Bindinglaw

US · guidance

CMS SOM App. C, Tag D5777

§493.1281 Standard: Comparison of test results

activein force · 2026-07-22 – presentas-observed

(b) The laboratory must have a system to identify and assess patient test results that

appear inconsistent with the following relevant criteria, when available:

(b)(1) Patient age.

(b)(2) Sex.

(b)(3) Diagnosis or pertinent clinical data.

(b)(4) Distribution of patient test results.

(b)(5) Relationship with other test parameters.

Interpretive Guidelines §493.1281(b)

The laboratory must have a system in place to monitor and evaluate test results for

inconsistencies with patient information, and for correlation between test results. For

example, a laboratory could multiply the hemoglobin result by a factor of 3, to see if the

result is equal to the hematocrit.

If the laboratory has auto-validation in its Laboratory Information System (LIS), they

must take steps to reduce the likelihood of sample-switching errors. For example, when

the creatinine result is significantly different from the patient’s previous creatinine test

results, or if the MCV is significantly different from the patient’s previous test results and

the patient did not receive a blood transfusion.

For automated laboratories, inconsistent patient results may be evaluated through the use

of verified LIS supported logic, patient distribution test results, verified automated test

comparison logic programs and individual test repeat criteria.

Probes §493.1281(b)

How does the laboratory obtain sufficient information to enable an evaluation of test

results with clinically relevant patient information?

Does the laboratory have procedures to assess and evaluate patient test results for

inconsistencies?

For example:

• Hemoglobin and Hematocrit (MCHC value exceeds reference range);

• BUN and Creatinine comparison;

• Albumin and Total Protein;

• Correlation of urine culture with urine microscopic; and

• Alkaline phosphatase with orthopedic surgical patients and/or pediatric patients;

and

• Correlation of microscopic sediment findings with macroscopic results, such as,

the presence of protein with casts, positive occults blood with red cells, and

positive leukocyte esterase with white cells.

§493.1281 Standard: Comparison of test results.

(c) The laboratory must document all test result comparison activities.

Interpretive Guidelines §493.1281(c)

The actual measurement(s) of test results and comparison activities must be recorded.

Acceptable formats for documentation may vary. Cite documentation deficiencies at

§493.1281(a) or §493.1281(b). Use D5775 or D5777, as appropriate.

History

Rev. 233; Issued: 09-12-25; Effective: 09-12-25; Implementation: 09-12-25

Provenance

Source
cms.gov
Retrieved
2026-07-22
Edition
som-2026-07-22
Content hash
8ff183cfad1d837bd700ffa6f52677dd88f54bf9b01936e12507548ed43eda6e
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.