We have considered how accreditation inspections and audits are screening tests with poor performance characteristics. They have a high sensitivity for things being wrong because they were designed to make inspection seem worthwhile. As a consequence, they have poor selectivity for issues that actually matter to post-analytical decision-making. For most non-compliances in an otherwise responsible, professional lab, accreditation has poor positive and negative predictive values of anything being seriously wrong. The distraction inspection creates may cause greater problems than any the lab had before accreditation, but nobody dares to investigate this.
If this sounds too technical, consider what unnecessary testing means for you as an individual. Look at Privatehealthscreen.org and think about how testing that is unhelpful to you has parallels with the quality screening of laboratory accreditation.
Both create waste, worry, delays, unnecessary treatment, and don’t improve health.