https://doi.org/10.1177/1544316718794330 Journal for Vascular Ultrasound 2018, Vol. 42(3) 116–119 © 2018, Society for Vascular Ultrasound Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/1544316718794330 journals.sagepub.com/home/jvu Scientific Research Introduction Multiple professional societies, including the Society for Vascular Ultrasound, support accreditation as a component of vascular laboratory quality and safety. The Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) began accrediting vascular testing laboratories in 1990. As of December 31, 2016, there were 1634 accredited vascular testing facilities located at 2922 sites throughout the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico. These accredited laboratories perform extracranial cerebrovas- cular (n = 1452), peripheral venous (n = 1190), peripheral arterial (n = 1157), visceral vascular (n = 358), and intracra- nial cerebrovascular (n = 79) studies. The accreditation process is designed to be educational through a process of self-examination and feedback following independent clinical peer review of application materials. Laboratories must meet minimum quality Standards and undergo evaluation of organizational structure, reporting, and imaging processes. 1 Quality is assessed based on adherence to published Standards as ascertained by review of reports and diagnostic study images by trained IAC clinical application reviewers. If the laboratory is found to be in substantial compli- ance with the Standards, accreditation is granted for 3 years. However, if items of noncompliance are identified, accredita- tion is delayed until all items of noncompliance are rectified. 2 The IAC Vascular Testing Accreditation Standards require each laboratory to use published, validated diagnostic criteria for each type of test performed. Diagnostic criteria must state how velocity measurements, spectral Doppler waveform anal- ysis, and images (for duplex studies) and segmental limb pres- sures and Doppler or plethysmographic waveforms (for physiological testing studies) are used for interpreting the examination results. Physician interpretations must strictly adhere to the laboratory-specific diagnostic criteria for each testing area as submitted with the accreditation application. This study is a continuation of a previous IAC study that only evaluated 6 months of data to ascertain which testing areas 794330JVU XX X 10.1177/1544316718794330Journal for Vascular UltrasoundFarrell et al research-article 2018 1 Intersocietal Accreditation Commission, Ellicott City, MD, USA 2 University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA 3 Vascular Surgery Associates of Richmond, VA, USA 4 Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, OH, USA Corresponding Author: Mary Beth Farrell, Intersocietal Accreditation Commission, 6021 University Blvd, #500, Ellicott City, MD 21043, USA. Email: farrell@intersocietal.org Reasons for Delay of Accreditation for Vascular Testing Laboratories Applying for Accreditation by Intersocietal Accreditation Commission Mary Beth Farrell 1 , Marge Hutchisson 1 , Michael Lilly 2 , Melissa A. Vickery 3 , and Heather L. Gornik 4 Abstract The Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) vascular testing accreditation process is designed to be educational through a process of self-examination and feedback from peer review. Accreditation is awarded based on compliance with published Standards. The objective of this study was to identify the most common reasons for accreditation delay and noncompliance with the published Standards among vascular laboratories applying for IAC accreditation. The IAC database was used to extract laboratory data and findings of application review for vascular laboratories applying for accreditation in 2016. Most laboratories applying for accreditation (88.7%, 535/603) had 1 or more accreditation delay issues that had to be rectified before accreditation was granted. The most common not compliant findings included reporting issues, discordant findings between the test documentation and final impression, poor image quality, diagnostic criteria issues, and missed diagnostic findings. Most laboratories corrected identified issues (82.2%, 440/535) within 90 days. IAC accreditation recognizes a laboratory as having met minimum quality Standards. For vascular laboratories reviewed by IAC, most accreditation issues were due to deficiencies in reporting, documentation, and image quality. Keywords accreditation, vascular imaging, quality, reporting, diagnostic criteria