GLI GLI Quality Tool
GLI Quality Tool — Version 2.0

Build a quarterly TB laboratory trend report that drives action

A quarterly trend report turns routine tuberculosis laboratory data into a practical view of quality performance. Rather than presenting isolated figures, it shows whether turnaround time, testing accuracy, safety, equipment reliability and corrective actions are improving, deteriorating or remaining stable.

For Australian laboratories, a useful report must work across different operating environments. A metropolitan service in Sydney or Melbourne may process high volumes with automated molecular platforms, while a regional or remote service may depend on specimen transport from Queensland, Western Australia or the Northern Territory. The template should make those differences visible without weakening comparability.

The report also needs to support a quality management system. Aligning the metrics with the GLI Quality Tool’s Quality Systems Essentials helps laboratory teams connect quarterly data with documented procedures, staff competency, equipment maintenance, assessment activities and continual improvement.

Reporting approach Strengths Limitations Best use
Simple activity summary Quick to prepare and easy to read Shows volume but not quality or causes Small laboratories starting routine reporting
Metric dashboard Highlights performance and direction of travel Needs consistent definitions and data checks Regular management review
Trend report with action log Links results to risks, owners and due dates Requires disciplined follow-up Mature quality management systems
Benchmarking report Supports comparison across sites or periods Can mislead if workloads and methods differ Network or jurisdictional oversight

Define the reporting purpose and scope

Start the template with a short statement explaining what the report covers, who reviews it and how the information will be used. Include the laboratory name, reporting period, testing locations, reporting date, report owner and approver. A defined scope prevents a quarterly report from becoming an unstructured collection of numbers.

Specify whether the report includes microscopy, culture, nucleic acid amplification testing, drug susceptibility testing, referral testing or all TB-related services. Record exclusions, such as tests performed by a reference laboratory or periods affected by a platform change. This context matters when comparing a busy NSW metropolitan service with a small regional facility.

A useful reporting calendar should account for Australian public holidays, planned shutdowns and seasonal staffing pressures. The January to March quarter, for example, may include reduced staffing or delayed governance meetings, while a cyclone or flood can affect specimen transport in northern Queensland and the Northern Territory.

Select a balanced set of quality metrics

A practical template should combine outcome, process and system measures. Core indicators may include median and 90th percentile turnaround time, proportion of results reported within the agreed target, specimen rejection rate, contamination rate, invalid or inconclusive test rate, EQA performance, equipment downtime, critical incidents and corrective action closure.

Record the numerator, denominator, unit, data source and target for every metric. “Turnaround time compliance” should state whether the clock starts at specimen receipt, accessioning or collection, and whether weekends are included. A consistent definition is essential when specimens travel from remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities to a central laboratory.

Avoid creating an excessive dashboard. A smaller set of reliable indicators is more valuable than a long list that staff cannot validate. Metrics should represent the main risks in the service and map to relevant Quality Systems Essentials, including assessment, equipment, process management, information management, personnel and continual improvement.

Create a clear data dictionary

The template should include a separate data dictionary or an appendix. For each metric, define the calculation, reporting frequency, acceptable source records, responsible person and rules for missing data. This prevents different staff members from interpreting “rejected specimen” or “late result” in conflicting ways.

For example, the specimen rejection rate can be calculated as rejected TB specimens divided by all TB specimens received, multiplied by 100. State whether unsuitable containers, insufficient volume, leakage, incorrect labelling and delayed transport are counted separately. Recording the reason category makes the result useful for collection teams and courier services.

Use a stable structure for monthly values within each quarter. A report might display January, February, March, the quarterly total or average, the previous quarter and the same quarter last year. When a laboratory changes assay platforms, extraction methods or information systems, add a note rather than silently breaking the trend.

Present trends without hiding variation

A strong quarterly report gives each metric a direction, not just a result. Use a simple status such as meeting target, watch or action required, supported by arrows or restrained colour coding. Do not rely on colour alone; labels and accessible formatting are important for printed reports and staff with colour-vision differences.

Show the actual values beside the status. A median turnaround time of two days may look acceptable, while a 90th percentile of nine days reveals a long delay affecting a smaller group. For low-volume laboratories, percentages can fluctuate sharply, so include the numerator and denominator, such as 2 of 18 specimens rather than 11.1% alone.

Include a brief interpretation beside every significant change. Examples include increased referrals from a regional clinic, delayed courier runs after flooding near Cairns, a new GeneXpert module, staff training, a reagent shortage or a rise in contaminated specimens from one collection location. The explanation should distinguish confirmed evidence from a working hypothesis.

Link results to risk and corrective action

The most useful report makes it easy to move from a signal to a response. Add columns for the issue, likely cause, immediate containment, corrective action, responsible person, due date, verification method and current status. This creates a direct connection between quarterly review and the laboratory’s improvement register.

For instance, a rise in invalid molecular results may lead to checks of specimen quality, cartridge storage, instrument error logs, operator competency and environmental conditions. A fall in EQA performance should trigger review of the affected analyte, result interpretation, internal quality control and communication with the provider.

Do not close an action merely because training was delivered or a procedure was revised. Verification should demonstrate that the change worked, such as three consecutive months within target, a successful competency assessment or a reduced rejection rate. This evidence supports management review and provides a defensible audit trail for NATA-accredited services.

Make the template usable across Australian settings

Australian laboratories vary in volume, staffing, technology and referral arrangements. A network in Melbourne may have dedicated quality staff, whereas a small hospital laboratory in regional Western Australia may assign reporting to a senior scientist alongside routine duties. Use optional fields so the core report remains manageable while larger services can add method-level or site-level analysis.

Include a field for location and service model: metropolitan, regional, remote, referral or public health reference laboratory. Where appropriate, record transport pathway, collection site and referral destination. This can reveal whether a turnaround problem begins before the specimen reaches the laboratory.

Use local governance terminology and align the report with existing monthly quality meetings, incident systems and accreditation records. A report that can be reviewed at a Queensland Health meeting, a Western Australian regional network meeting or a local hospital quality committee is more likely to become part of normal practice.

Use the GLI roadmap to mature the report

A laboratory starting from basic monitoring can begin with a small set of indicators, documented definitions and a quarterly review record. As the quality system matures, the report can add stratification by test method, site, specimen type and staff shift, along with formal trend analysis and documented effectiveness checks.

The GLI resource collection provides downloadable quality resources that can help teams build supporting checklists, forms and improvement records. Adapt these materials to the laboratory’s procedures and regulatory context rather than copying them without local review.

The user instructions explain how to work with the tool’s phases and Quality Systems Essentials. Use that structure to identify which metrics are already supported by controlled documents and which require stronger processes, such as equipment records, internal audits, document control or competency assessment.

A mature quarterly report should end with a short management review record: key achievements, unresolved risks, decisions made, resources required and actions carried forward. Save the approved version in a controlled location, protect patient and staff confidentiality, and retain evidence that the review took place.

Suggested template fields and review workflow

The first page can contain the reporting period, site details, executive summary and status overview. The main metric sheet should include:

Before circulation, the preparer should reconcile totals with the laboratory information system, incident register, equipment logs, EQA records and stock records. A second person should check calculations, unusual changes and missing explanations. The quality manager or laboratory manager can then approve the report for discussion.

Keep the final report concise enough for a meeting, with detailed evidence stored in linked records. Reviewing the same template every quarter builds a reliable baseline and helps teams recognise whether a corrective action has produced sustained improvement.

Adopt the template for the next reporting period, assign metric owners and agree on definitions before collecting data. A consistent quarterly review will help your TB laboratory detect emerging risks earlier, focus improvement work and demonstrate that quality decisions are based on evidence.