Hedwig C M Stepman1, Ulla Tiikkainen2, Dietmar Stöckl3, Hubert W Vesper4, Selvin H Edwards4, Harri Laitinen2, Jonna Pelanti2, Linda M Thienpont5. 1. Laboratory for Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; 2. Labquality, Helsinki, Finland; 3. STT-Consulting, Horebeke, Belgium; 4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Laboratory Sciences, Atlanta, GA. 5. Laboratory for Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; linda.thienpont@ugent.be.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: External quality assessment (EQA) with commutable samples is essential for assessing the quality of assays performed by laboratories, particularly when the emphasis is on their standardization status and interchangeability of results. METHODS: We used a panel of 20 fresh-frozen single-donation serum samples to assess assays for the measurement of creatinine, glucose, phosphate, uric acid, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglycerides. The commercial random access platforms included: Abbott Architect, Beckman Coulter AU, Ortho Vitros, Roche Cobas, Siemens Advia, and Thermo Scientific Konelab. The assessment was done at the peer group level and by comparison against the all-method trimmed mean or reference method values, where available. The considered quality indicators were intraassay imprecision, combined imprecision (including sample-matrix interference), bias, and total error. Fail/pass decisions were based on limits reflecting state-of-the-art performance, but also limits related to biological variation. RESULTS: Most assays showed excellent peer performance attributes, except for HDL- and LDL cholesterol. Cases in which individual assays had biases exceeding the used limits were the Siemens Advia creatinine (-4.2%), Ortho Vitros phosphate (8.9%), Beckman Coulter AU triglycerides (5.4%), and Thermo Scientific Konelab uric acid (6.4%), which lead to considerable interassay discrepancies. Additionally, large laboratory effects were observed that caused interlaboratory differences of >30%. CONCLUSIONS: The design of the EQA study was well suited for monitoring different quality attributes of assays performed in daily laboratory practice. There is a need for improvement, even for simple clinical chemistry analytes. In particular, the interchangeability of results remains jeopardized both by assay standardization issues and individual laboratory effects.
BACKGROUND: External quality assessment (EQA) with commutable samples is essential for assessing the quality of assays performed by laboratories, particularly when the emphasis is on their standardization status and interchangeability of results. METHODS: We used a panel of 20 fresh-frozen single-donation serum samples to assess assays for the measurement of creatinine, glucose, phosphate, uric acid, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglycerides. The commercial random access platforms included: Abbott Architect, Beckman Coulter AU, Ortho Vitros, Roche Cobas, Siemens Advia, and Thermo Scientific Konelab. The assessment was done at the peer group level and by comparison against the all-method trimmed mean or reference method values, where available. The considered quality indicators were intraassay imprecision, combined imprecision (including sample-matrix interference), bias, and total error. Fail/pass decisions were based on limits reflecting state-of-the-art performance, but also limits related to biological variation. RESULTS: Most assays showed excellent peer performance attributes, except for HDL- and LDL cholesterol. Cases in which individual assays had biases exceeding the used limits were the Siemens Adviacreatinine (-4.2%), Ortho Vitros phosphate (8.9%), Beckman Coulter AU triglycerides (5.4%), and Thermo Scientific Konelab uric acid (6.4%), which lead to considerable interassay discrepancies. Additionally, large laboratory effects were observed that caused interlaboratory differences of >30%. CONCLUSIONS: The design of the EQA study was well suited for monitoring different quality attributes of assays performed in daily laboratory practice. There is a need for improvement, even for simple clinical chemistry analytes. In particular, the interchangeability of results remains jeopardized both by assay standardization issues and individual laboratory effects.
Authors: Hedwig C M Stepman; Dietmar Stöckl; Rosana Acheme; Sandra Sesini; Daniel Mazziotta; Linda M Thienpont Journal: Clin Chem Lab Med Date: 2011-08-30 Impact factor: 3.694
Authors: W Greg Miller; Gary L Myers; Ikunosuke Sakurabayashi; Lorin M Bachmann; Samuel P Caudill; Andrzej Dziekonski; Selvin Edwards; Mary M Kimberly; William J Korzun; Elizabeth T Leary; Katsuyuki Nakajima; Masakazu Nakamura; Göran Nilsson; Robert D Shamburek; George W Vetrovec; G Russell Warnick; Alan T Remaley Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2010-04-08 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Linda M Thienpont; Dietmar Stöckl; Josef Kratochvíla; Bedrich Friedecký; Marek Budina Journal: Clin Chem Lab Med Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 3.694
Authors: Gus Koerbin; Jillian R Tate; Julie Ryan; Graham Rd Jones; Ken A Sikaris; David Kanowski; Maxine Reed; Janice Gill; George Koumantakis; Tina Yen; Andrew St John; Peter E Hickman; Aaron Simpson; Peter Graham Journal: Clin Biochem Rev Date: 2014-11
Authors: Christian V Hulzebos; Libor Vitek; Carlos D Coda Zabetta; Aleš Dvořák; Paul Schenk; Eline A E van der Hagen; Christa Cobbaert; Claudio Tiribelli Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 3.756