The College of American Pathologists (CAP) Laboratory Accreditation Program (LAP): Accreditation Process and its...

This study aimed to assess the laboratory professional perceptions on how the College of American Pathologists (CAP) Laboratory Accreditation Program (LAP) is associated with the laboratory processes and patient safety across multiple countries in the Middle East and South Asia. The objective was to determine how CAP LAP influences laboratory quality and safety culture, and participants reported that error-related events appeared to decrease following the CAP LAP. A quantitative, cross-sectional design was used, employing a structured electronic questionnaire distributed to CAP-accredited laboratories in Saudi Arabia, other Gulf countries, Egypt, and Pakistan. A total of 300 valid responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and marginal homogeneity testing to compare the respondents' perceived condition pre- and post-accreditation performance in areas such as staff competency, quality management, turnaround time, and safety practices. Respondents assessed conditions before and after accreditation in pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical areas, including quality management systems, staff competence, turnaround time, equipment upkeep, communication, and safety culture. We examined paired ordinal responses using marginal homogeneity tests. The CAP LAP was therefore viewed as highly valuable for improving both laboratory performance and patient safety. This study provides empirical evidence from multi-country CAP LAP accredited laboratories, filling a regional gap in accreditation research. It demonstrates that the CAP LAP functions as a strong governance mechanism enhancing quality and safety within diverse healthcare systems. It is advisable to conduct future longitudinal and comparative studies among CAP, ISO 15189:2022, and national accreditation systems to evaluate the durability of enhancements and their impact on laboratory personnel behavior. These results indicate that laboratory professionals view CAP LAP as linked to significant enhancements in laboratory operations and safety protocols. However, the results are based on people's own reports of their perceptions and don't show cause-and-effect relationships or measure objective safety outcomes. Future research incorporating objective performance metrics and longitudinal methodologies is essential to assess the causal influence of accreditation on patientsafety.