accreditation Manual for listing of PT exception codes and actions.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Records of review and evaluation of ungraded PT challenges

REFERENCES1) Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Clinical laboratory improvement amendments

of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24):3705 [42CFR493.1236(a)(2)]

**REVISED** 04/21/2014Phase IActivity MenuCOM.01200

The laboratory's current CAP Activity Menu accurately reflects the testing performed.

NOTE: The Activity Menu should at all times reflect the laboratory’s current testing. The accuracyof the Activity Menu can be assessed by inquiry of responsible individuals, and by examination ofthe laboratory's test requisition(s), computer order screens, procedure manuals, or patient reports.All tests listed on the CAP Master Activity Menu performed by the laboratory must be reflected onits activity menu, and those that have been discontinued must have been removed.

In order to ensure proper customization of the checklists, the laboratory should also ensure thatthe activity menu is accurate for non-test activities, such as methods and types of services offered.

Some activities are included on the Master Activity Menu using more generic groupings or panelsinstead of listing the individual tests. The Master Activity Menu represents only those analytes thatare directly measured. Calculations are not included, with a few exceptions (e.g. INR, hematocrit).

If any tests omitted from the laboratory’s Activity Menu are not covered by the checklists providedfor the inspection, the inspector should contact the CAP (800-323-4040) for instructions.

REFERENCES1) Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Clinical laboratory improvement amendments

of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2004(Oct 1): 985 [42CFR493.51]

Phase IIPT ParticipationCOM.01300

The laboratory participates in the appropriate required proficiency testing (PT)/externalquality assessment (EQA) program accepted by CAP for the patient testing performed.

NOTE 1: The list of analytes for which CAP requires proficiency testing is available on the CAPwebsite [http://www.cap.org/] or by phoning 800-323-4040 (or 847-832-7000), option 1. A laboratory'sparticipation in proficiency testing must include all analytes on this list for which it performs patienttesting.

NOTE 2: This checklist requirement applies to both waived and nonwaived tests.

10 of 37


http://www.cap.org/

http://www.cap.org/

NOTE 3: For laboratories subject to US regulations, participation in proficiency testing may bethrough CAP PT Programs or another proficiency testing provider accepted by CAP. Laboratorieswill not be penalized if they are unable to participate in an oversubscribed program. If unable toparticipate, however, the laboratory must implement an alternative assessment procedure for theaffected analytes. For regulated analytes, if the CAP and CAP-accepted PT programs areoversubscribed, CMS requires the laboratory to attempt to enroll in another CMS-approved PTprogram.

NOTE 4: For laboratories not subject to US regulations, participation in proficiency testing must bethrough CAP PT Programs. Laboratories may use acceptable alternatives when the CAP is unableto deliver PT due to oversubscribed programs, stability issues or customs denial, contingent onCAP approval. (This went into effect as of the 2014 Proficiency Testing Program year.) If unable toparticipate, however, the laboratory must implement an alternative assessment procedure for theaffected analytes.

NOTE 5: Proficiency testing for HER2 is method specific. If the laboratory performs HER2 testingby multiple methods, the laboratory must participate in PT for each method.

A. HER2 interpretation by immunohistochemistry (IHC): If the laboratory interprets its HER2 testresults from IHC stains prepared at another facility, the laboratory must:

● Enroll in an appropriate PT Program● Send PT materials to the staining facility for preparation, and● Interpret the resulting stains using the same procedures that are used for patient specimens

B. HER2 interpretation by FISH (or ISH): If the laboratory sends its FISH (or ISH) slides forhybridization to another facility, the laboratory must perform an alternative assessment of the testtwice annually and may not participate in formal (external) PT.

NOTE 6: For purposes of photograph/image identification in CAP PT Programs, it is stronglyrecommended that the current CAP Surveys Hematology Glossary be readily available to the benchtechnologist in the hematology and urinalysis sections.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Records such as CAP order form or purchase order indicating that the laboratory is enrolled in

CAP PT Programs for all analytes that CAP requires PT OR record of completed/submittedresult forms for all analytes on the activity menu


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 1992(Feb 28):7146 [42CFR493.801]2) Tholen DW. Reference values and participant means as targets in proficiency testing. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1993;117:885-889

3) Borsotti M. External quality assessment scheme in Tuscany, Italy. Ann 1st Super Sanita. 1995;31:175-186

4) Westgard JO, et al. Laboratory precision performance. State of the art versus operating specifications that assure the analytical qualityrequired by clinical laboratory improvement amendments proficiency testing. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1996;120:621-625

5) Ross JW, et al. The accuracy of laboratory measurements in clinical chemistry. A study of 11 routine chemistry analytes in the Collegeof American Pathologists chemistry survey with fresh frozen serum, definitive methods, and reference materials. Arch Pathol Lab Med.1998;122:587-608

6) College of American Pathologists, Commission on Laboratory Accreditation. Standards for laboratory accreditation; standard III. Northfield,IL: CAP, 1998

7) Dale JC, Hamrick HJ. Neonatal bilirubin testing practices. Reports from 312 laboratories enrolled in the College of American PathologistsExcel proficiency testing program. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2000;124:1425-1428

8) Plebani M, et al. External quality assessment for serum proteins: state of the art. Clin Chem. 2001;47(suppl):A35

9) Panteghini M, et al. External quality assessment scheme for biochemical markers of cardiac damage. Clin Chem. 2001;47(suppl):A195

10) Wilson JF, et al. Primary standardization of assays for anticonvulsant drugs: comparison of accuracy and precision. Clin Chem.2002;48:1963-1969

11) Taylor A, et al. Comparison of procedures for evaluating laboratory performance in external quality assessment schemes for lead inblood and aluminum in serum demonstrates the need for common quality specifications. Clin Chem. 2002;48:2000-2007

12) Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guidelinerecommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2007;131:18-43

13) Nakhleh RE, Grimm EE, Idowu MO, et al. Laboratory compliance with the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of AmericanPathologists (ASC/CAP) guidelines for human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2) testing: a College of American Pathologists survey of757 laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med 134:728034, 2010

11 of 37


**REVISED** 04/21/2014Phase IIAttestation PageCOM.01400

The proficiency testing attestation statement is signed by the laboratory director or designeeand the individual performing the testing.

NOTE: Physical signatures must appear on the original paper attestation form. A listing of typednames on the attestation statement does not meet the intent of the requirement.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Appropriately signed attestation statement from submitted PT result forms


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 1992(Feb 28):7146 [42CFR493.801(b)(1)]

**REVISED** 07/29/2013Phase IIAlternative Performance AssessmentCOM.01500

For tests for which CAP does not require PT, the laboratory at least semi-annually exercisesan alternative performance assessment system for determining the reliability of analytictesting.

NOTE 1: Appropriate alternative performance assessment procedures include participation in anexternal PT program not required by CAP; participation in an ungraded/educational PT program;split sample analysis with reference or other laboratories, split samples with an established in-housemethod, clinical validation by chart review, or other suitable and documented means. It is theresponsibility of the laboratory director to define such alternative assessment procedures and thecriteria for successful performance in accordance with good clinical and scientific laboratory practice.

NOTE 2: For FISH testing, alternative assessment may be performed by method and specimentype, rather than for each tested abnormality (i.e. one program for all FISH cytogenetics testsperformed on cell suspensions). Additionally, for sequencing based testing such as Sanger,pyrosequencing and next generation, alternative assessment may be performed by method andspecimen type. For tests such as allergen testing, alternative assessment may be performed inbatches of analogous tests.

NOTE 3: Semi-annual alternative performance assessment must be performed on tests for whichexternal PT is not available.

NOTE 4: This checklist requirement applies to both waived and nonwaived tests.

The list of analytes for which CAP requires proficiency testing is available on the CAP website[http://www.cap.org/] or by phoning 800-323-4040 (or 847-832-7000), option 1.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ List of tests defined by the laboratory as requiring alternative assessments AND✓ Records of those assessments


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24):7184 [42CFR493.1236(c)(1)]2) Shahangian S, et al. A system to monitor a portion of the total testing process in medical clinics and laboratories. Feasibility of a

split-specimen design. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1998;122:503-5113) Shahangian S, Cohn RD. Variability of laboratory test results. Am J Clin Pathol. 2000;113:521-527

4) CLSI. Assessment of Laboratory Tests When Proficiency Testing is not Available; Approved Guideline-Second Edition. CLSI DocumentGP29-A2. [ISBN 1-56238-673-5]. CLSI, 940 West Valley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne, PA 19087-1898 USA, 2008

5) Marks V. False-positive immunoassay results: a multicenter survey of erroneous immunoassay results from assays of 74 analytes in10 donors from 66 laboratories in seven countries. Clin Chem. 2002;48:2008-2016

Phase IIPT Integration Routine WorkloadCOM.01600

The laboratory integrates all proficiency testing samples within the routine laboratoryworkload, and those samples are analyzed by personnel who routinely test patient/clientsamples, using the same primary method systems as for patient/client/donor samples.

12 of 37


http://www.cap.org/

NOTE: Duplicate analysis of any proficiency sample is acceptable only if patient/client specimensare routinely analyzed in the same manner.With respect to morphologic examinations (identificationof cell types and microorganisms; review of electrophoretic patterns, etc.), group review andconsensus identifications are permitted only for unknown samples that would ordinarily be reviewedby more than one person in an actual patient sample.

If the laboratory uses multiple methods for an analyte, proficiency samples should be analyzed bythe primary method. The educational purposes of proficiency testing are best served by a rotationthat allows all technologists to be involved in the proficiency testing program. Proficiency testingrecords must be retained and can be an important part of the competency and continuing educationdocumentation in the personnel files of the individuals. When external proficiency testing materialsare not available, the semi-annual alternative performance assessment process should also beintegrated within the routine workload, if practical.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written policy describing proper handling of PT specimens AND✓ Instrument printout and/or work records AND✓ Completed attestation pages from submitted PT result forms


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 1992(Feb 28):7146 [42CFR493.801(b)]2) Shahangian S, et al. Toward optimal PT use. Med Lab Observ. 2000;32(4):32-43

3) Parsons PJ. Evaluation of blood lead proficiency testing: comparison of open and blind paradigms. Clin Chem. 2001;47:322-330

**REVISED** 07/29/2013Phase IIPT EvaluationCOM.01700

There is ongoing evaluation of PT and alternative assessment results, with prompt correctiveaction taken for unacceptable results.

NOTE: Primary records related to PT and alternative assessment testing are retained for two years(unless a longer retention period is required elsewhere in this checklist for specific analytes ordisciplines).These include all instrument tapes, work cards, computer printouts, evaluation reports,evidence of review, and documentation of follow-up/corrective action.

For laboratories outside the US, PT failures relating to problems with shipping and specimen stabilityshould include working with local customs and health regulators to ensure appropriate transit ofproficiency testing specimens.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Records of ongoing, timely review of all PT reports and alternative assessment results by the

laboratory director or designee AND✓ Records of investigation of "unacceptable" PT and alternative assessment results including

records of corrective action that is appropriate to the nature and magnitude of the problem

REFERENCES1) Ehrmeyer SS, et al. Use of alternative rules (other than the 1-2s) for evaluating interlaboratory performance data. Clin Chem.

1988:34:250-2562) Klee GG, Forsman RW. A user's classification of problems identified by proficiency testing surveys. Arch Pathol Lab Med.

1988;112:371-3733) Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Clinical laboratory improvement amendments

of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 1992(Feb 28):7173 [42CFR493.1407(e)(4)(iv)]4) Steindel SJ, et al. Reasons for proficiency testing failures in clinical chemistry and blood gas analysis. A College of American Pathologists

Q-Probes study in 655 laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1996;120:1094-11015) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Using Proficiency Testing to Improve the Clinical Laboratory; Approved

Guideline—Second Edition. CLSI document GP27-A2 (ISBN 1-56238-632-8). Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 940 WestValley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-1898 USA, 2007

6) Shahangian S, et al. Toward optimal PT use. Med Lab Observ. 2000;32(4):32-43

7) Zaki Z, et al. Self-improvement by participant interpretation of proficiency testing data from events with 2 to 5 samples. Clin Chem.2000;46:A70

**REVISED** 04/21/2014Phase IIPT Interlaboratory CommunicationCOM.01800

13 of 37


There is a policy that prohibits interlaboratory communication about proficiency testingsamples until after the deadline for submission of data to the proficiency testing provider.

NOTE:There is a strict prohibition against interlaboratory communications about proficiency testingsamples until after the deadline for submission of data to the proficiency testing provider. Thelaboratory director is responsible for enforcing this prohibition. Documentation of training on thehandling of PT samples and prevention of interlaboratory communication is strongly recommended.


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 1992(Feb 28):7146 [42CFR493.801(b)(3)]2) Bierig JR. Comparing PT results can put a lab's CLIA license on the line. Northfield, IL: College of American Pathologists CAP Today.

2002;16(2):84-87

**REVISED** 04/21/2014Phase IIPT ReferralCOM.01900

There is a policy that prohibits referral of proficiency testing specimens to another laboratoryor acceptance from another laboratory.

NOTE: This prohibition takes precedence over the requirement that proficiency testing specimensbe handled in the same manner as patient specimens. For example, a laboratory's routine procedurefor review of abnormal blood smears might be referral of the smear to a pathologist located atanother site. For proficiency testing specimens, the referring laboratory must NOT follow its routineprocedure in this situation. Rather, the laboratory must submit a PT result of "test not performed"since the review does not occur within the referring laboratory.

For laboratories subject to US regulations, this applies even if the second laboratory is in the samehealth care system. It is the responsibility of the laboratory director to ensure that this prohibitionis enforced.

Documentation of training on referral and acceptance of PT samples is strongly recommended.

Refer to 'Tips for Avoiding Proficiency Testing Referral' on the CAP website (e-LAB Solutions,Laboratory Accreditation, LAP Resources for Laboratories) for further information.


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 1992(Feb 28): [42CFR493.801(b)(4)]

QUALITY MANAGEMENT

GENERAL ISSUES


● Sampling of QM policies and procedures● QM/QC program, including pre-analytic, analytic and post-analytic monitor records and

corrective action when indicators do not meet threshold● Incident/error log and corrective action● Records of high school graduate high complexity test review by supervisor● Records of monthly review of instrument/equipment maintenance and function checks● Biannual instrument/method comparison records

14 of 37


● How do you evaluate data on the incident/error log? How do you determine appropriatecorrective action?

● As a staff member, what is your involvement with quality management?● How do you detect and correct laboratory errors?

● Follow an incident identified on the incident/error log and follow actions includingnotification and resolution

● Select several problems identified by the QM plan and follow tracking and correctiveaction. Determine if the methods used led to discovery and effective correction of theproblem.

Phase IIDocumented QM/QC PlanCOM.04000

The laboratory has a written quality management/quality control (QM/QC) program.

NOTE: The program must ensure quality throughout the pre-analytic, analytic, and post-analytic(reporting) phases of testing, including patient identification and preparation; specimen collection,identification, preservation, transportation, and processing; and accurate, timely result reporting.The program must be capable of detecting problems in the laboratory's systems, and identifyingopportunities for system improvement. The laboratory must be able to develop plans ofcorrective/preventive action based on data from its QM system.

All QM requirements in the Laboratory General Checklist pertain to the laboratory.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Records reflecting conformance with the program as designed AND✓ Results of quality surveillance


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 1992(Feb 28):7176 [42CFR493.1445(e)(5)]2) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Quality Management System: A Model for Laboratory Services; Approved

Guideline—Fourth Edition. CLSI document QMS-A4 (ISBN 1-56238-761-8 [Print]; ISBN 1-56238-762-6 [Electronic]). Clinical andLaboratory Standards Institute, 940 West Valley Road, Suite 2500, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087 USA, 2011.

3) Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Clinical laboratory improvement amendmentsof 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24): [42CFR493.1289]

Phase IIUnusual Laboratory ResultsCOM.04050

There is a documented system in operation to detect and correct significant clerical andanalytical errors, and unusual laboratory results, in a timely manner.

NOTE: One common method is review of results by a qualified person (technologist, supervisor,pathologist) before release from the laboratory, but there is no requirement for supervisory reviewof all reported data for single analyte tests that do not include interpretation. In computerizedlaboratories, there should be automatic "traps" for improbable results. The system for detectingclerical errors, significant analytical errors, and unusual laboratory results must provide for timelycorrection of errors, i.e. before results become available for clinical decision making. For confirmederrors detected after reporting, corrections must be promptly made and reported to the orderingphysician or referring laboratory, as applicable.

Each procedure must include a listing of common situations that may cause analytically inaccurateresults, together with a defined protocol for dealing with such analytic errors or interferences. Thismay require alternate testing methods; in some situations, it may not be possible to report resultsfor some or all of the tests requested.

The intent of this requirement is NOT to require verification of all results outside the reference(normal) range.

15 of 37


Evidence of Compliance:✓ Records of review of results OR records of consistent implementation of the error detection

system(s) defined in the procedure AND✓ Records of timely corrective action of identified errors

REFERENCES1) Dufour D, et al. The clinical significance of delta checks. Am J Clin Pathol. 1998;110:531

2) Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Clinical laboratory improvement amendmentsof 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24): [42CFR493.1281(b)]

Phase IISupervisory Result ReviewCOM.04100

In the absence of on-site supervisors, high complexity testing performed by trained highschool graduates qualifying as high complexity testing personnel is reviewed by thelaboratory director or supervisor/general supervisor within 24 hours.

NOTE: The CAP does NOT require supervisory review of all test results before or after reportingto patient records. Rather, this requirement is intended to address only that situation for "highcomplexity testing" performed by trained high school graduates qualifying under the CLIA regulation42CFR493.1489(b)(5)(i)(A)(B) when a qualified supervisor/general supervisor is not present.

The qualifications to perform high complexity testing can be accessed using the following link: CAPPersonnel Requirements by Testing Complexity.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written policy defining the review process and personnel whose results require review AND✓ Records of result review for specified personnel


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 1992(Feb 28):7182 [42CFR493.1463(a)(3) and 42CFR493.1463(c)]: 7183 [42CFR493.1489(b)(1)] and[42CFR493.1489(b)(5)]

Phase IISpecimen Collection ManualCOM.04150

There is a documented procedure describing methods for patient identification, patientpreparation, specimen collection and labeling, specimen preservation, and conditions fortransportation, and storage before testing, consistent with good laboratory practice.

NOTE:The proximity of the patient to the test site does not preclude the need for proper identificationsystems to prevent reporting of one patient's result to another's record. Refer to the SpecimenCollection section of the Laboratory General Checklist for additional information.

Identification requirements apply to aliquots as well as to primary specimens.


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Oct 1):1034 [42CFR493.1242(a)]

**REVISED** 04/21/2014Phase IIInstrument/Equipment Record ReviewCOM.04200

Instrument and equipment maintenance and function check records are reviewed andassessed at least monthly by the laboratory director or designee.

**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IIComparability of Instruments/MethodsCOM.04250

If the laboratory uses more than one nonwaived instrument/method to test for a given analyte,the instruments/methods are checked against each other at least twice a year for comparabilityof results.

16 of 37


http://www.cap.org/apps/docs/laboratory_accreditation/build/pdf/personnel_requirements_by_testing_complexity.pdf

http://www.cap.org/apps/docs/laboratory_accreditation/build/pdf/personnel_requirements_by_testing_complexity.pdf

NOTE:This requirement applies to tests performed on the same or different instrument makes/modelsor by different methods. The purpose of the requirement is to evaluate the relationship betweentest results using different methodologies, instruments, or testing sites.This comparison is requiredonly for nonwaived instruments/methods accredited under a single CAP number. The laboratorymust establish a protocol for this check that includes acceptance criteria.

Quality control data may be used for this comparison for tests performed on the same instrumentplatform, with both control materials and reagents of the same manufacturer and lot number.

Otherwise, the use of human samples, rather than stabilized commercial controls, is preferred toavoid potential matrix effects. The use of pooled patient samples is acceptable since there is nochange in matrix. In cases when availability or pre-analytical stability of patient/client specimens isa limiting factor, alternative protocols based on QC or reference materials may be necessary butthe materials used should be validated (when applicable) to have the same response as freshhuman samples for the instruments/methods involved.

This requirement only applies when the instruments/reagents are producing the same reportableresult. For example, some laboratories may use multiple aPTT reagents with variable sensitivity tothe lupus anticoagulant. If these are defined as separate tests, then this requirement does not applyunless each type of aPTT test is performed on more than one analyzer.

For Microbiology testing, this requirement applies when two instruments (same or differentmanufacturers) are used to detect the same analyte. Two or more detectors or incubation cellsconnected to a single data collection, analysis and reporting computer need not be consideredseparate systems (e.g. multiple incubation and monitoring cells in a continuous monitoring bloodculture instrument, two identical blood culture instruments connected to a single computer system,or multiple thermocycler cells in a real time polymerase chain reaction instrument). This checklistrequirement does not apply to multiple analytical methods (e.g. antigen typing versus culture ordetection of DNA versus a biochemical characteristic) designed to detect the same analyte.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written procedure for performing instrument/method comparison AND✓ Records of comparability studies reflecting performance at least twice per year with appropriate

specimen types

REFERENCES1) Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Medicare, Medicaid and CLIA programs;

CLIA fee collection; correction and final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24):5236 [42CFR493.1281(a)]2) Podczasy JJ, et al. Clinical evaluation of the Accu-Chek Advantage blood glucose monitoring system. Lab Med. 1997;28:462-466

3) Ross JW, et al. The accuracy of laboratory measurements in clinical chemistry: a study of eleven analytes in the College of AmericanPathologists Chemistry Survey with fresh frozen serum, definitive methods and reference methods. Arch Pathol Lab Med.1998;122:587-608

4) Miller WG, Myers GL, Ashwood ER, et al. State of the Art in Trueness and Inter-Laboratory Harmonization for 10 Analytes in GeneralClinical Chemistry. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2008;132:838-846

5) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Verification of comparability of patient results within one healthcare system: ApprovedGuideline (Interim Revision). CLSI document C54-A-IR (ISBN 1-56238-671-9).Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 940 WestValley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-1898 USA, 2012.

6) Miller WG, Erek A, Cunningham TD, et al. Commutability limitations influence quality control results with different reagent lots. ClinChem. 2011;57:76-83

**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IIComparability Criteria/Corrective ActionCOM.04300

Acceptability criteria are defined for comparability of instruments/methods used to test thesame analyte, with documentation of corrective actions when the criteria are not met.

NOTE: Statistically defined acceptability limits should be used for quantitative assays.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Records of comparability studies with evidence of review and corrective action, as appropriate


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24): [42CFR493.1282(A)]2) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Protocol for the Evaluation, Validation, and Implementation of Coagulometers:

Approved Guideline. CLSI document H57-A (ISBN 1-56238-656-5).Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 940 West Valley Road,Suite 1400, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-1898 USA, 2008.

17 of 37


PROCEDURE MANUAL

The procedure manual should be used by personnel at the workbench and must include the following elements,when applicable to the test procedure:

1. Principle and clinical significance2. Requirements for patient preparation; specimen collection, labeling, storage, preservation, transportation,

processing, and referral; and criteria for specimen acceptability and rejection3. Microscopic examination, including the detection of inadequately prepared slides4. Step-by-step performance of the procedure, including test calculations and interpretation of results5. Preparation of slides, solutions, calibrators, controls, reagents, stains, and other materials used in

testing6. Calibration and calibration verification procedures7. The analytic measurement range for test results for the test system, if applicable*8. Control procedures9. Corrective action to take when calibration or control results fail to meet the laboratory's criteria for

acceptability10. Limitations in the test methodology, including interfering substances11. Reference intervals (normal values)12. Imminently life-threatening (critical) test results13. Pertinent literature references14. The laboratory's system for entering results in the patient record and reporting patient results including,

when appropriate, the protocol for reporting imminently life-threatening (critical) results15. Description of the course of action to take if a test system becomes inoperable

(*The analytic measurement range may not apply to qualitative or semi-quantitative tests.)

The manual should address relevant pre-analytic and post-analytic considerations, as well as the analytic activitiesof the laboratory.The specific style and format of procedure manuals are at the discretion of the laboratory director.


● Representative sample of procedures for completeness, laboratory director approval,and review. Current practice must match contents of procedures/policies.

● Validation study of modified FDA-cleared/approved test, if applicable

● How do you access procedures?● What procedure has most recently been implemented or modified?● How do you ensure all copies of procedures are up to date?● How are changes in procedures documented and communicated to staff?● How are discontinued policies and procedures removed from general access?

● Identify a newly-implemented procedure in the prior two years and follow the stepsthrough authoring, laboratory director approval, and staff training

Phase IIProcedure ManualCOM.10000

18 of 37


A complete procedure manual is available at the workbench or in the work area.

NOTE 1: The use of inserts provided by manufacturers is not acceptable in place of a proceduremanual. However, such inserts may be used as part of a procedure description, if the insert accuratelyand precisely describes the procedure as performed in the laboratory. Any variation from this printedor electronic procedure must be detailed in the procedure manual. In all cases, policy/proceduremust match the laboratory's practice, the laboratory's practice must follow written procedure, andappropriate reviews must occur.

NOTE 2: A manufacturer's procedure manual for an instrument/reagent system may be acceptableas a component of the overall departmental procedures. Any modification to or deviation from theprocedure manual must be clearly documented.

NOTE 3: Card files or similar systems that summarize key information are acceptable for use asquick reference at the workbench provided that:

■ A complete manual is available for reference■ The card file or similar system corresponds to the complete manual and is subject

to document control

NOTE 4: Electronic (computerized) manuals are fully acceptable.There is no requirement for papercopies to be available for the routine operation of the laboratory, so long as the electronic versionsare readily available to all personnel. However, procedures must be available to laboratory personnelwhen the electronic versions are inaccessible (e.g. during laboratory information system or networkdowntime); thus, the laboratory must maintain either paper copies or electronic copies on CD orother media that can be accessed via designated computers. All procedures, in either electronic orpaper form, must be readily available for review by the inspector at the time of the CAP inspection.

Electronic versions of procedures must be subjected to proper document control (i.e. only authorizedpersons may make changes, changes are dated/signed (manual or electronic), and there isdocumentation of biennial review). Documentation of review of electronic procedures may beaccomplished by including statements such as “reviewed by [name of reviewer] on [date of review]”in the electronic record. Alternatively, paper review sheets may be used to document review ofelectronic procedures. Documentation of review by a secure electronic signature is NOT required.


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24):7164 [42CFR493.1251(a) (b) (1-14)(c)(d)(e)]2) van Leeuwen AM. 6 Steps to building an efficiency tool. Advance/Laboratory. 1999:8(6):88-91

3) Borkowski A, et al. Intranet-based quality improvement documentation at the Veterans Affairs Maryland health care system. Mod. Pathol.2001;14:1-5

4) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Quality Management System: Development and Management of LaboratoryDocuments; Approved Guideline - Sixth Edition. CLSI document QMS02-A6 (ISBN 1-56238-869-X). Clinical and Laboratory StandardsInstitute, 940 West Valley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087 USA, 2013.

**REVISED** 07/29/2013Phase IIProcedure Manual ReviewCOM.10100

There is documentation of review of all technical policies and procedures by the currentlaboratory director or designee at least every two years.

NOTE: The laboratory director must ensure that the collection of testing policies and technicalprotocols is complete, current, and has been thoroughly reviewed by a knowledgeable person.Technical approaches must be scientifically valid and clinically relevant. To minimize the burdenon the laboratory and reviewer(s), it is suggested that a schedule be developed whereby roughly1/24 of all procedures are reviewed monthly. Paper/electronic signature review must be at the levelof each procedure, or as multiple signatures on a listing of named procedures. A single signatureon a Title Page or Index of all procedures is not sufficient documentation that each procedure hasbeen carefully reviewed. Signature or initials on each page of a procedure is not required.

Only policies and procedures are addressed in this requirement. Biennial review is not required forother controlled documents.

19 of 37



of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 1992(Feb 28):7173 [42CFR493.1407(e)(13)]2) Borkowski A, et al. Intranet-based quality improvement documentation at the Veterans Affairs Maryland health care system. Mod. Pathol.

2001;14:1-5

**REVISED** 07/29/2013Phase IINew Procedure ReviewCOM.10200

The laboratory director reviews and approves all new technical policies and procedures, aswell as substantial changes to existing documents, before implementation.

NOTE:This review may not be delegated to designees in laboratories subject to the CLIA regulations.

Paper/electronic signature review is required. A secure electronic signature is desirable, but notrequired.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Policy on procedure review AND✓ Records of policy/procedure approval


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24):7164 [42CFR493.1251(d)]

**REVISED** 07/29/2013Phase IINew Procedure Review (Not Subject to US Regulations)COM.10250

For laboratories not subject to US regulations, the laboratory director or designee reviewsand approves all new technical policies and procedures, as well as substantial changes toexisting documents before implementation.

NOTE: Paper/electronic signature review is required. A secure electronic signature is desirable,but not required.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Policy on procedure review AND✓ Records of policy/procedure approval

Phase IIKnowledge of ProceduresCOM.10300

The laboratory has a system documenting that all personnel are knowledgeable about thecontents of procedure manuals (including changes) relevant to the scope of their testingactivities.

NOTE: The form of this system is at the discretion of the laboratory director. Annual proceduresign-off by testing personnel is not specifically required.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Records indicating that the testing personnel have read the procedures, new and revised, OR

records of another documented method approved by the laboratory director


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24): [42CFR493.1251(a)]

Phase IIDiscontinued ProcedureCOM.10500

When a procedure is discontinued, a paper or electronic copy is maintained for at least 2years, recording initial date of use, and retirement date.

NOTE 1: In transfusion medicine, procedures related to donor collection, transfusion, andadministration of tissues and progenitor cells, procedures (paper or electronic) must be maintainedfor 5 years.

20 of 37


NOTE 2: For genetic testing, in order to meet the requirements of some states relating to the testingof minors (under the age of 21), it is recommended that laboratories retain procedures (paper orelectronic) for at least 23 years (to cover the interval from fetal period to age 21).


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24):7164 [42CFR493.1105(a)(2)], [42CFR493.1251(e)]

RESULTS REPORTING


● Sampling of critical patient results/log

● How do you document critical results? Who do you contact?

● Follow a critical result from testing, reporting and recording of notification

**NEW** 07/29/2013Phase IIReference IntervalsCOM.29950

All patient/client results are reported with reference (normal) intervals or interpretations asappropriate.

NOTE: The laboratory must report reference (normal) intervals or interpretations with patient/clientresults, where such exist.This is important to allow proper interpretation of patient/client data. Age-and/or sex-specific reference ranges (normal values) or interpretive ranges must be reported withpatient test results, as applicable. In addition, the use of high and low flags (generally available witha computerized laboratory information system) is recommended. It is not necessary to includereference intervals when test results are reported as part of a treatment protocol that includes clinicalactions, which are based on the test result.

Under some circumstances it may be appropriate to distribute lists or tables of reference intervalsto all users and sites where reports are received. This system is usually fraught with difficulties, butif in place and rigidly controlled, it is acceptable.



Phase IICritical Result NotificationCOM.30000

The laboratory has procedures for immediate notification of a physician (or other clinicalpersonnel responsible for the patient's care) when results of designated tests exceedestablished "alert" or "critical" values that are important for prompt patient managementdecisions.

21 of 37


NOTE: Alert or critical results are those results that may require rapid clinical attention to avertsignificant patient morbidity or mortality. Each laboratory may define the critical values and criticalresults that pertain to its patient population. The laboratory may establish different critical resultsfor specific patient subpopulations (for example, dialysis clinic patients). Critical results should bedefined by the laboratory director, in consultation with the clinicians served.

Allowing clinicians to "opt out" of receiving critical results is strongly discouraged.

Records must be maintained showing prompt notification of the appropriate clinical individual afterobtaining results in the critical range.These records should include: date, time, responsible laboratoryindividual, person notified (the person's first name alone is not adequate documentation), and testresults. Any problem encountered in accomplishing this task should be investigated to preventrecurrence.

Reference laboratories may report critical results directly to clinical personnel, or to the referringlaboratory. The reference laboratory should have a written agreement with the referring laboratorythat indicates to whom the reference laboratory reports critical results.

In the point-of-care setting, the identity of the testing individual and person notified need not bedocumented when the individual performing the test is the same person who treats the patient. Inthis circumstance, however, there must be documentation of the critical result, date, and time inthe test report or elsewhere in the medical record.

REFERENCES1) Kost GJ. Critical limits for urgent clinician notification at US medical centers. JAMA. 1990;263:704-707

2) Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Clinical laboratory improvement amendmentsof 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24): [42CFR493.1291(g)]

3) Steindel SJ, Heard NV. Critical values: data analysis and critique. Q-Probes 92-04. Northfield, IL: College of American Pathologists,1992

4) Kost GJ. Using critical limits to improve patient outcome. Med Lab Observ. 1993;25(3):22-27

5) Tate KE, Gardner RM. Computers, quality, and the clinical laboratory: a look at critical values. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care.1993;193-197

6) Kaufman HW, Collins C. Notifying clients of life-threatening results. Med Lab Observ. 1994;26(8):44-45

7) Emancipator K. Critical values. ASCP practice parameter. Am J Clin Pathol. 1997:108:247-253

Phase ICritical Result Read-BackCOM.30100

When critical results are communicated by phone, there is a policy that “read-back” of theresults is requested and documented.

NOTE: Transmission of critical results by electronic means (FAX or computer) is acceptable. Ifcritical results are transmitted electronically, the laboratory should confirm receipt of the result bythe intended recipient (e.g. by a phone call); however, no read-back is necessary.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Records of critical result notification with documentation of read-back

REAGENTS


● Sampling of test procedures for reagent handling● Sampling of new reagent/shipment confirmation of acceptability records● Sampling of ambient temperature logs (if reagents stored at ambient temperature)

22 of 37


● Sampling of reagents (expiration date, labeling, storage)

● How do you store the reagents and controls used in test procedures?● How do you confirm the acceptability of new reagent lots?● What are your laboratory's criteria for mixing components from one lot number of reagent

kit with components from another lot number of kit?● How does your laboratory manage and control reagent inventory?

**REVISED** 07/29/2013Phase IIReagent Handling/Storage - Waived TestsCOM.30250

For waived tests, the laboratory follows manufacturer instructions for handling and storingreagents, cartridges, test cards, etc.

NOTE:There is no requirement to routinely label individual containers with "date opened"; however,a new expiration date must be recorded if opening the container changes the expiration date, storagerequirement, etc.

If the manufacturer defines a required storage temperature range, the temperature of storage areasmust be monitored and recorded daily. The two acceptable ways of recording temperatures are: 1)recording the numerical temperature, or 2) placing a mark on a graph that corresponds to a numericaltemperature (either manually, or using a graphical recording device). The identity of the individualrecording the temperature(s) must be documented (recording the initials of the individual is adequate).

The use of automated (including remote) temperature monitoring systems is acceptable, providingthat laboratory personnel have ongoing immediate access to the temperature data, so that appropriatecorrective action can be taken if a temperature is out of the acceptable range. The functionality ofthe system must be documented daily.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written procedure consistent with manufacturer's instructions for each waived test

The remaining checklist requirements in the REAGENTS section do not apply to waived tests.

Phase IIReagent LabelingCOM.30300

Reagents, calibrators, controls, and solutions are properly labeled, as applicable andappropriate, with the following elements.

1. Content and quantity, concentration or titer2. Storage requirements3. Date prepared or reconstituted by laboratory4. Expiration date

NOTE: The above elements may be recorded in a log (paper or electronic), rather than on thecontainers themselves, providing that all containers are identified so as to be traceable to theappropriate data in the log. While useful for inventory management, labeling with "date received"is not routinely required. There is no requirement to routinely label individual containers with "dateopened"; however, a new expiration date must be recorded if opening the container changes theexpiration date, storage requirement, etc.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written policy defining elements required for reagent labeling

23 of 37



of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24):7164 [42CFR493.1252(c)]

**REVISED** 04/21/2014Phase IIReagent StorageCOM.30350

All reagents and media are stored and handled as recommended by the manufacturer.

NOTE: Reagents and media must be stored and handled as recommended by the manufacturerto prevent environmentally-induced alterations that could affect reagent stability and test performance.Prepared reagents must be properly stored, mixed when appropriate, and discarded when stabilityparameters are exceeded.

If ambient storage temperature is indicated, there must be documentation that the defined ambienttemperature is maintained and corrective action taken when tolerance limits are exceeded.

A frost-free freezer may not be used to store reagents and controls provided that the function ofthese materials is not compromised. Storage conditions must remain within the specifications ofthe manufacturer of the reagent or control. Temperatures may be recorded using a continuousmonitoring system or a maximum/minimum thermometer. Thermal containers within the freezermay be used.

Patient samples may be stored in a frost-free freezer only if protected from thawing. The laboratorymust be able to document that the temperatures stay within the defined range.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Records of reagent and media storage and handling consistent with manufacturer's instructions,

including refrigerator, freezer and room temperature monitoring, as applicable

REFERENCES1) Gonzales Y, Kampa IS. The effect of various storage environments on reagent strips. Lab Med. 1997;28:135-137

2) Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Clinical laboratory improvement amendmentsof 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24): [42CFR493.1252(b)]

3) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). One-Stage Prothrombin Time (PT) Test and Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time(aPTT) Test; Approved Guideline—Second Edition. CLSI document H47-A2 (ISBN 1-56238-672-7). Clinical and Laboratory StandardsInstitute, 940 West Valley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087 USA, 2008.

**REVISED** 07/29/2013Phase IIReagent Expiration DateCOM.30400

All reagents and media are used within their indicated expiration date.

NOTE: The laboratory must assign an expiration date to any reagents and media that do not havea manufacturer-provided expiration date. The assigned expiration date should be based on knownstability, frequency of use, storage conditions, and risk of deterioration.

Separate requirements for rare blood banking reagents are included in the Transfusion MedicineChecklist.

For laboratories not subject to US regulations and military laboratories in overseas locations, expiredreagents may be used only under the following circumstances: 1) The reagents are unique, rare ordifficult to obtain; or 2) Delivery of new shipments of reagents is delayed through causes not undercontrol of the laboratory. The laboratory must document verification of the performance of expiredreagents in accordance with written laboratory policy.

Laboratories subject to US regulations must not use expired reagents.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written policy for evaluating reagents and media lacking manufacturer's expiration date



24 of 37


**REVISED** 07/29/2013Phase IINew Reagent Lot Confirmation of AcceptabilityCOM.30450

New reagent lots and/or shipments are checked against old reagent lots or with suitablereference material before or concurrently with being placed in service.

NOTE: The purpose of this check is to confirm that the use of the new reagent lot or shipment doesnot affect patient results. Matrix interferences between different lots of reagents may impact thecalibration status of instruments and consistency of patient results. Improper storage conditionsduring shipping of reagents may have a negative impact on their ability to perform or exhibit thesame levels of reactivity as intended.

Qualitative: For qualitative nonwaived tests, minimum cross-checking includes retesting at leastone positive and negative sample with known reactivity against the new reagent lot. A weaklypositive sample should also be used in systems where patient results are reported in that fashion.

Examples of suitable reference materials for qualitative tests include:

1. Positive and negative patient samples tested on a previous lot;2. Previously tested proficiency testing materials;3. External QC materials tested on the previous lot;4. Control strains of organisms or previously identified organisms for microbiology reagents

used to detect or evaluate cultured microorganisms.

For flow cytometry reagents, please refer to the Reagents section of the Flow Cytometry Checklist.

Quantitative: For quantitative nonwaived tests, patient specimens should be used to compare anew lot against the old lot, when possible. Manufactured materials, such as proficiency testing (PT)or QC materials may be affected by matrix interference between different reagent lots, even if resultsshow no change following a reagent lot change. The use of patient samples confirms the absenceof matrix interference. Other than patient samples, the following materials may also be used:

1. Reference materials or QC products provided by the method manufacturer with methodspecific and reagent lot specific target values;

2. Proficiency testing materials with peer group established means;3. QC materials with peer group established means based on interlaboratory comparison

that is method specific and includes data from at least 10 laboratories;4. Third party general purpose reference materials if the material is documented in the

package insert or by the method manufacturer to be commutable with patient specimensfor the method.

5. QC material used to test the current lot is adequate alone to check a new shipment ofthe same reagent lot, as there should be no change in potential matrix interactionsbetween the QC material and different shipments of the same lot number of reagents.

For hematology analyzers, reservoirs containing testing reagents and cleaning/decontaminatingsolutions must be checked according to manufacturer's instructions.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written procedure for the confirmation of acceptability of new lots and shipments prior to use

AND✓ Records of acceptability study of new reagents/shipments

REFERENCES1) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Evaluation of Matrix Effects; Approved Guideline Second Edition. Clinical and Laboratory

Standards Institute document EP14-A2 (ISBN 1-56238-561-5). Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 940 West Valley Road,Suite 1400, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-1898 USA, 2005

2) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Verification of comparability of patient results within one healthcare system: ApprovedGuideline (Interim Revision). CLSI document C54-A-IR (ISBN 1-56238-671-9).Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 940 WestValley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-1898 USA, 2012.

3) Miller WG, Myers GL, Rej R. Why commutability matters. Clin Chem. 2006;52:553-554

Phase IIReagent Kit ComponentsCOM.30500

25 of 37


If there are multiple components of a reagent kit, the laboratory uses components of reagentkits only within the kit lot unless otherwise specified by the manufacturer.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written documentation defining allowable exceptions for mixing kit components from different

lots


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24): [42CFR493.1252(e)]

INSTRUMENTS AND EQUIPMENT

A variety of instruments and equipment are used to support the performance of analytical procedures. Examplesof equipment include, but are not limited to centrifuges, microscopes, incubators, heat blocks, refrigerators, freezers,biological safety cabinets, fume hoods, glassware, pipettes, etc. This section contains general requirements thatapply to most laboratory sections and types of testing.The laboratory is also responsible for any additional instrumentand equipment requirements found in the discipline-specific checklists, as applicable.

INSTRUMENT AND EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/FUNCTION CHECKS


● Sampling of instrument/equipment policies and procedures● Sampling of function check and performance verification records for

instruments/equipment● Sampling of instrument/equipment maintenance logs and repair records

● Instrument/equipment records (promptly retrievable)

**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IIMaintenance and Function Checks - Waived TestsCOM.30525

For waived tests, the laboratory follows manufacturer instructions for instrument andequipment maintenance and function checks.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written procedure consistent with manufacturer's instructions for each waived test AND✓ Records for instrument/equipment maintenance and function checks as required by the

manufacturer

The remaining checklist requirements in the INSTRUMENT AND EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE/FUNCTIONCHECK section do not apply to waived tests.

**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IIInstrument/Equipment Performance VerificationCOM.30550

The performance of all instruments and equipment is verified upon installation and afterrepair or reconditioning to ensure that they run according to expectations.

NOTE: Performance verification is necessary after repairs or replacement of critical componentsof an instrument or item of equipment.

26 of 37


Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written procedure for performance verification AND✓ Records of performance verification

**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IIInstrument/OperationCOM.30575

There are documented standard procedures for start-up, operation and shutdown ofinstruments and equipment, as applicable.

NOTE: These procedures must readily be available to the operator in the immediate vicinity of theinstrument, and ideally should include a procedure for emergency shutdown.These may be separateapproved procedures or included in the testing procedure for a specific analyte.

**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IIMaintenance/Function ChecksCOM.30600

Appropriate maintenance and function checks are performed and documented for allinstruments (e.g. analyzers) and equipment (e.g. centrifuges) following a defined schedule,at least as frequent as specified by the manufacturer.

NOTE: There must be a schedule and procedure at the instrument for appropriate function checksand maintenance. These may include (but are not limited to) cleaning, electronic, mechanical andoperational checks.The procedure and schedule must be as thorough and as frequent as specifiedby the manufacturer.

Function checks should be designed to detect drift, instability, or malfunction, before the problemis allowed to affect test results.

For equipment that have no standard frequency or requirement for maintenance and function checks,each laboratory should establish a schedule and procedure that reasonably reflects the workloadand specifications of its equipment.


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24): [42CFR493.1254]

**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IIFunction Check Tolerance LimitsCOM.30625

Tolerance limits for acceptable function are documented for specific instruments andequipment wherever appropriate, with documented corrective action when the limits areexceeded.

NOTE:The defined tolerance limits must follow the manufacturer's specified limits. Function checksmust be within the defined tolerance limits prior to use for testing patient samples.



**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IIInstrument TroubleshootingCOM.30650

Instructions are provided for minor troubleshooting and repairs of instruments (such asmanufacturer's service manual).

**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IIInstrument/Equipment RecordsCOM.30675

27 of 37


Instrument and equipment maintenance, function check, performance verification, andservice and repair records (or copies) are promptly available to, and usable by, the technicalstaff operating the equipment.

NOTE: Effective utilization of instruments and equipment by the technical staff depends upon theprompt availability of the records (copies are acceptable) to detect trends or malfunctions. Offsitestorage, such as with centralized medical maintenance or computer files, is acceptable if the inspectoris satisfied that the records can be promptly retrieved.

THERMOMETERS


● Records of traceability to NIST Standards● Sampling of verification records for non-certified thermometers● Sampling of policies/procedures for thermometers

**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IIThermometric Standard DeviceCOM.30700

An appropriate thermometric standard device of known accuracy (guaranteed by manufacturerto meet NIST Standards or traceable to NIST Standards) is available.

NOTE: Thermometric standard devices must be recalibrated, recertified, or replaced prior to thedate of expiration of the guarantee of calibration or they are subject to requirements for non-certifiedthermometers.

Thermometers should be periodically evaluated for damage (e.g. separation of columns).Thermometers with obvious damage should be rechecked for continued use.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Thermometer certificate of accuracy AND✓ Policy for the continued use of certified thermometers

**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IINon-certified ThermometersCOM.30725

All non-certified thermometers in use are checked against an appropriate thermometricstandard device before initial use and as defined by laboratory policy.

NOTE: Non-certified thermometers used in transfusion medicine, including blood-warmerthermometers, must be checked at least annually.

If digital or other displays of temperatures on equipment are used for daily monitoring, the laboratorymust verify that the readout is accurate. The display must be checked initially and followingmanufacturer's instructions.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written procedure defining verification of non-certified thermometers AND✓ Written policy for rechecking of non-certified thermometers AND

28 of 37


✓ Records of verification

TEMPERATURE-DEPENDENT INSTRUMENTS, EQUIPMENT, ANDENVIRONMENTS


● Sampling of temperature logs (refrigerator, freezer, water bath, heat block, incubatorambient, etc.)

**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IITemperature ChecksCOM.30750

Temperatures are checked and recorded each day of use for all temperature-dependentequipment and environments using a calibrated thermometer.

NOTE: Temperature-dependent equipment (e.g. refrigerators, freezers, incubators) containingreagents and/or patient/client specimens must be monitored daily, as equipment failures couldaffect accuracy of patient/client test results. Items such as water baths and heat blocks used forprocedures need only be checked on days of patient/client testing.

If specific instruments, equipment, kits, or supplies have specified ambient temperature ranges forproper operation or use, there must be documentation that the specified ambient temperature ismaintained and corrective action taken when tolerance limits are exceeded.

The two acceptable ways of recording temperatures are: 1) recording the numerical temperature,or 2) placing a mark on a graph that corresponds to a numerical temperature (either manually, orusing a graphical recording device).The identity of the individual recording the temperature(s) mustbe documented (recording the initials of the individual is adequate).

The use of automated (including remote) temperature monitoring systems is acceptable, providingthat laboratory personnel have ongoing immediate access to the temperature data, so that appropriatecorrective action can be taken if a temperature is out of the acceptable range.The daily functionalityof the system must be documented.

For heat blocks or dry baths, thermocouple probes may be used as an alternative method forchecking the temperature.

**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IITemperature RangeCOM.30775

Acceptable ranges have been defined for all temperature-dependent equipment andenvironments (including test-dependent ambient temperature) in accordance with themanufacturer instructions.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Temperature log or record with defined acceptable range

**NEW** 04/21/2014Phase IITemperature Corrective ActionCOM.30800

There is evidence of corrective action taken if acceptable temperature ranges fortemperature-dependent equipment are exceeded, including evaluation of contents ofrefrigerators and freezers for adverse effects.

29 of 37


NOTE: If acceptable temperature ranges for refrigerators and/or freezers are exceeded, storedreagents, controls, calibrators, etc. must be checked to confirm the accuracy or quality of the materialbefore use and documented. The check should follow a defined protocol or procedure.

TEST METHOD VALIDATION/VERIFICATION


● Policies and procedures for the introduction of new tests/methods/instruments● Sampling of assay validation/verification studies, including signed summary statements

and data, for tests with emphasis on tests introduced in the past two years● Sampling of assay validation studies for laboratory-developed tests (LDTs), including

tests that are not FDA-cleared/approved and FDA-cleared/approved tests modified bythe laboratory, with emphasis on tests introduced since the last on-site inspection

● Sampling of patient reports for laboratory-developed assays

● Which laboratory tests or instruments have been implemented in the past two years,particularly those that are not FDA-cleared/approved?

● How does your laboratory validate/verify assay performance prior to test implementation?● How has your laboratory verified/established the reportable range (AMR) for the test?● How does your laboratory establish or verify reference intervals?● How do you ensure that a modified FDA-cleared/approved test exhibits equal or superior

performance?● How does your laboratory validate clinical claims made by the laboratory about LDTs?

**REVISED** 04/21/2014Phase IIMethod Validation/Verification ApprovalCOM.40000

There is a summary statement, signed by the laboratory director (or designee who meetsCAP director qualifications) prior to use in patient testing, documenting evaluation ofvalidation/verification studies and approval of each test for clinical use.

NOTE: This checklist item is applicable only to tests implemented after June 15, 2009.

The summary statement must include a written assessment of the validation/verification study,including the acceptability of the data. The summary must also include a statement approving thetest for clinical use with the approval signature such as, "This validation study has been reviewed,and the performance of the method is considered acceptable for patient testing."

For an FDA-cleared/approved test, a summary of the verification data must address analyticperformance specifications, including analytic accuracy, precision, interferences, and reportablerange, as applicable.

In addition, for modified FDA-cleared/approved tests or LDTs, the summary must address analyticalsensitivity, analytical specificity and any other parameter that is considered important to assure thatthe analytical performance of a test (e.g. specimen stability, reagent stability, linearity, carryover,and cross-contamination, etc.), as appropriate and applicable.

If the laboratory makes clinical claims about its tests, the summary must address the validation ofthese claims.

See the Method Performance Specifications section for details concerning validation/verification.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Summary of validation/verification studies with review and approval

REFERENCES

30 of 37


1) Lawrence Jennings, Vivianna M. Van Deerlin, Margaret L. Gulley (2009) Recommended Principles and Practices for Validating ClinicalMolecular Pathology Tests. Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine: Vol. 133, No. 5, pp. 743-755

METHOD PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS

NOTE: This subsection on METHOD PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS does not apply to waived tests.

ANALYTIC VALIDATION/VERIFICATIONLaboratories are required to perform analytic validation/verification of each nonwaived test/method/instrumentsystem before use in patient testing, regardless of when it was first introduced by the laboratory, including instrumentsof the same make and model and temporary replacement (loaner) instruments. There is no exception for analyticvalidation/verification of test systems introduced prior to a specific date. The laboratory must have data forthe validation/verification of the applicable method performance specifications and retain the records as long asthe method is in use and for at least two years after discontinuation.

The method performance specifications must be validated or verified in the location in which patient testing will beperformed. If an instrument is moved, the laboratory must verify the method performance specifications (i.e.accuracy, precision, reportable range) after the move to ensure that the test system was not affected by therelocation process or any changes due to the new environment (e.g. temperature, humidity, reagent storageconditions, etc.). The laboratory must follow manufacturer's instructions for instrument set up, maintenance, andsystem verification.

Not all method performance specifications apply to qualitative tests. For qualitative tests, the laboratory mustestablish/verify the method performance specifications that are applicable and clinically relevant.

LABORATORIES SUBJECT TO US REGULATIONS:

● For unmodified FDA-cleared or approved tests, the laboratory may use data from manufacturers'information or published reports, but the laboratory must verify outside data on accuracy, precisionand reportable range.

● For tests that are not FDA-cleared or approved (including tests developed in-house), or forFDA-cleared/approved tests modified by the laboratory, the laboratory must establish accuracy,precision, analytic sensitivity, interferences, analytic specificity, and reportable range, as applicable;data on interferences may be obtained from manufacturers or published literature, as applicable.

LABORATORIES NOT SUBJECT TO US REGULATIONS:

● The laboratory must verify or establish analytic accuracy, precision, analytic sensitivity, analyticspecificity, interfering substances, and reportable range for each test. Laboratories may useinformation from manufacturers, published literature, or studies performed in other laboratories,but should verify such outside information, whenever practical.

LABORATORY-DEVELOPED TESTS:For the purposes of interpreting the checklist requirements, a laboratory-developed test (LDT) is defined as follows:A test used in patient management that has all of the following characteristics:

1. The test is neither FDA-cleared nor FDA-approved, or the laboratory has made a modification tomanufacturer's instructions for an FDA-cleared/approved test

2. The test is performed by the clinical laboratory that developed the test. A laboratory is considered tohave developed a test irrespective of whether the test or critical components of the test were originallydeveloped elsewhere or reagents (including ASRs), equipment, or technology integral to the test werepurchased, adopted, or licensed from another entity, or if the test was validated by another laboratory.

3. The test was first used for clinical testing after April 23, 2003

31 of 37


Phase IIIntermittent TestingCOM.40100

When a test is put back into production, the following requirements must be met:

1. PT or alternative assessment performed within 30 days prior to restarting patienttesting

2. Method performance specifications verified, as applicable, within 30 days priorto restarting patient testing

3. Competency assessed for analysts within 12 months prior to restarting patienttesting

NOTE: This requirement applies to tests that are taken out of production for a time (for example,seasonal testing for influenza). A test is considered to be taken out of production when (1) patienttesting is not offered AND (2) PT or alternative assessment, as applicable, is suspended. It doesnot apply to situations where a proficiency testing challenge is not performed due to a temporary,short-term situation, such as a reagent back order or an instrument breakdown. In those situations,the laboratory must perform alternative assessment for that testing event.

The laboratory should have written procedures for putting intermittent tests into production.

For tests for which PT is required by CAP, if a PT challenge is not offered during the 30-day periodprior to restarting patient testing, the laboratory may perform an alternative assessment of the test.The laboratory must participate in the next scheduled PT event, if the Laboratory AccreditationProgram requires external PT for that analyte.

Phase ILDT ListCOM.40200

The laboratory documents the list of laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) it has implementedduring the previous 2 years.

NOTE: This list will help the inspector review the analytic validation data for these tests.

This includes tests developed in-house, and for laboratories subject to US regulations, tests usingASRs, and FDA-cleared/approved tests that have been modified by the laboratory.

**REVISED** 04/21/2014Phase IIManufacturer InstructionsCOM.40250

The laboratory follows manufacturer instructions or provides documentation of validationif the test has been modified.

NOTE: Following manufacturer instructions includes performing quality control, calibration, calibrationverification, and related functions as applicable to the scope of testing. Reagents, fluids, anddisposable materials supplied by the laboratory must meet the specifications in the instructions.

If the laboratory modifies manufacturer instructions, the test is no longer an FDA cleared/approvedtest, and the modification(s) must be validated by the laboratory. Changes in the specimen type orcollection device are examples of common modifications (see "modification of manufacturer'sinstructions" in the Definition of Terms). Additional requirements for validation/verification may befound in the discipline-specific checklists.

For waived tests, if manufacturer instructions are modified, the test is no longer considered waived,and requirements for high complexity testing apply.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Documentation of validation of established performance specifications (accuracy, precision,

analytic sensitivity, analytic specificity, interferences, reference range, and reportable range)of any test that has been modified.



32 of 37


Phase IIAnalytic Accuracy/PrecisionCOM.40300

The laboratory verifies or establishes analytic accuracy and precision for each test.

NOTE:Where current technology permits, accuracy is established by comparing results to a definitiveor reference method, or may be verified by comparing results to an established comparative method.Use of reference materials or other materials with known concentrations or activities is suggestedin establishing or verifying accuracy. Precision is established by repeat measurement of samplesat varying concentrations or activities within-run and between-run over a period of time.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written procedure for determining method performance characteristics, including

accuracy/precision AND✓ Records of verification or establishment of analytic accuracy and precision for each test


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24) [42CFR493.1253]2) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Measurement Comparison and Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples; Approved

Guideline—Third Edition. CLSI document EP09-A2-IR (ISBN 1-56238-887-8). Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 940 WestValley Road, Suite 2500, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-1898 USA, 2013

3) Voss EM, et al. Determining acceptability of blood glucose meters. Statistical methods for determining error. Lab Med. 1996;27:601-606

4) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Statistical Quality Control for Quantitative Measurement Procedures: Principles andDefinitions; Approved Guideline—Third Edition. CLSI document C24-A3 (ISBN 1-56238-613-1). Clinical and Laboratory StandardsInstitute, 940 West Valley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-1898 USA, 2006

5) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Preliminary Evaluation of Quantitative Clinical Laboratory Methods – ApprovedGuideline- Third Edition. CLSI Document EP10-A3 (ISBN 1-56238-622-0). Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 940 West ValleyRoad, Wayne, PA, 19087-1898, USA, 2006.

**REVISED** 04/21/2014Phase IIAnalytic SensitivityCOM.40400

For modified FDA-cleared/approved tests or laboratory-developed tests (LDTs), the laboratoryestablishes the analytic sensitivity (lower detection limit) of each assay, as applicable.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written procedure for determining method performance characteristics, including analytic

sensitivity AND✓ Records of establishment of analytic sensitivity for each assay


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24):[42CFR493.1253(b)(2)]2) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Evaluation of Detection Capability for Clinical Laboratory Measurement Procedures;

Approved Guideline—Second Edition. CLSI document EP17-A2 (ISBN 1-56238-795-2) . Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute,940 West Valley Road, Suite 2500, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-1898 USA, 2012.

**NEW** 07/29/2013Phase IIAnalytical Specificity/Interfering SubstancesCOM.40450

For modified FDA-cleared/approved tests or laboratory-developed tests (LDTs), the resultsof each validation study include a sufficient number of samples to establish the test'sanalytical specificity.

NOTE: The analytical specificity refers to the ability of a test or procedure to correctly identify orquantify an entity in the presence of interfering or cross-reactive substances that might be expectedto be present. Laboratories are encouraged to review the published literature for guidance andprovided confidence intervals to estimated performance characteristics.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Records of validation studies and published references used to establish analytical specificity


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24): [42CFR493.1253(b)(2)]2) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry; Approved Guideline—Second Edition.

CLSI document EP7-A2 (ISBN 1-56238-584-4). Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 940 West Valley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne,Pennsylvania 19087-1898 USA, 2005.

33 of 37


**REVISED** 07/29/2013Phase IIAnalytic InterferencesCOM.40500

The laboratory understands the analytic interferences for each test, and has an appropriateplan of action when they are present.

NOTE: Interfering substances may pose a significant problem to the clinical laboratory and healthcareproviders who may be misled by laboratory results that do not reflect patient clinical status. Thelaboratory must be aware of common interferences by performing studies (during LDT validation)or referencing studies performed elsewhere (such as by the instrument-reagent manufacturer).

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written procedure for determining method performance characteristics, including analytic

interferences AND✓ Document listing known interferences for each test and plan of action when they are present

REFERENCES1) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Interference Testing in Clinical Chemistry; Approved Guideline—Second Edition.

CLSI document EP7-A2 (ISBN 1-56238-584-4). Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 940 West Valley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne,Pennsylvania 19087-1898 USA, 2005

2) Ho C-H. The hemostatic effect of packed red cell transfusion in patients with anemia. Transfusion. 1998;38:1011-1014

3) Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Clinical laboratory improvement amendmentsof 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24): [42CFR493.1253]

Phase IIReportable RangeCOM.40600

The reportable range (analytic measurement range) is verified/established for each analyticprocedure before implementation.

NOTE: The analytic measurement range (AMR) is the range of analyte values that a method candirectly measure on the specimen without any dilution or concentration.

Expanded definitions and details of the AMR are provided in some of the section-specific checklists(e.g. Chemistry).Verification of the AMR may not apply to certain assays (for example, in immunologyand coagulation).

The limits of the AMR are based on meeting accuracy and precision requirements such as theminimal limit of quantification or sensitivity, when applicable. In some cases, clinically relevant limitsmay be narrower than the potential analytical range, and the clinically relevant limit would be usedas the limit of the reportable range.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Written policy for determining method performance characteristics, including reportable range

AND✓ Records of verification or establishment of reportable ranges for each test


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 1992(Feb 28): [42CFR493.1253]

**NEW/REVISED** 04/21/2014Phase IIBody Fluid ValidationCOM.40620

Testing of body fluid specimens using methods intended for other specimen types (e.g.blood or other fluid) have been validated by the laboratory for accuracy, precision, analyticsensitivity, analytic specificity, interferences, and reportable range.

NOTE: This requirement applies directly to body fluid testing that the laboratory offers as a routine,orderable test. If the test is routinely performed on the fluid, there must be a written procedure. Thelaboratory director determines the extent of the method performance specifications relevant forclinical purposes. Method performance specifications for blood specimens may be used for bodyfluids if the laboratory can reasonably exclude the existence of matrix interferences affecting thelatter either by reference in the procedure manual to published literature or by evaluation forinterferences due to matrix effects by performing an appropriate study (e.g. a dilution study using

34 of 37


admixtures of samples, spiking samples, further dilution).The reference range must be defined andreported with results, unless the value is reported in comparison to its concentration in blood.Reference range citations from the manufacturer's insert or published literature citations may beused to determine the range (COM.50000).

Alternative performance assessment is required (COM.01500) and may be performed using clinicalassessment by chart review.

For clinically unique samples where specimens are submitted with a unique request based on anunusual clinical concern in a specific patient or situation (e.g. pathologic states where the analyteis not normally found in the fluid type), it may not be possible to establish test performancecharacteristics. Protein and lipid content can vary considerably from specimen to specimen. "Normal"fluid samples may not be obtainable. In such cases, the result must be accompanied by a commentsuch as, "The reference range and other method performance specifications have not beenestablished for this body fluid. The test result must be integrated into the clinical context forinterpretation."

REFERENCES1) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Body Fluids in Clinical Chemistry; Approved Guideline. CLSI document C49-A (ISBN

1-56238-638-7). Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 940 West Valley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-1898USA, 2007

2) Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Clinical laboratory improvement amendmentsof 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24): [42CFR493.1253]

**NEW** 07/29/2013Phase ILDT ReportingCOM.40630

Reports for laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) contain a description of the method, astatement that the assay was developed by the laboratory, and appropriate performancecharacteristics.

NOTE: Requirements for reports are given in the Results Reporting sections of the checklists.Laboratories subject to US regulations often include an LDT disclaimer as follows: "This test wasdeveloped and its performance characteristics determined by <insert laboratory/company name>.It has not been cleared or approved by the FDA.The laboratory is regulated under CLIA as qualifiedto perform high-complexity testing. This test is used for clinical purposes. It should not be regardedas investigational or for research."

REFERENCES1) CLSI. Establishing Molecular Testing in Clinical Laboratory Environments: CLSI document MM19-A (ISBN 1-56238-773-1). Clinical and

Laboratory Standards Institute, 940 West Valley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-1898 USA, 2011

**NEW** 07/29/2013Phase IILDT Clinical Claims ValidationCOM.40640

All clinical claims made by the laboratory about a laboratory-developed test (LDT) arevalidated.

NOTE: Clinical claims may include statements about a test's diagnostic sensitivity and specificity,ability to predict the risk of a disease or condition, clinical usefulness, or cost-effectiveness. Clinicalclaims may be found on the test report or in other information distributed by the laboratory (websites,test catalogues, newsletters, memoranda, advertisements, etc.). Laboratories are not required tomake clinical claims about a test, but any claims made by the laboratory must be validated. Thelaboratory should validate claims through a clinical study, but for rare conditions or well-accepteduses of a test, reference to published peer-reviewed literature is acceptable.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Records of clinical studies performed by the laboratory OR peer-reviewed literature that

reasonably substantiate all claims made by the laboratory about a test

Phase IIMethod Performance Specifications AvailabilityCOM.40700

35 of 37


The laboratory's current test methods, including performance specifications and supportingvalidation/verification data (analytic accuracy, precision, analytic sensitivity, interferences,reference range, and reportable range, as applicable), are available to clients of the laboratoryand to the inspection team upon request.

NOTE:The laboratory must also provide data on clinical performance claims to clients upon requestif clinical performance claims are made. The laboratory may at its option require clients to agree totreat such data as confidential and not to share such data with any other party except as requiredby law.

The CAP inspection team is instructed to use the data solely for accreditation purposes.


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24):7163 [42CFR493.1291(e)]

Phase IIAnalytic Methodology ChangesCOM.40800

If the laboratory changes its analytic methodology so that test results or their interpretationsmay be SIGNIFICANTLY different, the change is explained to clients.

NOTE: This requirement can be accomplished in any of several different ways, depending on localcircumstances. Some methods include directed mailings, laboratory newsletters or part of the testreport itself.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Records such as directed mailings, laboratory newsletters or comment on the patient report

advising of the change


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24):7163 [42CFR493.1291(e)]

REFERENCE INTERVALS

**REVISED** 07/29/2013Phase IIReference Intervals Established/VerifiedCOM.50000

The laboratory establishes or verifies its reference intervals (normal values).

NOTE: Reference intervals are important to allow a clinician to assess patient results against anappropriate population. The reference range must be established or verified for each analyte andspecimen source (e.g. blood, urine, cerebrospinal fluid), when appropriate. For example, a referenceinterval can be verified by testing samples from 20 healthy representative individuals; if no morethan 2 results fall outside the proposed reference interval, that interval can be considered verifiedfor the population studied (refer to CLSI guideline EP28-A3c, reference below).

If a formal reference interval study is not possible or practical, then the laboratory should carefullyevaluate the use of published data for its own reference ranges, and retain documentation of thisevaluation. For many analytes (e.g. therapeutic drugs and CSF total protein), literature referencesor a manufacturer's package insert information may be appropriate.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Record of reference range study OR records of verification of manufacturer's stated range when

reference range study is not practical (e.g. unavailable normal population) OR other methodsapproved by the laboratory/section director


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 1992(Feb 28):7164 [42CFR493.1253]2) Van der Meulen EA, et al. Use of small-sample-based reference limits on a group basis. Clin Chem. 1994;40:1698-1702

36 of 37


3) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Defining, Establishing, and Verifying Reference Intervals in the Clinical Laboratory- Approved Guideline- Third Edition - CLSI Document EP28-A3c. (ISBN 1-56238-682-4) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute,940 West Valley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne, PA, 19087-1898, USA, 2010.

Phase IIReference Interval EvaluationCOM.50100

The laboratory evaluates the appropriateness of its reference intervals and takes correctiveaction if necessary.

NOTE: Criteria for evaluation of reference intervals include:

1. Introduction of a new analyte to the test repertoire2. Change of analytic methodology3. Change in patient population

If it is determined that the range is no longer appropriate for the patient population, corrective actionmust be taken.

Evidence of Compliance:✓ Records of evaluation and corrective action, if indicated


of 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 1992(Feb 28):7164 [42CFR493.1253]2) Van der Meulen EA, et al. Use of small-sample-based reference limits on a group basis. Clin Chem. 1994;40:1698-1702

3) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). Defining, Establishing, and Verifying Reference Intervals in the Clinical Laboratory- Approved Guideline- Third Edition - CLSI Document EP28-A3c. (ISBN 1-56238-682-4) Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute,940 West Valley Road, Suite 1400, Wayne, PA, 19087-1898, USA, 2010.

4) Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Clinical laboratory improvement amendmentsof 1988; final rule. Fed Register. 2003(Jan 24): [42CFR493.1282(b)(1)(iii)]

37 of 37
