ISO 15189:2022 · Section 8 · Management system requirements
Clause 8.5: Actions to address risks and opportunities
Check the exact requirement in your licensed copy of the standard.
Last reviewed
What this clause is about
Risk work helps the laboratory anticipate what could prevent reliable services and identify changes that could improve them. Consider the full pathway, from test selection and specimen collection to interpretation and communication of results. Include patient harm, staff safety, confidentiality, service continuity and the ability to meet laboratory commitments. Opportunities may include reducing confusing handoffs, simplifying a request process or improving access to specialist advice.
Use an approach that suits the work. A structured discussion may be enough for a simple change, while a complex reporting interface deserves more detailed analysis. Describe the potential event, its causes and consequences, existing controls and the action needed. Numerical scores can help prioritize, but they should not replace professional judgement or hide an important clinical consequence behind an apparently low total. Record enough reasoning to explain why a risk was accepted or why action was chosen.
Assign actions to people with authority and resources, and integrate them into normal processes. Additional checks, redesigned workflows, supplier changes or training may be appropriate, depending on the cause. Consider whether a proposed control creates a new problem elsewhere, such as delaying urgent specimens while preventing identification errors. Discuss significant residual risks with the relevant decision makers and service users where appropriate.
Check whether the action has actually changed the risk or delivered the intended benefit. Use observations, incident patterns, turnaround performance or other relevant evidence rather than closing actions solely because a document was issued. Revisit assessments after incidents, major changes and new information. LabToolkit Pro can support risk registers, action forms and controlled procedures, while laboratory leaders remain responsible for prioritization, resource decisions and evaluation of real operational outcomes.
What assessors typically ask to see
- How are risks identified across the entire service rather than only within the examination room or equipment process?
- Can staff explain a significant risk, the existing safeguards and the reason for the selected additional action?
- How are opportunities evaluated for benefit and unintended effects before the laboratory changes its workflow?
- Who accepts significant residual risks, and how are actions assigned appropriate resources, ownership and completion dates?
- What evidence demonstrates that completed actions reduced the relevant risk or delivered the intended service benefit?
Documents and records that usually provide evidence
- Risk and opportunity procedure explaining identification, prioritization, action planning, review and escalation of significant concerns.
- Risk register connecting potential events, causes, patient consequences, existing safeguards and decisions about further treatment.
- Change assessments considering effects on identification, specimen integrity, reporting, staffing, information flow and service continuity.
- Action plans identifying accountable owners, necessary resources, intended outcomes and arrangements for evaluating effectiveness.
- Residual-risk decisions documenting the reasoning, responsible authority and any communication needed with affected service users.
- Follow-up reviews using relevant operational evidence to confirm benefits, identify unintended effects and revise controls.
Ready-made forms mapped to clause 8.5: Failure Mode & Effect Analysis (fmea) Worksheet, Risk & Opportunities Register, Opportunities Identification Form.
Common findings to avoid
- Completing risk scores without describing the hazardous event clearly enough to select an effective practical control.
- Copying a generic register that omits local referral transport, information interfaces or out-of-hours staffing vulnerabilities.
- Closing risk actions after training attendance without checking whether the vulnerable workflow has actually improved.
- Treating opportunities as a separate wish list with no ownership, evaluation criteria or connection to laboratory priorities.
How LabToolkit Pro maps documents to this clause
Each SOP, form and record in LabToolkit Pro can carry clause tags. When a document tagged 8.5 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 8.5 still need a controlled document or a current record. Readiness is a planning aid — only an accreditation body confirms conformity.
Frequently asked questions
Is a particular scoring matrix required?
No single scoring approach fits every laboratory decision. Choose a consistent method suited to the complexity and consequences. Explain assumptions and decisions, and avoid allowing a numerical score to override a credible serious patient-safety concern.
How is risk work different from corrective action?
Risk work can anticipate problems before they occur. Corrective action addresses causes of a detected failure. They inform each other: an incident may reveal an underestimated risk, and preventive controls may reduce recurrence elsewhere.
Does every opportunity need implementation?
No. Evaluate likely benefit, resource needs and possible unintended consequences. Record important decisions, including reasons for deferral, and prioritize changes that support patient needs and the laboratory's defined objectives.
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.