BACKGROUND: To date, no practical tools are available to obtain optimal settings for moving average (MA) as a continuous analytical quality control instrument. Also, there is no knowledge of the true bias detection properties of applied MA. We describe the use of bias detection curves for MA optimization and MA validation charts for validation of MA. METHODS: MA optimization was performed on a data set of previously obtained consecutive assay results. Bias introduction and MA bias detection were simulated for multiple MA procedures (combination of truncation limits, calculation algorithms and control limits) and performed for various biases. Bias detection curves were generated by plotting the median number of test results needed for bias detection against the simulated introduced bias. In MA validation charts the minimum, median, and maximum numbers of assay results required for MA bias detection are shown for various bias. Their use was demonstrated for sodium, potassium, and albumin. RESULTS: Bias detection curves allowed optimization of MA settings by graphical comparison of bias detection properties of multiple MA. The optimal MA was selected based on the bias detection characteristics obtained. MA validation charts were generated for selected optimal MA and provided insight into the range of results required for MA bias detection. CONCLUSIONS: Bias detection curves and MA validation charts are useful tools for optimization and validation of MA procedures.
BACKGROUND: To date, no practical tools are available to obtain optimal settings for moving average (MA) as a continuous analytical quality control instrument. Also, there is no knowledge of the true bias detection properties of applied MA. We describe the use of bias detection curves for MA optimization and MA validation charts for validation of MA. METHODS: MA optimization was performed on a data set of previously obtained consecutive assay results. Bias introduction and MA bias detection were simulated for multiple MA procedures (combination of truncation limits, calculation algorithms and control limits) and performed for various biases. Bias detection curves were generated by plotting the median number of test results needed for bias detection against the simulated introduced bias. In MA validation charts the minimum, median, and maximum numbers of assay results required for MA bias detection are shown for various bias. Their use was demonstrated for sodium, potassium, and albumin. RESULTS: Bias detection curves allowed optimization of MA settings by graphical comparison of bias detection properties of multiple MA. The optimal MA was selected based on the bias detection characteristics obtained. MA validation charts were generated for selected optimal MA and provided insight into the range of results required for MA bias detection. CONCLUSIONS: Bias detection curves and MA validation charts are useful tools for optimization and validation of MA procedures.