2017 PT Manual

2017Pr
o ci
encyTest
ingManual
Per
for
manceyoucanmeasur
e
Accur
acyyoucant
rust
Table of Contents
Proficiency Testing (PT) Manual
1 General Customer Information................... 3–10 4 How to Interpret Your Evaluation.............. 17–20

• Order Confirmation................................................ 3 • General Guidelines for Evaluation........................... 17
• Regulatory Reporting............................................. 3 • Selection of a Target Value............................................ 17
• Binders/Glossaries................................................ 4 • Calculation of Summary Statistics........................... 18
• Kit Delivery and Storage ........................................ 4 • Comparative Statistics.......................................... 20
• CAP Identification Number...................................... 4 5 Continuing Education (CE)........................ 21–22

• Replacement Specimens........................................ 4 • Continuing Medical Education (CME) Category 1....... 21
• Testing Instructions and Completion Time................... 5 • CE for Nonphysician Laboratory Personnel............... 21
• Second Instrument Reporting................................... 5 • CE for Cytotechnologists...................................... 22
• Corrections to Results and CMS Reporting
6 Discipline-Specific Reporting
Instructions.......................................................... 6
Information.................................................. 23–25
• Fax-Back Response Programs................................. 7
• How to Complete the Result Form........................... 23
• Evaluations.......................................................... 7
• Corrections to Results............................................ 7 7 Evaluations and Participant Summaries
• Customer Support................................................. 7 (PS)............................................................... 26–29

• Overview...................................................... 26
• Program Certificates.............................................. 8
• Reviewing Your Evaluation ................................... 26
• Limitations of PT................................................... 9
• PS................................................................... 28
• Laboratory Accidents............................................. 9
• How to Perform a Self-Evaluation........................... 29
• Limitations of PT Letter ........................................ 10
2 Result Form Data Entry...............................11–13 8 Laboratory Legislation and Centers for
• Overview........................................................... 11 Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)
• Preprinted Method Summary Page ......................... 11 Reporting................................................... 30–37

• Provision of Results to CMS and State Agencies........ 33
• Exception Codes................................................. 12
• Use of Reason Codes for Nonevaluated Specimens... 35
• Master Lists....................................................... 12
• CMS Performance Summary ................................ 36
• Reporting Boxes and Decimal Precision................... 13
• CMS Performance Summary Data.......................... 36
• “Less Than” or “Greater Than” Values...................... 13
3 e-LAB Solutions Suite (ELSS)................... 14–16

• Getting Started................................................... 14
• Online Data Submission....................................... 15
• Online Reports................................................... 16
• Performance Analytics Dashboard.......................... 16

Interlaboratory Comparison Program Cycle
1 Catalog Delivered
September: The catalog
2 Orders Completed
September–December:
3 Orders Processed
is sent to your laboratory. Your laboratory places its order. Order quantities are reserved.
4 Order Confirmations Sent

5 Kits Mailed
Kits are prepared and sent
6 Results Submitted
Completed result forms are
Confirmation reports are sent to from the manufacturer to your returned to the CAP where data
your laboratory after your order laboratory. are summarized.
is processed.
7 Evaluation Criteria Reviewed

The scientific resource
8 Reports Available
Reports are sent to and made
9 Certificate of Participation
Provided
committee reviews results and available online for your At the beginning of the program
the impact of evaluation criteria. laboratory, regulatory agency, year, your laboratory receives
and/or consultants. a certificate of participation.
beginning of the program year.
New Customer Information
General Customer
Information
Order Confirmation
After your laboratory’s order is received, an order confirmation is sent that contains the
following information:
• Shipping address
• Billing address
• Telephone and fax number
• List of programs ordered
• List of agencies and/or consultants to whom you have requested copies of your
evaluation be sent
Review the confirmation document carefully. If you have changes, return the document
within two weeks of receipt to:
Mail: Customer Data Management
College of American Pathologists
325 Waukegan Road
Northfield, Illinois 60093-2750
Fax: 847-832-8168 (country code: 001)
Regulatory Reporting
The CAP will automatically forward results for analytes regulated for PT to the CMS for
laboratories that have provided a CLIA identification number.
To make changes to your laboratory’s analyte reporting selections (ARS), contact the CAP
at 800-323-4040 option 1 or access your report online at cap.org.
Documentation will be requested and may be faxed to 847-832-8168. An explanation of
regulatory reporting and current laboratory legislation is included in section 8.
Binders/Glossaries
To provide you with an easy way by which to store your Surveys program materials, for
every nine (9) eligible programs, one three-ring binder with tabs and custom labels will be
sent to you at no charge. There is no need to order the binders as they will be shipped
automatically upon placement of your order. Additional binders are available for purchase
through the online store.
2017 2017 2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 3

If you are enrolled in hematology and/or clinical microscopy Surveys containing

photographs for morphologic identification, you will be able to access an online glossary of
terms for your general use. If you need a hardbound copy, call the CAP.
Kit Delivery and StorageRefer to the shipping schedule and advise your receiving
department accordingly. A shipping schedule is provided to your laboratory with the order
forms, or you can obtain a customized shipping calendar by logging in to ELSS at cap.org
and clicking on My PT Shipping Calendar.
The receiving department of your hospital or laboratory should be advised how to handle
the CAP kits. Insist on prompt transfer to the laboratory. Kits received by the hospital but
not delivered to the laboratory are not eligible for free replacement. Unless otherwise
specified, store the specimens in the refrigerator.
CAP Identification Number

Each Survey participant receives a CAP identification number that is printed on all result
forms. This number will also appear on each evaluation received by your laboratory. It is
helpful to have this number available when contacting the CAP.
Replacement Specimens
Kits may contain specimens for analysis. Check the contents against the kit instructions
upon receipt. If the kit is incomplete or contains broken or unlabeled specimens, contact
the CAP as soon as possible for a free replacement.
In the event that a replacement specimen is required, retain your original result form while
awaiting the arrival of the replacement specimens. The replacement specimens will be
sent in the same manner as your original specimens. When you receive the replacement
specimens, it is imperative that you complete testing as soon as possible to comply with
the original due date. Due to regulatory restrictions, a due date extension may not always
be possible. Occasionally, it may not be possible for the manufacturer to replace your
specimen(s) or kit. In this case, fill the exception code 33 bubble on the result form. A note
will appear on your evaluation report and you will not be penalized.
Because PT materials must be procured in advance of shipment, on occasion, additional
inventory is available for a nominal fee. Additional material may be purchased after the
close of the formal PT event.
To purchase these materials contact the CAP at 800-323-4040 option 1. All literature
associated with this product including the summary data will be provided. This option
does not replace routine PT.
These materials may be used for but not limited to:
• Competency assessment
• Instrument troubleshooting
• Training
• Education
• Research

PT Referral Information
Per CLIA, as published by the United States Federal Register, PT specimens must be
tested with the laboratory’s regular workload, using routine methods and testing the PT
specimens the same number of times it routinely tests patient specimens.
When handling PT specimens, laboratories must not communicate results nor share or
refer specimens for tests not on the laboratory’s menu. If referral for testing is routinely
performed for patient specimens, the practice cannot be followed for PT specimens.
Referral is considered to be movement of the
specimen from a laboratory with a CLIA identification number to another laboratory that
has a different CLIA identification number. Laboratories must ensure that personnel
do not share results or refer PT specimens for any reflex or testing outside their CLIA
identification number.
Results Due Date

The Surveys program is used for certification of certain laboratories. Since promptness
is considered in determining certification, we cannot accept late entries. Results must
be received at the CAP no later than midnight, Central Time by the due date on
the result form. Result forms received beyond the date noted will not be evaluated.
Participants will receive an evaluation indicating that the results were received past the
evaluation cut-off date along with a PS that can be used for self-evaluation.
Second Instrument Reporting

In 2014, the CMS directed all PT providers that laboratories subject to Clinical Laboratory
Improvement Amendments (CLIA) regulations are not permitted to test PT specimens on
multiple instruments unless that is how the laboratory routinely tests patient specimens.
Recently, the CMS communicated to approved PT providers that this directive applies
to all analytes, including those not listed in Subpart I of the CLIA regulations, as well as
analytes/methods categorized as waived tests (such as whole blood glucose meters).
Because the sanctions are severe if the regulations are not followed, the CAP PT program
no longer includes the option for second instrument. To meet your laboratory’s needs, the
CAP now offers its Quality Cross Check program. See the current Surveys and Anatomic
Pathology Education Programs catalog or the Regulatory Information page via cap.org for
further details.
Corrections to Results
• Corrections to results can be made any time prior to the due date listed on the result
form; review your laboratory data carefully prior to submission. For results approved
online, corrections must also be made online. Faxed or mailed corrections will not be
accepted.
• To view the status of your results, go to ELSS via cap.org click on Result Form Data
Entry.

• For any testing that you do not routinely perform in your laboratory, leave all reporting
areas for that test blank, including method information. Exceptions are noted in the
Critical Reporting Information section of the kit instructions or on the result form. Note:
A penalty will not be applied for blank responses in the case of educational challenges,
challenges not formally graded, or the proper use of exception codes.
CMS Reporting Instructions

For any regulated analytes that your laboratory does not report or may have discontinued,
you must update your reporting settings via the online CMS Analyte Reporting Selections
tool via ELSS. Additional regulatory information can be found via cap.org on the
Proficiency Testing page under Laboratory Improvement. If you have any questions, call
the customer contact center at 800-323-4040 option 1.
Fax-Back Response Programs

The CAP offers immediate (fax-back) responses for the submission of the laboratory forms
for the following educational anatomic pathology programs:
• Interlaboratory Programs in Gynecologic and Nongynecologic Cytopathology
(PAP/NGC)
• Fine-Needle Aspiration Glass Slide Program (FNAG)
Individual result forms can be submitted online (preferred method) or faxed to the CAP.
CME/CE certificates may be self-claimed via cap.org by clicking on the Learning tab.
Evaluations
Evaluations are posted online and mailed approximately two to five weeks after the ship
date of the kit. This time is needed for processing data, establishing evaluation criteria, and
preparing the PS.
Customer Support
CAP Customer Contact Center Information
Regular Hours: Monday-Friday, 7:00 AM–5:30 PM CT
Extended Hours: Monday-Friday 9 PM-5:00 AM CT (email only)
Contact us to: Phone:

001-847-832-7000 option 1
• Update contact information (telephone
number, email address, fax number, or Email:
address) Go to cap.org and select CONTACT &
• Receive additional supporting SUPPORT at the top of the home page.
information or documents for ordering OR
or importing purposes
Send email to [email protected]
• Ask a CAP expert questions about a
specific CAP program

Laboratory Accident Hotline Phone:

Accidental exposures while processing 001-847-832-7000 option 1
specimens from the CAP, including cuts During Contact Center hours
and contamination of mucous membranes
001-847-470-2812
or non-intact skin, should be reported
All other hours
to the CAP hotline for evaluation and
questions regarding prophylaxis. Please
provide the identification number of the
relevant specimen.
In countries where the CAP has a designated distributor, directly contact your CAP
distributor if you have questions related to pricing or any other inquiry not listed above.
Your laboratory will be notified of kit shipment via CAPTRAKerSM and email. If you do not
receive your kit within 7–10 calendar days following the ship date, or if you receive an
incomplete or damaged shipment, please call the customer contact center. Requests for
replacements after the 10th calendar day cannot be accepted.
For document acknowledgment, include the appropriate email address on the first page of
your order form in the section titled “PT Shipping Contact.”
To choose not to participate in this program, participants can contact the CAP at
800-323-4040 option 1.
Program Certificates
After the completion of the program year, participating laboratories will receive a certificate
recognizing each institution’s participation in the CAP PT program and its commitment to
patient care. Certificates are signed by the CAP president and are suitable for framing.
Deficiency Response
The CAP does not require that you submit documentation for all PT deficiencies. However,
it is recommended that such documentation be retained in your laboratory. The CAP
Laboratory Accreditation Program issues a separate report, the “Proficiency Testing
Exception Summary,” that addresses deficiencies for CAP-accredited laboratories.
Instructions for response will be included with the report.
Handle with Caution

PT specimens must be handled with caution. Each shipment includes a biohazard warning
statement explaining proper handling.
Laboratory Accidents
Incidents of personnel exposure to infectious specimens, through needle sticks,
contamination of the mucous membranes through splashes or aerosolization, or cuts from
containers, should be reported immediately to the CAP.

24-hour hotline: 800-443-3244

Have the following information available:
• CAP number
• Phone number
• Name of institution/city/state
• Name of person affected, if other than caller
• Date and time of incident
• Where and how affected
• Survey and specimen number
• Name and telephone number of laboratory director
This information will be relayed to a pathologist member of the appropriate resource
committee who will contact the participant’s laboratory director or hospital employee health
services physician with instructions concerning prophylaxis.
Limitations of PT
Due to the manufactured nature of the specimens and the logistics of shipping, PT does
not always correlate with the manner in which fresh, clinical specimens are handled. A
letter addressing these differences is included for general use by your laboratory.

Limitations of PT Letter
The College of American Pathologists (CAP) Surveys program is the largest external
quality assessment program in the world. As such, it provides an unparalleled selection
of challenges and offers the largest database in existence for interlaboratory comparison.
The CAP has accumulated significant experience in managing this type of program and is
knowledgeable in its uses and limitations.
Performance on CAP Surveys is not to be taken as the sole indicator of a laboratory’s

abilities. A proficiency testing Survey is but one of a number of programs that laboratories
should employ to assess, manage, and improve quality. In addition to Surveys, proper
method validation, quality control testing, periodic calibration and instrument maintenance,
employee competency testing, and laboratory inspection and accreditation provide important
tools for measuring laboratory performance and ensuring quality.
The Surveys program, although outstanding, is not a perfect measuring device. A number
of factors limit this tool’s ability to measure laboratory accuracy. Specific limitations
include requisite use of matrix materials that may impact test systems differently than
patient specimens; the appropriateness of grouping responses according to methodology,
instrumentation, and test platforms; varying size of comparison groups with attendant
variability of statistical parameters; regulated limitations in sampling of laboratories’ testing
systems; difficulties in quantitation at the extremes of analyte concentration; and unsuitability
of certain federally-mandated evaluation limits.
Thus, a certain number of responses that are graded as unacceptable in Surveys will in
fact be acceptable, and a certain number of responses graded as acceptable will in fact be
unacceptable. Although unsuccessful or unsatisfactory Surveys performance may reflect
problems within a laboratory, it does not constitute proof of inadequate performance or an
inability to meet patient needs.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth A. Wagar, MD, FCAP

Chair, Council on Scientific Affairs

General Comments
Result Form Data Entry

Overview
The result form is a document on which you record your methods of analysis and PT data.
The completed result form must be returned online (preferred) via ELSS or by fax to the
CAP by the due date listed on the form.
Retain a copy of the completed result form for your records before submitting it to the CAP.
Per the Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), changes to submitted data
cannot be made after the due date on the result form. Review all information on the
preprinted method summary page and all entries made on the result form for accuracy
prior to submission. Once you have opted in, log in to ELSS via cap.org and click on
Result Form Data Entry to view the status of your submitted data.
Preprinted Method Summary Page

Once your laboratory initially provides a master list code for a method, instrument, and/
or reagent, the CAP will retain this information, no longer requiring you to report them
repetitively throughout the year. Carefully check each master list selection to ensure the
correct codes are listed. To change a code, enter it in the appropriate boxes on the result
form.
Exception Codes
If your laboratory needs to report an analytical problem for an entire test or individual
specimens within a test, leave the result area blank and fill the appropriate two-digit
exception code bubble on the result form.
Exception Code Reason
11 Unable to analyze (documentation to be provided by laboratory).
22 Result is outside method/instrument reportable range.
33 Specimen determined to be unsatisfactory after contacting the CAP.
It is the laboratory’s responsibility to document the appropriate use of exception codes if
requested during a laboratory inspection. Refer to the kit instructions for more information.
2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 10

General Comments
Master Lists
Choose the appropriate method or instrument provided on the kit instructions or result
form.
Notify the CAP and the manufacturer if your method or instrument is not listed. If the
manufacturer of your method or instrument is not listed on the kit instructions or result
form, enter it in the “Use of Other” section at the end of the result form.
Identification master lists are provided for microbiology, blood cell identification, urine
sediment, clinical microscopy, and provider-performed microscopy. Select a code from the
appropriate master list and enter it on the result form.
For blood cell identification, urine sediment, clinical microscopy, and provider-performed
microscopy, all possible identifications are included on the master lists. Do not use the
code 010, “Other, Specify.” The use of this code will be evaluated as an unacceptable
response.
HTML Section
The CAP is implementing a more customer-friendly online interface for entering proficiency
testing (PT) results via e-LAB Solutions Suite. The enhancement provides online result
forms in an HTML format, replacing the PDF technology, but retains the design. The form
helps:
1. Reduce common clerical errors
2. Increase data accuracy
3. Approve online data efficiently
4. Search and navigate with ease
What is different about the form?

It provides validation for required information. For example, if a value/result is populated
for any specimen for a single test, then a value/result must be populated for manufacturer,
method, instrument, or reagent. It also prevents incomplete data from being submitted to
the CAP. For example, if you:
• Do not enter a unit of measure in the online result form, a pop-up message will appear
and ask you to provide the required information.
• Enter a value/result in an incorrect format (eg, ###.# instead of ###.) on the online
result form, a pop-up message will appear and ask you to revise the information.
• In addition, the form:
• Allows navigation by test (for laboratories that do not report every test in a PT event)
• Provides an approval button on the top of each result form page
• Aims to lessen browser compatibility issues.

General Comments
“Less Than” or “Greater Than” Values

Do not attempt to add “less than” or “greater than” to the value you submit unless this
option is provided on the result form. Where the option to report “greater than” or “less
than” is given, you must fill in the bubble underneath the appropriate reporting box to
indicate your response is a “less than” or “greater than” value. All other results will be
considered “equal to” values.
Where no option to report “greater than” or “less than” is given, refer to the Exception
Codes section or the General Reporting Information section of the kit instructions.

e-LAB Solutions (ELSS)
e-LAB Solutions Suite (ELSS)

Getting Started
ELSS is the CAP’s online portal to manage your laboratory improvement programs. In
order to take full advantage of the functionalities available online, users can selectively
enable laboratories and personnel by:
Creating an Online Account

In order to access ELSS, you must create a personal Web account by going to cap.org
and clicking on the LOG IN drop-down menu. Under New Users, click on CREATE AN
ACCOUNT; this anonly needs to be done once per user
Logging In
Once you have established an online account, you will be prompted to enter your user
ID and password. This must be done every time you visit cap.org.Both members and
nonmembers utilize the same login functionality.
Opting In
When your laboratory first places an order, the laboratory director will receive an opt-in
email with a CAP Number and PIN #. The laboratory director must designate who will
be the laboratory’s site administrator. Your laboratory only has to opt in once. The opt-
in process establishes the laboratory’s online access to CAP programs through e-LAB
Solutions Suite and defines the site administrator’s responsibilities.
Requesting Access
Individualized accounts for laboratory users allow flexibility in determining access levels.
Because users are independent entities from the laboratory, users can be affiliated with
multiple laboratories and their security can be administered in a different manner at each
site.
To request access to a laboratory, go to cap.org, log in, and under the LOG IN drop-down
menu, click on e-LAB Solutions Suite. Under Quick Links, click on Request Access to
Laboratory Data and enter your laboratory’s CAP#.
Individual privileges can be accessed by clicking on My Lab Permissions.

e-LAB Solutions (ELSS)
Online Data Submission

Online result forms make data entry faster and more accurate. Your laboratory will
minimize PT failures on data entry through the use of an enhanced HTML-based result
form. You can also verify receipt of data and view faxed or mailed data.
Automated PT data reporting is available through e-LAB Solutions Connect. The CAP
has partnered with Data Innovations Instrument Manager™ middleware solution to help
facilitate the connection and transmission. With e-LAB Solutions Connect, the CAP’s
quantitative PT results are automatically transmitted from your laboratory’s instruments or
laboratory information system to ELSS.
Online Reports
When the result form due date has past, data are processed and graded according
to stringent governmental and committee criteria. Laboratory results and grading
interpretations are displayed in an individualized report accessible by clicking on
Evaluation Reports under Proficiency Testing/Quality Management. Using the filter options,
select the program and report.
The online evaluation allows the user to easily navigate the data analyte by analyte. Also,
users benefit by the inclusion of detailed images hyperlinked on the report. Laboratory
managers can access the All Analyte Scorecard, allowing them to customize the scorecard
data for their laboratory as a means of identifying deficiencies or trends in performance.
Other ancillary reports that accompany the evaluation are available online, as well, for
review and to download for future reference, including the PS, final critiques, and annual
summaries, which contain useful data and education that can be reviewed and accessed
by all users with appropriate security.
Performance Analytics Dashboard

Our new Performance Analytics Dashboard gives the comprehensive data view you
need to proactively focus energy on areas that need immediate attention while filtering
out distractions. Updated daily, this Web-based reporting solution for your CAP PT and
accreditation performance reduces the stress of managing today’s single laboratory or an
expansive network’s performance with only a few clicks.

How to Interpret Your Evaluation
How to Interpret Your

Evaluation
This chapter includes general information regarding evaluations. A section explaining how
to interpret your individual evaluation will be included with each mailing.
General Guidelines for Evaluation

On February 28, 1992, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) published the
final rules implementing the CLIA of 1988. These regulations established evaluation criteria
limits for many of the analytes included in the CAP Surveys programs. The target values
are determined by the scientific resource committees of the CAP. For those analytes not
included in the PT portion of CLIA, the target values and evaluation criteria are determined
solely by the scientific resource committees.
Selection of a Target Value

To minimize the effect of method differences and to allow comparison of all methods,
participants’ results are combined into comparable method/instrument groups called
peer groups. It is important for participants to provide complete information regarding the
method or instrument used in order to be combined in the appropriate peer group.
For most analytes, the peer group mean is designated as the target value for evaluation.
The peer group mean is the preferred target if no single target value exists that can
provide an accuracy-based target that is traceable to the “true value” as determined by a
definitive or reference method analysis. The peer group must consist of greater than nine
results after outlier exclusion, and the variability of the peer group data must not be too
great.
If peer group data are not available or are too variable, method group statistics may be
used. The method group must also consist of greater than nine results and demonstrate
acceptable variability before it is used as the target group.
If peer and method group statistics are not available, a comparative method group may be
designated as the target mean. The comparative method is not the method recommended
by the CAP; however, it is established as a historically reliable method and is used
for evaluating results from methods that have an insufficient number of participants to
generate a separate peer group and/or method group statistics. If no comparative method
exists for the analyte, results will not be evaluated.
For some analytes, a single target value is used in which consistent results are
demonstrated across all peer groups.

Calculation of Summary Statistics

Peer Group Results
Results are grouped according to the method used for analysis and screened for outliers.
Various statistics are calculated from the remaining data that summarize the peer group’s
responses. These summary statistics may include the following:
• the mean (the average of the reported results)
• the standard deviation (a measure of the variability of the participant results, often
abbreviated as SD)
• the coefficient of variation (CV)
• the median (the middle value in an ordered list of the non-outlier results)
• the low value (the lowest value reported)
• the high value (the highest value reported)
• the final count of reported results that were not excluded as outliers.
Outlier Detection Technique

Outlier exclusion is necessary because a large series of results frequently will include
some aberrant values. These may arise from instrument malfunction, technical errors,
specimen mix-ups, misplaced decimals, incorrect units of measure, or data entry errors. If
any results are excluded, the outlier process is repeated using the remaining values. The
summary statistics that appear on your reports do not reflect results that were considered
to be outliers during either outlier pass.
Quantitative Procedures/Rounding
All quantitative responses are evaluated based on a range of acceptability. This range is
determined using a target value and a limit. The limit will be either a fixed interval (eg, ±
5 mg/dL), a percentage of the mean (eg, ± 25%), an SD (eg, ± 3 SD), or a variable range
(eg, ± 6 mg/dL or 10%, whichever is greater). The PS included with your evaluations
the criteria used to evaluate your performance. The following sections provides specific
examples of how to calculate the range of acceptability depending upon the criteria used.
Benefit-of-the-doubt rounding is used to determine the range of acceptable results. The
upper limit of acceptability is obtained by rounding up to the next reportable result, while
the lower limit is determined by truncating.
Fixed Range Example

Your laboratory reports a sodium result of 138 mmol/L. The peer group mean is 139.5
mmol/L.
The evaluation limit for sodium is ± 4 mmol/L. The acceptable range is determined by the
formula 139.5 mmol/L ± 4 mmol/L, which is 135 to 144 mmol/L; therefore, your reported
result of 138 mmol/L is within the calculated acceptable range of 135 to 144 mmol/L when
using benefit-of-the-doubt rounding.

Percentage of the Mean Example

Your laboratory reports an albumin result of 3.1 mg/dL. The peer group mean is 3.39 mg/
dL. The evaluation limit for albumin is ± 10%. Ten percent of 3.39 mg/dL is 0.34 mg/dL.
The acceptable range is determined by the formula 3.39 mg/dL ± 0.34 mg/dL, which is 3.0
to 3.8 mg/dL when using benefit-of-the-doubt rounding; therefore, your reported result of
3.1 mg/dL is within the calculated acceptable range of 3.0 to 3.8 mg/dL.
Standard Deviation Example

Your laboratory reports a thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) result of 16.4 µU/mL. The
peer group statistics are as follows: mean = 15.7 µU/mL, SD = 1.5, and CV = 9.6. The
evaluation limit for TSH is ± 3 SD. 3 x 1.5 = 4.5. The acceptable range is determined using
the formula 15.7 µU/mL ± 4.5 µU/mL, which is 11.2 to 20.2 µU/mL when using benefit-of-
the-doubt rounding; therefore, your result of 16.4 µU/mL is within the acceptable range of
11.2 to 20.2 µU/mL.
Variable Range Example

Your laboratory reports a total bilirubin result of 4.5 mg/dL. The peer group mean is 4.68
mg/dL. The evaluation limit for total bilirubin is ± 0.4 mg/dL or 20%, whichever is greater.
Twenty percent of 4.68 is 0.936. Since the percentage limit of 0.94 is greater than the
interval limit of 0.4, the percentage limit is applied to the target value. The acceptable
range is determined using the formula: 4.68 ± 0.936, which is 3.7 to 5.7 mg/dL when using
benefit-of-the-doubt rounding; therefore, your result of 4.5 mg/dL is within the acceptable
range of 3.7 to 5.7 mg/dL.
The PS included with your evaluation will list the criteria used to evaluate your
performance. To determine the acceptable range, a benefit-of-the-doubt rounding
procedure is utilized when grading.
Calculation of the Standard Deviation Index (SDI)

The evaluation lists your results, the statistics for your peer group, and your normalized
results as an SDI. This value is obtained by subtracting the group mean from your result
and then dividing by the SD.
The SDI is expressed in terms of the number of SDs from the mean, with an arithmetic
sign indicating the direction of the difference. The calculation of the SDI normalizes your
result and, therefore, allows for a comparison of results from specimens of different
concentrations of an analyte.
When a comparative method has been designated for Surveys analysis, a second set
of statistics is listed comparing your results with those obtained using the comparative
method. The figures shown are the mean and SD for the comparative method and your
result as an SDI using these statistics. It is possible for your result to be defined as “good”
performance in your method group and yet produce a comparative SDI greater than two.
This will occur if your method has a large analytic bias or a large SD. It is possible to
receive a comparative SDI lower than the method group SDI, although this rarely occurs.
In practice, most participants receive similar method group and comparative SDIs.

Comparative Statistics
Quantitative Procedures
Your evaluation contains plots of the relative distance of your reported results as a
percentage of allowable deviation from the target value. The numeric digit indicates the
number of results at a plot location. The allowed deviation may be calculated as follows:
If your result is greater than the target mean:
Percentage of your result-target

= 100 x
Acceptable Deviation upper limit-target mean
If your result is less than the target mean:
Percentage of your result-target

= 100 x
Acceptable Deviation target mean-lower limit-
Qualitative Procedures
For qualitative responses, consensus agreement of referee or participating laboratories is
used for evaluation. Generally, 80% agreement is required.

Discipline-Specific Reporting Information
Continuing Education
(CME)
Continuing Medical Education (CME) Category 1
The CAP is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education
(ACCME) to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
The CAP designates these educational activities for a maximum of the stated number of
AMA PRA Category 1 Credits™. Physicians should only claim credits commensurate with
the extent of their participation in the activity.
The American Medical Association has determined that physicians not licensed in the US
who participate in these CME activities are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 Credit™.
See the current Surveys and Anatomic Pathology Education Programs catalog for
available CME programs.
CE for Nonphysician Laboratory Personnel

This activity is acceptable to meet the CE requirements for the American Society for
Clinical Pathology (ASCP) Board of Registry Certification Maintenance Program. This
activity is approved for continuing education credit in the states of California and Florida.
All nonphysician laboratory professionals in your laboratory can earn individual CE credits
by completing the related education reading and online learning assessment questions via
cap.org.
Surveys CE Programs
Discipline Maximum CE Credits
Chemistry
Coagulation
Hematology
The number of credits are
Histology (HistoQIP)
specific to the program mailing.
Immunology
Microbiology
Therapeutic Drug Monitoring/Endocrinology Go to cap.org for
up-to-date activity listings.
Toxicology
Transfusion Medicine
Reproductive Medicine

Learning Cycle Information

Each education activity provides information on common technical and nontechnical
issues encountered in all laboratory settings. To receive CE credit, you must complete
the education reading provided in your PS and answer the online learning assessment
questions. Most education activities are available for 12 months and must be completed
within that time frame. CE credit will be applied toward the year in which the activity is
completed. Detailed information on how to access the online components will be included
in each PS. The CAP is an approved provider of accredited CME. In order to remain a
CME provider the CAP must abide by all ACCME and AMA rules for accredited CME. This
means that the CAP cannot open a course to allow completion of the course after the
expiration date.
CE for Cytotechnologists
Cytotechnologists may apply the credits from the gynecologic and nongynecologic (FNA,
FNAG, NGC, and TICP) programs toward the required educational activities for the
American Society for Cytopathology (ASC) Continuing Education Credit Program.
Online Virtual Microscopy Education Programs

The CAP offers online education programs that use DigitalScopetechnology to present
whole slide images from actual glass slides for a variety of sites and specimen types.
This technology simulates a microscope, allowing you to scan the image and use multiple
magnifications to view the material. From the images and clinical information provided,
you select a diagnosis, answer learning assessment questions, and receive immediate
feedback online.
See the current Surveys and Anatomic Pathology Education Programs catalog for
available online virtual microscopy education programs.

Discipline-Specific Reporting
Information
Hematology
To report your blood cell identification, select the best identification code from the
Hematology Blood Cell Identification Master List provided in the kit instructions. For further
description of the Hematology Blood Cell Identification Master List choices, refer to the
Blood Cell Identification section of the current CAP Hematology and Clinical Microscopy
Glossary, which can be accessed at cap.org.
If results are reported for both blood cell identification and auto differentials, the blood cell
identification will be reported to CMS.
The Hematology Blood Cell Identification Master List choice, “Immature cell or abnormal
cell, would refer for identification,” must be reserved for cells you rarely encounter and are
unable to specifically identify. Grading of this response will follow the guidelines set forth in
the July 26, 1993, Federal Register Notice.
Coagulation
For plasma-based coagulation testing [prothrombin time (PT), activated partial
thromboplastin (APTT), Fibrinogen], an instrument and reagent code are required for
proper evaluation. Participants enrolled in whole blood testing for PT need only indicate an
instrument (if requested) and their results. For all prothrombin time modules, reporting of
international normalized ratio (INR) results is optional. Plasma-based and whole blood INR
are evaluated.
Urinalysis
There are separate urinalysis and specific gravity method and instrument master lists in
the kit instructions. To ensure an accurate peer group evaluation of your results, it is critical
to provide accurate method and instrument information.
A specific list of reporting options is provided for each urinalysis procedure. It is not
feasible to provide a list of reporting choices specific for every possible dipstick being
marketed to laboratories. Subsequently, the result ranges listed may not exactly correlate
with the ranges used with your instrument/dipstick. In these few cases, choose the range
that most closely matches your intended result.

To report urine sediment, clinical microscopy, or provider-performed microscopy, select

the best identification code from the Urine Sediment Master List provided. For further
description of the Hematology Blood Cell Identification Master List choices, refer to the
Blood Cell Identification section of the current CAP Hematology and Clinical Microscopy
Glossary, which can be accessed at cap.org.
Urinalysis Dipstick Tests

For qualitative procedures in urinalysis, evaluation is based on participant consensus
by method and instrument. For each analyte, a minimum of two, but not more than four,
responses will be given a passing score. Analyte results graded “good” performance must
have 80% participant consensus. Eighty percent participant consensus can be determined
by grouping the mode with the next one or two most frequent responses. This group
will be given “good” performance. “Acceptable” performance will be given to additional
responses until a minimum of 90% of participant results are given a passing score. In
the case of a negative specimen, negative responses must constitute 90% participant
consensus. Specimens with results for one or more methods distributed over both negative
and positive response (nonconsensus) will not be evaluated. Specimens for which there is
greater than 90% of participant responses distributed over more than four responses will
be graded as nonconsensus.
Microbiology
Where appropriate, a clinical diagnosis, age, and source are listed to simulate a true
clinical situation and to allow laboratory personnel to select appropriate media or methods
for processing these specimens. However, as the pathogenic bacteria present in any of
these specimens may be isolated from multiple sources of the body, all participants should
attempt identification of the organisms present in all these specimens.
Per the Federal Register, a Survey must grade a laboratory’s ability to distinguish between
a pathogen and a contaminant. Culture challenges will be designated in the instructions
to be handled as “identify principal pathogen” or “identify all organisms” challenges.
Participants must report in this manner even when this differs from their laboratory’s
routine practice. For example, a urine specimen contains Klebsiella pneumoniae and
Staphylococcus epidermidis. If the instructions indicate to “Identify all organisms,” both
organisms should be reported. If the instructions indicate to “identify principal pathogen,”
only the Klebsiella pneumoniae should be reported. If the Staphylococcus epidermidis is
reported, it would be penalized.
Specimen results will be evaluated if 80% or more of the participant laboratories agree on
the identification of the test organism(s) to genus or to genus and species. In the absence
of participant consensus, referee laboratories will be used.
The CLIA regulations state that a laboratory must perform a minimum of five specimens in
each testing event for the subspecialty of bacteriology. The five challenges can include a
combination of the following specimens:
• Bacterial antigen detection
• Bacterial identification (culture)
• Gram stain
• Antimicrobial susceptibility
Procedures assayed with waived methodologies will not count toward the five-challenge
minimum. The laboratory is responsible for maintaining the five specimens per testing
event for its remaining nonwaived tests in the subspecialty when a test is waived by the
Food and Drug Administration midyear.
Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

Participants will be asked to perform susceptibility tests using the antimicrobial agents and
techniques in routine use in their individual laboratories. The laboratories should report
only antibiotics appropriate for therapy of infections at the site indicated in the patient
history. See current Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) documents M2, M7,
M100, or other appropriate documents for guidance.
Interpretation results (susceptible, intermediate, and resistant) will be penalized for:
• Agents that are not clinically appropriate for the site of infection (meningitis,
pneumonia, urinary tract, etc)
• Use of methods CLSI advises against
• Use of methods that the manufacturer recommends against using, due to poor
performance
Selective reporting for the presumed site of infection helps improve clinical relevance,
encourages appropriate therapy, and helps to minimize selection of resistance.

Evaluations and Participant Summaries (PS)
Evaluations and Participant

Summaries (PS)
Overview
Shortly after you submit your PT results to the CAP, an evaluation of your submitted results
will be available online or mailed back to you. Your evaluation can be used as a quality
assurance tool to assess how you performed compared to other participants. It is important
that you review and understand the information presented in your evaluation:
• Demographic information: Provides information about your laboratory, including
the name of your institution, your CAP identification number, and any agencies or
consultants you have designated to receive copies of your evaluation.
• Result area: Contains all results reported for a particular mailing and statistical data
used for evaluation purposes. A detailed description of evaluation data specific for
each discipline is presented in each PS.
• CMS performance summary report: Includes information on current and cumulative
performance for regulated analytes to be sent to the CMS.
Reviewing Your Evaluation

To truly realize the benefit of PT, it is important that you take
the time to carefully review your evaluation. You can gain valuable insight into your
laboratory’s overall processes by following these easy steps in reviewing this report.
1. Review the demographic information on the evaluation. If any information is incorrect
or has changed, contact the CAP at 800-323-4040 option 1.
2. Compare information on your evaluation with results on your photocopy or printed
copy of the result form. If any of your data was entered by the CAP incorrectly, contact
us immediately. Corrections due to data entry errors made by the CAP must be
requested within four weeks after the first evaluation was mailed.
3. Look for any unacceptable results. Common, easily corrected reasons for
unacceptable results include:
• Incorrect or incomplete method/instrument data
• Clerical error
• Decimal point placement
• Specimen handling error
Remember, whatever the cause, CLIA states that all PT deficiencies must be
documented and corrective action taken to resolve the deficiency.

4. Occasionally, incorrect entry of submitted data occurs. If this is due to your

transcription error or failure to complete the result form appropriately, your entry cannot
be reevaluated. If the error is made by the CAP, contact the CAP at 800-323-4040
option 1 for further assistance.
5. Although the results may not be formally evaluated, you can compare your results with
the data provided in the PS report. You can use the “all method mean” or median, low,
and high values to compare your results for a self-assessment of your performance.
6. For quantitative data, just knowing that you are “within limits” does not tell you if you
are experiencing a slowly developing bias that may result in future failures. The key to
optimal use of your evaluation data is to look at the column where standard deviation
indexes (SDI) are reported. If you note any of the following tendencies, it may be
advantageous to examine your laboratory processes further:
• The average SDI is more than ±1.5: this may indicate a significant systematic
error. Review calibration data and technique. Review expiration dates of
calibrators and reagents.
• One of your SDIs is greater than ±3 or total SDI is greater than 4 (one SDI is -2
and one is +2.5 for a total of 4.5): this may indicate a significant random error.
Review your procedure to determine where any unwanted imprecision may be
occurring.
7. When the evaluation has a nonevaluation code listed, refer to your PS for valuable
information.
8. Verify that all regulated analytes for which you reported results are included on the
CMS Performance Summary Report.
9. Make sure the laboratory director reviews and signs all PT evaluations.
PS
In addition to your evaluation, each laboratory receives a PS for that mailing that lists
results from all participants for each analyte grouped by the methodology. This report
provides valuable information to the participant in the form of comparative data and
education activities.
Program Update
This section of the participant summary contains information about evaluation criteria
in use for that mailing. It also highlights important method, manufacturer, and specimen
information that pertains to that mailing.
Quantitative Data
The participant summary provides the statistical data needed to review your PT
results. The report lists the mean, SD, and CV for peer groups consisting of 10 or more
laboratories.
Qualitative Data
Qualitative data evaluation is based on consensus of participant and/or referee responses.
The PS lists the participant responses along with the percentage reporting that response.
Where available, referee data is also included. This practice provides higher-quality,
evaluated challenges to our participants.

How to Perform a Self-Evaluation

As mentioned previously, occasionally a PT challenge cannot be evaluated for a variety of
reasons:
• Lack of participant consensus
• Insufficient data (<10 responses for a given method)
• Perceived compatibility issues
In order to comply with the quality assurance aspect of PT as outlined in CLIA, you must
have some mechanism to evaluate your PT results. Here are a few examples of how the
data presented in the PScan assist with this task.
Quantitative Results
If you perform a test and there are fewer than nine other laboratories reporting results for
that test, your result will not be evaluated. You can determine how well you performed
compared to all participants who reported results by using the “all instrument method” data
presented in the PS(if provided). For example, you perform hemoglobin analysis using
the Coulter LH500. There are an insufficient number of results to form a peer group (<10);
therefore, your results are not graded. Note that in the PS there is an all-instrument mean,
standard deviation, and coefficient of variation, which can be used as a reference value.
By applying the published CMS evaluation limits (±7%) to this mean, you can determine
how well you performed compared to this reference value. For example:
Your result: 13.8 g/dL
All Instrument Mean: 13.77 g/dL
Range of Acceptability: 12.8–14.8 g/dL
In this example, your result would be considered within range when compared to the all-
instrument mean. Document this self-assessment on your evaluation. When you perform
this self-assessment, any unacceptable result should be documented and investigated and
corrective action should be taken as would be done for formally evaluated results. This
same technique can be used when only a median, low, and high value are reported for an
analyte.
Qualitative Results
If a qualitative result is not evaluated due to lack of referee or participant consensus, you
can still evaluate how well your laboratory’s result agreed with the correct response by
using the data in the PS. For example, one of the Gram stain challenges could not be
graded due to lack of participant consensus (77% reported gram-negative, 23% reported
gram-positive). The PS indicates that the organism was Pseudomonas aeruginosa, a
gram-negative rod/bacilli. Compare your result with the correct result. Investigate and
document any corrective action taken. Review the educational critique accompanying the
result for helpful suggestions on laboratory technique.

Laboratory Legislation and CMS Reporting
Laboratory Legislation and

CMS Reporting
In February 28, 1992, the Secretary of HHS published the final rules implementing CLIA.
The CLIA regulations replaced the Medicare, Medicaid, and CLIA ’67 standards with a
single set of requirements that apply to almost all laboratories testing human specimens.
Standards for laboratory personnel, quality control, and quality assurance are based on
test complexity and risk factors. The regulations also establish application procedures and
fees for CLIA certification, as well as enforcement procedures and sanctions applicable
when laboratories fail to meet standards.
CLIA applies to all laboratories, physician offices, or other entities performing testing on
human specimens for the purpose of providing information for the diagnosis, prevention, or
treatment of disease or impairment of human beings. Laboratories that conduct testing for
the purpose of assessing the health of individuals (eg, testing for insurance purposes) are
also subject to CLIA. The following lists certain laboratories that are not subject to CLIA:
• Laboratories conducting only forensic testing
• Research laboratories that do not report patient results
• Components or functions of laboratories certified by the Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration
• Laboratories located in a state in which the licensure program is approved by the CMS
as meeting CLIA standards
• International laboratories not performing tests on United States citizens
Under CLIA, all clinical laboratories, regardless of location, size, or type, must meet
standards based on the complexity of the tests they perform. Three levels of testing
complexity are defined in the regulations: waived, provider-performed microscopy, and
nonwaived. Laboratories performing provider-performed microscopy or nonwaived
testing must meet requirements for PT, patient test management, quality control, quality
assurance, and personnel. These specific requirements do not apply to tests in the waived
category.
The uniform PT program regulations mandate that your laboratory must enroll in a PT
program approved by the Department of Health and Human Services, the CMS parent
regulatory agency, for each of the specialties and subspecialties for which it seeks
certification. All analytes that are regulated for PT appear in bold type in the Surveys and
Anatomic Pathology Education Programs catalog.
Your laboratory must notify CMS of the approved program(s) in which you participate and
authorize the PT program to release all data to the CMS. Your laboratory must participate
in an approved PT program for one year before designating a different program. CMS must
be notified before your laboratory changes PT programs. For tests that are not subject to
PT in these regulations, your laboratory must still establish the accuracy and reliability of
its test procedures at least twice a year.

PT specimens must be tested with the regular patient workload by personnel who routinely
perform testing. Your laboratory’s routine testing methods must be used. The individual
testing the specimens and the laboratory director must attest to the routine integration of
specimens using a form provided by the PT program. Laboratories that perform tests on
PT specimens must not engage in interlaboratory communications pertaining to the results
of PT specimen(s) until after the date by which the laboratory must report PT results to the
program for the testing event in which the specimens were sent. Laboratories with multiple
testing sites or separate locations must not participate in communications or discussions
concerning PT specimen results until after the date by which the laboratory must report PT
results to the program. Your laboratory must also maintain a copy of all records, including
the form used to record the PT results (including the attestation signatures), for a minimum
of two years.
Your laboratory must successfully participate in a PT program approved by CMS.
“Unsuccessful proficiency testing performance” is a “condition level” deficiency and may
result in laboratory sanctions such as suspension of the CLIA certificate and Medicare
payments for the specialty, subspecialty, and analyte involved. Failure to achieve a
satisfactory overall testing event performance for two consecutive testing events or two out
of three consecutive testing events is considered unsuccessful performance.
Procedures assayed with waived methodologies will not count toward the five-challenge
minimum.
Failure to attain an overall testing event score of at least 80% is unsatisfactory
performance for analytes in all specialties and subspecialties except ABO group, D(Rh)
typing, and compatibility testing for which 100% is required.
Failure to return PT results for a testing event is unsatisfactory performance and will result
in a score of “0.” For any unsatisfactory testing event for reasons other than failure to
participate, your laboratory must undertake appropriate training and employ the technical
assistance necessary to correct the problem. All remedial action must be documented
and such documentation kept for two years at your laboratory for possible reference
by inspection and accreditation teams. As part of these regulations, criteria have been
established by which a PT provider’s program may be evaluated for approval by HHS. The
CAP has made every effort to ensure that the Surveys program has met the requirements
set forth by the February 28, 1992, Final Rule.
Special Considerations for the Regulatory Requirements for the

Specialty of Immunohematology
The specialty of Immunohematology comprises four subspecialties as follows:
• ABO/Rh
• Unexpected antibody detection
• Compatibility testing
• Antibody identification
A 100% score is required to achieve satisfactory performance for ABO/Rh and compatibility
testing.
For unexpected antibody detection and antibody identification, an 80% score is required.
The consensus percentage required to establish a graded challenge is set at 95%
participant or 100% referee consensus for ABO/Rh and compatibility testing and 95%
referee or participant consensus for unexpected antibody or antibody identification
challenges.
Special Considerations for the Regulatory Requirements for the

Specialty of Microbiology
The CLIA regulations state that a laboratory must test a minimum of five specimens in
each testing event for the subspecialties of bacteriology, mycobacteriology, mycology,
parasitology, and virology. Within each of these subspecialties, various types of testing are
required.
For bacteriology, the five challenges may include a combination of the following
specimens:
• Bacterial antigen detection
• Bacterial identification
• Gram stain
• Antimicrobial susceptibility
Chlamydia trachomatis results are aggregated under the subspecialty of bacteriology.
For mycobacteriology, the five challenges may include a combination of the following
specimens:
• Acid-fast stain
• Mycobacterial identification
• Antimycobacterial susceptibility
For mycology, five identifications are required.
For parasitology, five identifications are required and may consist of testing by fecal
suspension, Giemsa-stained blood smear, antigen detection, and/or PVA slide.
For virology, the five challenges may include a combination of the following specimens:
• Viral antigen detection
• Viral identification (culture)
Note: In order to meet the regulatory requirements for microbiology subspecialties,
carefully follow the kit instructions included with each Surveys mailing.
Regulatory Requirements for the Specialty of Cytology: Gynecologic

Examinations
For cytology, the examination consists of ten slides from four diagnostic categories,
including Unsatisfactory, Negative or Benign, LSIL and HSIL or carcinoma. To be
successful in cytology, a score of 90% must be achieved. Detailed instructions will be
provided with the test materials.

Provision of Results to CMS and State

Agencies
To assist in complying with the requirement that your laboratory results be released to
HHS, the CAP will transfer data to the CMS if you have provided a CLIA identification
number. We will forward paper or electronic copies of your results to your state department
of health, acting on behalf of the CMS, if you authorize us to do so. To authorize release of
results to state agencies, indicate your request on the order confirmation report sent after
your Surveys order is processed, or send a letter to the CAP. Your Surveys evaluation will
then reflect the name of the agency to which the information was provided. Any questions
regarding requirements for forwarding your PT results may be answered via your state
department of health or one of the CMS regional offices.
Consult with your state department of health for additional laws or regulations concerning
inspection, accreditation, and PT requirements that may affect the licensing of your
laboratory and its personnel.
Copies of the February 28, 1992, CLIA regulations can be obtained by contacting the
Government Printing Office by telephone at 202-512-1800 or by fax at 202-512-2250 and
requesting CFR Title 42 Parts 400-429 and 430-End. You may also access documents
online at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-1992-02-28/pdf/FR-1992-02-28.pdf
If you have any questions regarding the automatic transfer of results to CMS or your
performance summaries, contact the CAP at 800-323-4040 option 1.

Use of Reason Codes for Nonevaluated

Specimens
Some individual results are not evaluated for certain laboratories for a variety of reasons.
A reason code explaining the specific circumstance will appear on individual evaluation,
along with a brief explanation of what that code means. Below is a ledger of possible
reason codes that can be assigned.
Reason Code Description or Explanation

11 Unable to analyze (documentation to be provided by laboratory).
20 No appropriate target/response could be graded.
21 Specimen problem.
22 Result is outside the method/instrument reportable range.
24 Incorrect response due to failure to provide a valid response code.
25 Inappropriate use of antimicrobial.
26 Educational challenge.
27, 31 Lack of participant or referee consensus.
Response qualified with a “greater than” or “less than” sign; or unable
28
to quantitate.
29 Inappropriate response.
30 Scientific committee decision.
33 Specimen determined to be unsatisfactory after contacting the CAP.
35 Testing not performed on this specimen type.
40 Results for this kit were not received.
41 Results for this kit were received past the due date.
42 No credit assigned due to absence of response.
43 The order for this kit was canceled; results not evaluated.
This drug is not included in our test menu. Use of this code counts as a
44
correct response.
46 Quantitation not appropriate.
55 Exemption granted due to a natural disaster.
77 Improper use of exception code for this mailing.
Lab does not perform tests from this source or does not perform this
88
test on patients.
There were an insufficient number of contributing challenges to
91
establish a composite grade.
Composite grade could not be established due to the use of multiple
92
non-graded reason codes for the individual challenges.
It is the laboratory’s responsibility to document the appropriate use of these

exception codes should this be requested during a laboratory inspection.

CMS Performance Summary
CMS Performance Summary Data

1. a. Kit ID: defines the customer’s unique kit number for each mailing.
b. Kit Mailed: lists the date the Surveys mailing was shipped.
c. Original Evaluation: lists the date the evaluation was originally generated.
2. Regulated Analyte: lists all regulated tests included in the specialty/subspecialty as
defined by the CLIA regulations for the modules in which you are enrolled.
3. Summary of Your Previous Responses: lists the total number of specimens you have
tested and the number of acceptable responses for previous testing events.
4. CAP Number and Kit: defines the CAP number and kit sequence.
5. Test Event: identifies the product fulfillment group and shipment.
6. Summary of Your Current Responses: lists the total number of specimens you have
tested and the number of acceptable responses for that testing event.
7. Current Event Performance Interpretation: indicates either satisfactory (≥80%) or
unsatisfactory (<80%) performance for each analyte and the overall performance for
the specialty/subspecialty. For ABO group, D (Rho) type, and compatibility testing, a
score of 100% is required. When results have not been received from your laboratory
for a shipment, this area will be blank.
• A score may not appear (field is blank) due to the following reasons:
• Lab has indicated to the CAP that the regulated analyte should not be
• reported to agencies
• Challenges were not graded, using reason codes that are not reported on the
scorecard
• The method reported for the analyte is waived by the CMS
• No results were reported
8. Cumulative Performance Interpretation: indicates successful (≥80%) or
unsuccessful (<80%) performance for each analyte and for the specialty/subspecialty.
For ABO group, D (Rho) type, and compatibility testing, a score of 100% is required. A
<1> symbol denotes that your performance is successful; however, because you had
less than 80% on the previous mailing, you are still at risk to be unsuccessful for the
next mailing. A <2> denotes you are currently successful but at risk for the next two
mailings as you were unsatisfactory for this mailing. These codes are applicable to
both the analyte and the overall specialty/subspecialty scores. A <3> denotes currently
unsuccessful performance. A <4> denotes that scorecard performance is pending a
future evaluation or may not be applicable due to discontinued testing or the use of a
waived method.

2017 PT Manual

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2017 PT Manual

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2017 PT Manual

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2017Pr

1 General Customer Information................... 3–10 4 How to Interpret Your Evaluation.............. 17–20

• Regulatory Reporting............................................. 3 • Selection of a Target Value............................................ 17

• Binders/Glossaries................................................ 4 • Calculation of Summary Statistics........................... 18

• Kit Delivery and Storage ........................................ 4 • Comparative Statistics.......................................... 20

• CAP Identification Number...................................... 4 5 Continuing Education (CE)........................ 21–22

• Corrections to Results............................................ 7 7 Evaluations and Participant Summaries

• Customer Support................................................. 7 (PS)............................................................... 26–29

2 Result Form Data Entry...............................11–13 8 Laboratory Legislation and Centers for

• Overview........................................................... 11 Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)

• Preprinted Method Summary Page ......................... 11 Reporting................................................... 30–37

3 e-LAB Solutions Suite (ELSS)................... 14–16

• Online Data Submission....................................... 15

• Performance Analytics Dashboard.......................... 16

4 Order Confirmations Sent

7 Evaluation Criteria Reviewed

2017 2017 2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 3

If you are enrolled in hematology and/or clinical microscopy Surveys containing

CAP Identification Number

2017 2017 2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 4

Results Due Date

Second Instrument Reporting

2017 2017 2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 5

CMS Reporting Instructions

Fax-Back Response Programs

Contact us to: Phone:

2017 2017 2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 6

Laboratory Accident Hotline Phone:

Handle with Caution

2017 2017 2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 7

24-hour hotline: 800-443-3244

2017 2017 2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 8

Performance on CAP Surveys is not to be taken as the sole indicator of a laboratory’s

Elizabeth A. Wagar, MD, FCAP

2017 2017 2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 9

Result Form Data Entry

Preprinted Method Summary Page

2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 10

What is different about the form?

2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 11

“Less Than” or “Greater Than” Values

2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 12

e-LAB Solutions Suite (ELSS)

Creating an Online Account

2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 13

Online Data Submission

Performance Analytics Dashboard

2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 14

How to Interpret Your

General Guidelines for Evaluation

Selection of a Target Value

2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 15

Calculation of Summary Statistics

Outlier Detection Technique

Fixed Range Example

2017 Proficiency Testing Manual College of American Pathologists 16

Percentage of the Mean Example

Standard Deviation Example

Variable Range Example