BACKGROUND: An unexpectedly detected prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) can be a harmless laboratory finding, but can also reflect a thrombotic tendency or a bleeding disorder. The assistance of laboratory professionals in the interpretation of an unexpectedly detected prolonged APTT (uAPTT) is often required. The way in which uAPTTs are evaluated in laboratories was assessed in this international study with the aim of determining whether laboratory professionals are able to fulfill this need. METHODS: Postanalytical practices after uAPTT were investigated and the mixing study methodology (if used) was studied by circulating a case report with a questionnaire to staff in the invited laboratories. In addition, the interpretations of those staff regarding the presence or absence of inhibitors in three APTT mixing study scenarios were examined. RESULTS: Large within- and between-country variations were detected in both postanalytical practices and mixing study methodologies among the 990 responding laboratories, 90% of which were in 13 countries. Shortcomings regarding the investigation of uAPTTs leading to potentially incorrect or delayed clinical diagnoses were found in 88% of the laboratories. Of the laboratories to which the interpretative questions were sent, 49% interpreted all mixing study scenarios correctly. uAPTTs were investigated appropriately and all mixing study scenarios interpreted correctly in parallel in only 9.6% of the participating laboratories. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical requirement for the assistance of laboratory professionals in the interpretation of uAPTTs cannot be met at most of the participating laboratories. Laboratory professionals should be trained in the evaluation of ordinary laboratory tests, such as that for uAPTTs.
BACKGROUND: An unexpectedly detected prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) can be a harmless laboratory finding, but can also reflect a thrombotic tendency or a bleeding disorder. The assistance of laboratory professionals in the interpretation of an unexpectedly detected prolonged APTT (uAPTT) is often required. The way in which uAPTTs are evaluated in laboratories was assessed in this international study with the aim of determining whether laboratory professionals are able to fulfill this need. METHODS: Postanalytical practices after uAPTT were investigated and the mixing study methodology (if used) was studied by circulating a case report with a questionnaire to staff in the invited laboratories. In addition, the interpretations of those staff regarding the presence or absence of inhibitors in three APTT mixing study scenarios were examined. RESULTS: Large within- and between-country variations were detected in both postanalytical practices and mixing study methodologies among the 990 responding laboratories, 90% of which were in 13 countries. Shortcomings regarding the investigation of uAPTTs leading to potentially incorrect or delayed clinical diagnoses were found in 88% of the laboratories. Of the laboratories to which the interpretative questions were sent, 49% interpreted all mixing study scenarios correctly. uAPTTs were investigated appropriately and all mixing study scenarios interpreted correctly in parallel in only 9.6% of the participating laboratories. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical requirement for the assistance of laboratory professionals in the interpretation of uAPTTs cannot be met at most of the participating laboratories. Laboratory professionals should be trained in the evaluation of ordinary laboratory tests, such as that for uAPTTs.
Authors: Cornelia Mrazek; Giuseppe Lippi; Martin H Keppel; Thomas K Felder; Hannes Oberkofler; Elisabeth Haschke-Becher; Janne Cadamuro Journal: Biochem Med (Zagreb) Date: 2020-06-15 Impact factor: 2.313