ISO 15189:2022 · Section 7 · Process requirements
Clause 7.4: Post-examination processes
Check the exact requirement in your licensed copy of the standard.
Last reviewed
What this clause is about
Post-examination processes ensure that technically produced results become reliable, understandable information available to the right person at the right time. They include result review and release, reporting content, urgent communication, amendments, and the handling of specimens after examination. A result can be analytically sound yet unsafe if it is assigned to the wrong patient, delayed without notice, or communicated without an essential limitation.
Define who may review and release results and what checks are required. Consider specimen suitability, quality control status, clinically unexpected findings, previous results where relevant, and the need for interpretive advice. Automated review and release require validated rules, controlled configuration, monitoring, and a reliable route for exceptions. Manual workarounds should not bypass essential checks simply because a reporting system is unavailable.
Reports should identify the patient, examination, relevant specimen information, result, units where applicable, and interpretive information needed for appropriate use. Establish arrangements for preliminary reports, referred results, and limitations. Critical result procedures should define notification criteria, authorized recipients, confirmation of communication, escalation when the first contact fails, and records that show who communicated what and when.
Amended reports need clear identification, traceability to the original information, and appropriate notification to users. Also define specimen retention, storage, retrieval, and disposal after examination according to clinical needs and applicable obligations. Review delayed reports and communication failures as quality signals. LabToolkit Pro can support reporting procedures, critical communication logs, and amendment forms, while authorized professionals remain responsible for release and clinical communication.
What assessors typically ask to see
- What checks occur before release, and who is authorized to review routine results, exceptions, and interpretive comments?
- How are automated release rules verified, monitored, changed under control, and suspended when their reliability is in doubt?
- How do report formats preserve patient identity, units, relevant interpretive limits, limitations, and the origin of referred examinations?
- How are critical results communicated to an appropriate recipient, confirmed accurately, documented, and escalated when contact attempts fail?
- Can staff retrieve the original report and determine why an amendment occurred, who authorized it, and which users were notified?
- How are examined specimens stored, retrieved, retained, and disposed of while preserving identification, suitability, confidentiality, and applicable retention obligations?
Documents and records that usually provide evidence
- Result review and release procedure defining authorized roles, required checks, exception handling, preliminary reporting, and arrangements during system interruption.
- Report examples and configuration checks covering identity, units, reference information, relevant comments, referred work, and appropriate qualifications.
- Automated release validation and monitoring records showing rule scope, challenge cases, approval, change control, and periodic performance review.
- Critical result communication logs documenting result identity, caller, recipient, notification timing, confirmation, failed attempts, and escalation actions.
- Amended report records retaining original content, the reason for change, authorization, revised information, and communication to affected users.
- Post-examination specimen records covering storage conditions, retention periods, retrieval requests, disposal decisions, and handling of exceptional clinical needs.
Ready-made forms mapped to clause 7.4: List of Persons Authorized to Release Test Reports, List of Persons Authorized to Receive Test Reports, List of Critical Results (alert Values), Critical Result Notification Log, Sample Retention Schedule.
Common findings to avoid
- A critical result is marked telephoned without identifying the recipient, timing, communicated result, or confirmation of accurate receipt.
- Amended reports overwrite earlier content so the original result and the reason for correction cannot be reconstructed.
- Automated release settings are changed in production without documented challenge testing, approval, or monitoring of affected result groups.
- Specimen retention instructions exist but storage locations, disposal dates, or retrieval responsibilities are unclear during out-of-hours work.
How LabToolkit Pro maps documents to this clause
Each SOP, form and record in LabToolkit Pro can carry clause tags. When a document tagged 7.4 becomes effective, it counts as direct evidence on the readiness dashboard for ISO 15189:2022; links from other standards through the crosswalk are shown separately as indicative coverage. Gaps appear clause by clause, so you can see which parts of 7.4 still need a controlled document or a current record. Readiness is a planning aid — only an accreditation body confirms conformity.
Frequently asked questions
Must every result be manually authorized?
Not necessarily. Automated release can be appropriate when the laboratory establishes and validates suitable rules, controls changes, monitors performance, and handles exceptions safely. The laboratory remains responsible for the result pathway. Define who oversees the rules and when automated release must stop because quality or system conditions are unacceptable.
What should a critical result record contain?
Record enough information to reconstruct the communication: patient and result identification, date and time, the person communicating, the recipient, confirmation of accurate receipt, and any escalation. Define an approach for unreachable recipients and failed electronic acknowledgments. A transmission record alone may not demonstrate that someone responsible received and understood the message.
How should corrected reports be handled?
Preserve the original information and clearly identify the revised report, the reason for amendment, and its authorization. Assess whether users need direct notification rather than relying on passive access to the updated report. Consider patient impact and whether the error also requires investigation through the nonconforming work process.
Check the exact requirement in your licensed copy of the standard.
Put it into practice
Draft, approve and e-sign your SOPs with version control, or get the complete template pack.