Module overview
Section 5 of 6 · Open sections

Required section · Section 5 of 6

Design an alternate assessment and judge a corrective action

The chemistry bench also runs a calculated result, an anion gap-style index, that has no CLIA-listed PT program. For this analyte the laboratory owes documented accuracy verification at least twice a year rather than PT enrollment. Your task is to choose a workable design from the recognized options: a split patient specimen tested by a second qualified method or laboratory, a blinded recheck of previously tested material, a reference or comparison material with predefined criteria, or a case or image re-evaluation where that fits the discipline. A calibrator or control is not an acceptable substitute on its own; it can assess part of analytical performance but it does not behave like a patient specimen and cannot stand in for the full patient-testing pathway.

A split-specimen design is only sound if the laboratory defines, before running it, which ordinary patient specimen qualifies, how long it remains stable for the split test, the timing between the two results, which comparison method or laboratory receives the second aliquot, the acceptance criterion for agreement, and exactly what happens when the two results disagree. Skipping any one of those elements turns an alternate assessment into an ungraded exercise with no defensible interpretation.

The learner decision has two parts. First, identify which of the four required-content scenarios below describes a prohibited practice, and which describes a permitted response. Second, given a proposed corrective action for the PT-3 sodium event, decide whether it is preferred, acceptable but incomplete, or unsupported, and say what evidence is missing.

Alternative performance assessment is not limited to a single approach. CAP lists participation in an external PT program not required by CAP, an ungraded or educational PT program, split-sample analysis with another laboratory or with an established in-house method, and use of assayed materials as appropriate options, each integrated into the routine workload where applicable. This is a menu for finding comparison data, not a replacement for defining your own acceptance criteria beforehand.

An alternate assessment is only as strong as the acceptance criteria and discrepancy plan written down before the first sample runs.

Ordering exercise

Put the PT-3 sodium investigation steps in the order that checks the cheapest, fastest evidence first and the most resource-intensive evidence last.

  1. 1. Competency check

    Review the assigned analyst's current sodium competency assessment.

  2. 2. QC check

    Review sodium controls bracketing the run for a shift or trend.

  3. 3. Calibration and reagent check

    Review reagent lot and the most recent sodium calibration.

  4. 4. Method check

    Review analyzer flags and maintenance events around the PT-3 run time.

  5. 5. Specimen check

    Review reconstitution volume, diluent, and the preparation log for PT-3.

  6. 6. Clerical check

    Compare the worksheet value to the electronic entry and confirm material identity.

Knowledge checks

Reading and checks are open. Sign in only to save.

Knowledge check 1

Which of these are recognized alternate-assessment designs for a test with no available PT program? Select all that apply.

Choose at least 1 options.

Knowledge check 2

A supervisor proposes using only the routine daily control results as the laboratory's alternate assessment for a non-PT analyte. Is this sufficient?

Choose one option.

Section status

Finish this section

Reading and checks are open. Sign in only to save.

The module finishes after every required section is marked done and every check in those sections is correct.