A practical workshop for TB laboratory quality systems
A workshop on GLI quality essentials can help a tuberculosis laboratory team move from general awareness to concrete quality improvement. The strongest sessions connect the GLI Quality Tool’s four-phase roadmap with the laboratory’s actual workflow, risks, staffing pattern, equipment, and available resources.
The aim is not to cover every quality topic in a single day. Instead, the workshop should help participants recognize their current position, agree on priority gaps, and leave with actions that can be measured. A well-designed session combines short explanations, guided self-assessment, practical exercises, and time for team decisions.
To organize a workshop on GLI quality essentials for TB lab teams, begin with a clear purpose and a realistic participant group. Include laboratory managers, bench technologists, quality officers, biosafety staff, and, where appropriate, clinicians or program representatives who rely on laboratory results.
Set a focused purpose
Start by defining what the workshop must achieve. A new laboratory may need to understand the basic structure of a quality management system, while an established facility may be ready to review internal audits, corrective actions, or performance indicators. Combining these needs without prioritization can produce a crowded agenda and limited follow-through.
Use the twelve Quality Systems Essentials as a framework for discussion. These areas include organization, personnel, equipment, purchasing and inventory, process management, information management, documents and records, customer focus, assessment, facilities and safety, and continual improvement. The group does not need to study each essential in equal depth; select the areas most relevant to current risks.
Before the event, ask participants to review existing policies, forms, audit findings, incident reports, and quality indicators. A short pre-workshop survey can identify whether the main problems involve specimen rejection, turnaround time, reagent verification, equipment downtime, documentation, or staff competency. This information allows the facilitator to tailor examples instead of relying on generic laboratory scenarios.
Prepare the people and materials
Keep the group small enough for active participation, usually between eight and twenty people. If several facilities attend, mix participants across teams during exercises, then create time for facility-specific planning. Confirm who has authority to approve changes, assign responsibilities, procure supplies, or revise procedures; otherwise, action plans may remain theoretical.
The facilitator should understand both the GLI Quality Tool and the realities of TB testing. Technical expertise is valuable, but so are skills in discussion management, adult learning, and problem analysis. A co-facilitator can capture decisions, manage time, support online participation, or help participants work through calculations.
Share the agenda and any required reading in advance. The downloadable workshop materials can support preparation and provide useful reference documents for participants. Print essential worksheets when internet access is uncertain, and prepare offline alternatives for facilities with limited electricity, computers, or projection equipment.
Build an agenda around practice
A one-day workshop can work when the team already has basic knowledge and needs to select priorities. A two-day format is better for introducing the quality essentials, completing a structured assessment, and drafting a credible improvement plan. Either format should alternate between explanation and application rather than placing all lectures at the beginning.
A useful sequence begins with the purpose of quality management in TB services, followed by an overview of the roadmap and the twelve essentials. Participants can then map a sample patient or specimen pathway, identify control points, and compare the laboratory’s current practices with the relevant phase checklist. Later sessions should focus on root-cause analysis, measurable objectives, and assignment of responsibilities.
| Workshop component | Practical activity | Expected output |
|---|---|---|
| Quality system overview | Match daily laboratory tasks to the relevant essential | Shared understanding of quality responsibilities |
| Current-state review | Use selected phase checklists in small groups | List of strengths, gaps, and evidence |
| Risk and process mapping | Trace a specimen from receipt to result reporting | Priority failure points |
| Performance monitoring | Review a real or simulated indicator | Agreed definition, source, and review frequency |
| Improvement planning | Rank gaps by risk, feasibility, and effect | Short action plan with owners and dates |
| Follow-up planning | Schedule review meetings and evidence checks | Monitoring calendar |
Leave sufficient time for participants to challenge assumptions. For example, a missing document may reflect poor document control, unclear ownership, inadequate training, or a procedure that does not match actual practice. The workshop should help the team distinguish the visible symptom from the system weakness underneath it.
Use realistic TB laboratory exercises
Exercises should reflect the tests and services the team performs. A microscopy laboratory might examine staining quality, slide labeling, reading competency, and result transcription. A culture laboratory could work through contamination rates, media quality, biosafety controls, equipment monitoring, and referral arrangements. A molecular testing site may focus on internal controls, invalid results, environmental conditions, stock management, and instrument maintenance.
Use de-identified records whenever possible. Participants can review a sample log, identify missing fields, decide whether a corrective action is adequate, or develop a simple indicator from routine data. These activities make quality concepts tangible and reveal where the laboratory lacks reliable evidence.
Performance benchmarks require careful interpretation. A useful exercise can ask participants to define the numerator and denominator for a culture contamination indicator, separate routine variation from a true change, and decide what action should follow an unfavorable trend. The guidance on culture contamination benchmarks can help facilitators frame this discussion with greater consistency.
Reagent verification is another practical topic. Ask teams to list the records and controls needed before a new batch of TB staining reagents is introduced. Participants should consider acceptance criteria, reference materials, lot numbers, storage conditions, expiry dates, and authorization of the release decision. A focused exercise can draw on the guide to verify staining reagent accuracy.
Turn assessment into decisions
The GLI Quality Tool is most useful when checklists lead to evidence-based decisions. Ask participants to mark each selected item as implemented, partially implemented, not implemented, or not applicable, while recording the evidence behind the judgment. This prevents a checklist from becoming a subjective scorecard.
Next, rank the gaps. A simple method is to score each issue according to patient or staff risk, effect on result reliability, frequency, regulatory importance, cost, and feasibility. A low-cost documentation correction may be completed quickly, while a biosafety or equipment problem may need escalation and a longer investment plan.
Write actions in operational language. “Improve equipment management” is too broad; “create a monthly temperature review log for the culture incubator, assign the senior technologist as owner, and review the first three months of records” is measurable. Each action should include an owner, deadline, resources, verification method, and expected evidence.
Make the workshop lead to sustained change
A workshop should end with a clear handover into routine management. Schedule a follow-up meeting before participants leave, ideally within two to six weeks. At that meeting, the team can review completed actions, examine barriers, and revise deadlines without losing accountability.
Build quality discussions into existing structures such as staff meetings, supervisory visits, biosafety reviews, and management meetings. Display a small set of indicators where staff can see progress, but avoid collecting data that nobody will analyze. The selected measures should help the team decide whether a process is stable, whether an intervention worked, or whether additional investigation is needed.
Recommendations for a durable workshop process include:
- Select two or three priority essentials rather than attempting to resolve every gap at once.
- Use the laboratory’s own forms, records, incidents, and workflow maps as learning materials.
- Assign one accountable owner and one verification method to every improvement action.
- Adapt activities for local language, staffing levels, connectivity, and available equipment.
- Review progress at a scheduled meeting and retain evidence of completed changes.
Facilitators should also document lessons from the event. Record which exercises generated useful discussion, which concepts remained unclear, and what support participants requested. This feedback can improve future sessions and help a national or regional TB laboratory network share effective approaches without imposing an identical model on every facility.
A quality workshop succeeds when participants can connect standards to daily behavior. By using the GLI roadmap selectively, grounding activities in real TB laboratory processes, and linking assessment to assigned actions, the team can build a practical path from identified gaps to safer work, more reliable results, and continual improvement.
Download the relevant GLI resources, select the phase checklists that match your laboratory’s current needs, and set a workshop date with the people responsible for making quality decisions. The most valuable outcome is a documented first step that the team can review, measure, and strengthen after the session.