Literature DB >> 28224767

Effect of Accreditation on Accuracy of Diagnostic Tests in Medical Laboratories.

Mi Ae Jang1, Young Ahn Yoon2, Junghan Song3, Jeong Ho Kim4, Won Ki Min5, Ji Sung Lee6, Yong Wha Lee7, You Kyoung Lee8.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Medical laboratories play a central role in health care. Many laboratories are taking a more focused and stringent approach to quality system management. In Korea, laboratory standardization efforts undertaken by the Korean Laboratory Accreditation Program (KLAP) and the Korean External Quality Assessment Scheme (KEQAS) may have facilitated an improvement in laboratory performance, but there are no fundamental studies demonstrating that laboratory standardization is effective. We analyzed the results of the KEQAS to identify significant differences between laboratories with or without KLAP and to determine the impact of laboratory standardization on the accuracy of diagnostic tests.
METHODS: We analyzed KEQAS participant data on clinical chemistry tests such as albumin, ALT, AST, and glucose from 2010 to 2013. As a statistical parameter to assess performance bias between laboratories, we compared 4-yr variance index score (VIS) between the two groups with or without KLAP.
RESULTS: Compared with the group without KLAP, the group with KLAP exhibited significantly lower geometric means of 4-yr VIS for all clinical chemistry tests (P<0.0001); this difference justified a high level of confidence in standardized services provided by accredited laboratories. Confidence intervals for the mean of each test in the two groups (accredited and non-accredited) did not overlap, suggesting that the means of the groups are significantly different.
CONCLUSIONS: These results confirmed that practice standardization is strongly associated with the accuracy of test results. Our study emphasizes the necessity of establishing a system for standardization of diagnostic testing. © The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine

Entities:  

Keywords:  Quality assurance; Quality system management; Standardization, Accuracy; The Korean Association of External Quality Assessment Service; The Korean External Quality Assessment Scheme

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28224767      PMCID: PMC5339093          DOI: 10.3343/alm.2017.37.3.213

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Lab Med        ISSN: 2234-3806            Impact factor:   3.464


INTRODUCTION

Medical laboratories play a central role in health care. Laboratory data are an integral part of physicians' decision-making processes; 70% of all critical medical decisions are based on laboratory test results [1]. The purpose of a laboratory is to provide physicians and other health care professionals with information that enables them to: (1) detect a disease or predisposition to a disease, (2) confirm or reject a diagnosis, (3) establish prognosis, (4) guide patient management, and (5) monitor the efficacy of therapy. To successfully achieve these goals, every laboratory should strive to achieve medical, scientific, and technical expertise, obtain resources such as personnel, laboratory equipment, supplies, and facilities, and, most importantly, have a management set-up that ensures quality laboratory services. Many laboratories are adopting a more focused and stringent approach to quality system management. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is the first quality management system for medical laboratories. It establishes guidelines that reflect the highest level of quality [2]. The ISO 15189 has been adopted by the College of American Pathologists (CAP) in an effort to improve patient care through quality laboratory practices [3]. Similarly, the CLSI has developed 12 Quality System Essentials based on ISO standards. These 12 essentials serve as a starting point in establishing a quality system that covers pre-testing, testing, and post-testing operations [3]. In the United States, laboratory activities are highly regulated by healthcare-related legislation such as the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) of 1988 [4]. Most clinical laboratories in the United States have received CLIA certification to perform testing on human samples, which indicates that they meet personnel, operational, safety, and quality standards based on test complexity. In Korea, no national regulatory standards have been developed for clinical laboratories. The standardization of laboratory practice depends on a private sector entity, the Korean Laboratory Accreditation Program (KLAP), and the Korean External Quality Assessment Scheme (KEQAS) [56]. The KLAP was developed by the Korean Society of Laboratory Medicine in 1999, and was reorganized as the Laboratory Medicine Foundation in 2010 [6]. A laboratory that meets the requirements of laboratory accreditation schemes can receive KLAP certification, which expresses confidence in the quality of services provided by that laboratory [6]. The KEQAS was set up in 1976, and is currently run by the Korean Association of External Quality Assessment Service. The main objectives of the KEQAS are to compare test results among participating laboratories nationwide by using the same test item. The number of participants in the KEQAS is gradually increasing [5]. The standardization efforts undertaken by the KLAP and KEQAS may have facilitated an improvement in laboratory performance in Korea; however, there are no fundamental studies demonstrating that laboratory standardization is useful. We analyzed the results of the KEQAS to identify significant differences between laboratories with and without KLAP, and to determine the impact of laboratory practice standardization on the accuracy of diagnostic testing.

METHODS

1. Study subjects and parameters

Data from the KEQAS gathered between 2010 and 2013 by the clinical chemistry subcommittee of the Korean Association of External Quality Assessment Service were included in this study. A total of 19 test items related to clinical chemistry were analyzed: albumin, alkaline phosphatase, ALT, AST, blood urea nitrogen, chloride, creatinine, γ-glutamyl transferase, glucose, lactate dehydrogenase, phosphorus, potassium, sodium, total bilirubin, total calcium, total cholesterol, total protein, triglyceride, and uric acid [7]. As a statistical parameter to assess bias in performance between laboratories, we used the variance index score (VIS). The VIS ranges from 0 to 400, and it provides an overall comparison of test results for each test item. The value of the VIS is calculated as follows: VIS=[(Xlab–DV)/DV×100]/CCV×100; where Xlab is the result from the participating laboratory; DV is the designated value, which is the mean result from the participating laboratories using that method after excluding outliers more than two standard deviations from the mean; and CCV is the chosen coefficient of variation, taken from the National External Quality Assessment Scheme in the United Kingdom (1971) [8].

2. Comparison of 4-yr VIS between laboratories with or without KLAP

KEQAS participants, whose data on clinical chemistry tests were available, were categorized into two subgroups based on their KLAP status, and the VIS of each test item from 2010–2013 was compared. The number of laboratories participating in the KEQAS was 1,333 in 2013 [7]. Among the KEQAS participants with available data, the number of laboratories with or without KLAP, by year, was 233/767 (23% accredited; 77% non-accredited) in 2010, 245/844 (22% accredited; 78% non-accredited) in 2011, 258/908 (22% accredited; 78% non-accredited) in 2012, and 265/1,008 (21% accredited; 79% non-accredited) in 2013.

3. Comparison of 4-yr VIS between laboratories categorized by institution type

All participants in the KEQAS were categorized into four laboratory subgroups based on the institutional type; these subgroups were general hospitals with 100 or more beds, hospitals with 30–99 beds, clinics with less than 30 beds, and entrusted laboratory agencies. During 2010–2013, the number of laboratories in general hospitals varied between 321 and 356; the number of laboratories in hospitals varied between 314 and 453; the number of laboratories in clinics varied between 272 and 351; and the number laboratories in entrusted laboratory agencies varied between 11 and 15. We analyzed the VIS difference in each test by institutional type. Furthermore, we analyzed the difference in VIS between laboratories in general hospitals based on their KLAP status to rule out confounding factors such as personnel, laboratory equipment, supplies, and facilities. These factors are likely to affect the value of the VIS, because the hospital and clinic institutional types had a very small number of KLAP-accredited laboratories. Therefore, only data from the general hospital group, which had a sufficient number of laboratories with or without KLAP spanning, were included in further analysis.

4. Statistical analysis

VIS differences between laboratories with or without KLAP were compared by Student's t-test. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's multiple comparison test was used to evaluate the statistical significance of the differences among the institutional types. Logarithmic transformation of VIS was performed because of its right skewed distribution. The values of VIS were reported as the geometric mean with 95% confidence intervals. P values were based on two-sided comparisons, and P values<0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

1. Differences in the VIS between laboratories with or without KLAP

Statistical data on VIS, by test, are listed in Table 1. Most of the VIS data received scores of less than 100, except for a chloride test result from laboratories without KLAP (107.7 in 2010, 101.9 in 2011, and 102.3 in 2012). Relative to the group of laboratories without KLAP, the group of laboratories with KLAP exhibited significantly lower geometric means of 4-yr VIS in all tests (P<0.0001). Confidence intervals for the mean of each test item in the two groups (accredited and non-accredited) did not overlap; this gap suggested that the means of the two groups were significantly different (Table 1). The geometric means of VIS in 2013 are shown in Fig. 1.
Table 1

Comparison of variance index scores between laboratories with or without KLAP from 2010 to 2013

Test itemYearAccredited laboratoryNon-accredited laboratoryP
N*VIS (95% CI)N*VIS (95% CI)
Albumin201023240.9 (38.7–43.2)72247.6 (45.7–49.6)< 0.0001
201124436.4 (34.3–38.7)78944.3 (42.7–46.0)< 0.0001
201225736.3 (34.3–38.5)84545.2 (43.5–46.8)< 0.0001
201326438.3 (36.3–40.4)93748.3 (46.7–50.0)< 0.0001
ALP201022839.8 (36.5–43.3)69650.0 (47.0–53.2)< 0.0001
201124040.6 (37.4–44.1)76453.3 (50.5–56.2)< 0.0001
201225440.5 (37.2–44.1)81550.2 (47.5–53.1)< 0.0001
201326143.8 (40.1–47.8)89257.4 (54.4–60.6)< 0.0001
ALT201023333.2 (31.2–35.4)76738.4 (36.7–40.2)0.0002
201124528.8 (27.0–30.8)84437.1 (35.6–38.7)< 0.0001
201225832.7 (30.8–34.7)90841.3 (39.8–42.8)< 0.0001
201326533.6 (31.5–35.9)1,00843.3 (41.8–44.9)< 0.0001
AST201023330.1 (28.2–32.2)76637.1 (35.5–38.7)< 0.0001
201124527.3 (25.6–29.1)84533.1 (31.9–34.4)< 0.0001
201225727.8 (25.9–29.7)90836.0 (34.6–37.3)< 0.0001
201326428.1 (26.3–30.1)1,00736.5 (35.1–38.0)< 0.0001
BUN201023347.0 (44.0–50.2)73563.9 (61.0–67.0)< 0.0001
201124541.8 (39.3–44.4)80663.3 (60.7–66.1)< 0.0001
201225741.8 (39.4–44.3)85962.5 (60.0–65.1)< 0.0001
201326442.4 (39.9–45.0)95968.4 (65.7–71.2)< 0.0001
Chloride201022476.1 (71.5–81.0)424107.7 (102.4–113.3)< 0.0001
201123675.3 (71.9–78.8)471101.9 (97.5–106.4)< 0.0001
201224878.3 (74.6–82.2)507102.3 (97.9–106.9)< 0.0001
201325685.0 (81.0–89.2)56199.0 (94.9–103.3)< 0.0001
Creatinine201022845.8 (42.8–48.9)75466.9 (64.1–69.9)< 0.0001
201124045.7 (43.1–48.3)82961.4 (58.9–64.1)< 0.0001
201225445.6 (43.2–48.2)89263.7 (61.1–66.3)< 0.0001
201326146.1 (43.6–48.8)99368.2 (65.6–70.8)< 0.0001
γ-glutamyl transferase201022927.6 (25.6–29.6)74936.8 (35.1–38.5)< 0.0001
201124127.9 (26.0–30.0)82434.5 (33.1–36.0)< 0.0001
201225427.8 (26.0–29.8)88633.8 (32.4–35.3)< 0.0001
201326127.3 (25.6–29.2)98336.2 (34.8–37.6)< 0.0001
Glucose201022923.4 (21.9–24.9)74435.9 (34.3–37.6)< 0.0001
201124123.4 (22.1–24.9)82034.2 (32.8–35.7)< 0.0001
201225424.3 (22.8–26.0)83933.8 (32.5–35.3)< 0.0001
201326122.5 (21.1–24.1)98134.8 (33.4–36.2)< 0.0001
LDH201022616.0 (14.3–18.0)52022.8 (20.9–24.8)< 0.0001
201123813.9 (12.6–15.2)54020.2 (18.7–21.8)< 0.0001
201225014.3 (13.2–15.5)56220.3 (18.9–21.7)< 0.0001
201325617.2 (15.9–18.5)60423.5 (22.0–25.2)< 0.0001
Phosphorus201021933.4 (31.1–35.9)28345.8 (42.5–49.4)< 0.0001
201123129.2 (27.3–31.2)30743.8 (40.7–47.2)< 0.0001
201224529.7 (27.7–31.9)32640.3 (37.3–43.4)< 0.0001
201325128.9 (27.0–30.9)33840.1 (37.2–43.2)< 0.0001
Potassium201022548.9 (45.8–52.3)43873.6 (69.6–77.8)< 0.0001
201123745.5 (42.7–48.6)48474.7 (71.1–78.5)< 0.0001
201224844.6 (42.2–47.2)51966.1 (63.0–69.3)< 0.0001
201325543.4 (40.5–46.5)57468.5 (65.3–71.8)< 0.0001
Sodium201022561.1 (57.0–65.5)43783.6 (79.3–88.2)< 0.0001
201123761.5 (57.9–65.4)48487.7 (83.5–92.1)< 0.0001
201224959.6 (56.4–63.0)51988.4 (84.5–92.6)< 0.0001
201325656.4 (53.1–59.9)57484.1 (80.4–87.9)< 0.0001
Total bilirubin201022825.7 (23.8–27.8)72036.9 (34.9–38.9)< 0.0001
201124028.1 (26.1–30.2)79037.1 (35.4–38.9)< 0.0001
201225426.9 (25.0–29.0)84533.7 (32.1–35.4)< 0.0001
201326126.5 (24.7–28.5)94236.1 (34.6–37.7)< 0.0001
Total calcium201022053.9 (50.3–57.8)32177.8 (72.9–83.0)< 0.0001
201123352.7 (49.6–56.0)34879.5 (75.1–84.1)< 0.0001
201224652.8 (49.5–56.4)36276.2 (72.1–80.6)< 0.0001
201325149.8 (46.7–53.1)38373.2 (68.8–77.9)< 0.0001
Total cholesterol201023328.3 (26.5–30.2)75437.4 (35.7–39.1)< 0.0001
201124526.7 (25.0–28.4)82935.4 (34.1–36.8)< 0.0001
201225726.7 (25.1–28.3)82034.7 (33.3–36.2)< 0.0001
201326426.8 (25.2–28.4)99337.5 (36.1–39.0)< 0.0001
Total protein201023357.0 (53.2–60.9)71575.4 (71.8–79.2)< 0.0001
201124553.1 (50.5–55.9)78074.9 (71.9–78.1)< 0.0001
201225851.2 (48.4–54.2)83471.9 (69.0–74.9)< 0.0001
201326550.2 (47.4–53.1)85575.5 (72.4–78.8)< 0.0001
Triglyceride201022932.0 (29.3–34.9)73845.1 (42.7–47.5)< 0.0001
201124135.4 (32.8–38.3)81148.0 (45.5–50.6)< 0.0001
201224633.1 (30.7–35.8)64545.6 (43.1–48.3)< 0.0001
201326130.3 (28.3–32.4)97545.5 (43.5–47.7)< 0.0001
Uric acid201022832.5 (30.4–34.7)64944.1 (41.9–46.5)< 0.0001
201123930.2 (28.3–32.2)70142.2 (40.3–44.3)< 0.0001
201225428.3 (26.7–30.1)74041.0 (39.2–43.0)< 0.0001
201326128.2 (26.6–29.9)80544.1 (42.0–46.2)< 0.0001

*Number of laboratories; †Geometric mean of VIS; ‡P value by Student's t-test using the log-transformed values.

Abbreviations: BUN, blood urea nitrogen; CI, confidence interval; KLAP, Korean Laboratory Accreditation Program; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; VIS, variance index score.

Fig. 1

Comparison of geometric means of the variance index score (VIS) for clinical chemistry tests between laboratories with or without KLAP in 2013. The 95% confidence intervals for the mean of each test in the two groups did not overlap. (A) VIS<50 and (B) VIS: 50–100. The graph shows the clinical chemistry tests on the X-axis and the geometric means of the VIS on the Y-axis.

Abbreviations: BUN, blood urea nitrogen; KLAP, Korean Laboratory Accreditation Program; γ-GT, γ-glutamyl transferase; VIS, variance index score.

2. Differences in the VIS between laboratories categorized by institution type

Laboratories in general hospitals and entrusted laboratory agencies exhibited significantly lower geometric means of 4-yr VIS for all test items compared with that of laboratories in hospitals and clinics (P<0.0001) (Table 2). The laboratories in general hospitals were further classified into two subgroups based on their KLAP status; the numbers in the accredited and non-accredited groups were 205 (64%) and 116 (36%) in 2010, 212 (65%) and 116 (35%) in 2011, 219 (66%) and 113 (34%) in 2012, and 221 (62%) and 135 (38%) in 2013, respectively. Among the laboratories in general hospitals, the means of 4-yr VIS in laboratories with KLAP were significantly lower than those in laboratories without KLAP for blood urea nitrogen, chloride, creatinine, glucose, lactate dehydrogenase, phosphorus, potassium, sodium, total calcium, total cholesterol, triglyceride, and uric acid (Table 3).
Table 2

Comparison of variance index scores between laboratories categorized by institution type between 2010 and 2013

Test itemYearGeneral hospitalHospitalClinicEntrusted laboratoryP
N*VIS (95% CI)N*VIS (95% CI)N*VIS (95% CI)N*VIS (95% CI)
Albumin201031343.0 (40.9–45.3)31246.3 (43.7–49.2)25348.2 (44.7–51.9)1136.4 (29.6–44.6)0.0302
201132037.5§,∥ (35.5–39.6)35044.9§ (42.6–47.4)28244.5 (41.6–47.6)1235.5 (26.4–47.7)< 0.0001
201232437.1§,∥ (35.2–39.1)39446.5§,¶ (44.1–48.9)30245.1∥,** (42.3–48.1)1330.6¶,** (22.2–45.1)< 0.0001
201334539.7§,∥ (37.7–41.9)44749.9§ (47.5–52.5)32147.3 (44.6–50.1)1541.9 (33.6–52.1)< 0.0001
ALP201031241.3§ (38.1–44.9)30847.5 (43.5–51.9)22952.6§ (46.9–59.1)1143.9 (26.2–73.4)0.0058
201131943.1§,∥ (40.0–46.5)34652.8§ (48.9–57.0)25953.5 (48.5–59.1)1242.7 (28.8–63.4)0.0007
201232340.9§,∥ (37.7–44.2)39052.1§ (48.2–56.3)27449.5 (44.7–54.8)1347.5 (29.7–75.9)0.0005
201334046.6§ (43.0–50.5)43659.8§ (55.3–64.6)28952.7 (47.9–58.0)1551.2 (31.6–82.7)0.0004
ALT201032134.3§ (32.3–36.4)31438.5 (36.0–41.3)27240.6§ (37.6–43.8)1131.8 (25.8–39.2)0.0042
201132831.8§,∥ (30.0–33.8)35336.0§ (34.0–38.2)30938.3 (35.5–41.4)1232.0 (23.7–43.1)0.0010
201233235.4§,∥ (33.5–37.3)39740.0§ (38.0–42.2)33542.6∥,¶ (40.0–45.3)1327.5 (21.6–35.0)< 0.0001
201335636.0§,∥ (34.0–38.2)45342.9§ (40.7–45.2)35144.5 (41.8–47.5)1538.1 (31.1–46.6)< 0.0001
AST201032131.2§,∥ (29.4–33.0)31436.9§ (34.5–39.4)27138.9 (36.1–41.9)1127.4 (21.0–35.6)< 0.0001
201132828.2§,∥ (26.6–29.9)35332.3§ (30.4–34.2)30935.3 (33.2–37.5)1229.9 (21.9–40.8)< 0.0001
201233228.7§,∥ (27.1–30.5)39735.7§ (33.8–37.7)33436.8 (34.4–39.3)1324.9 (18.9–32.8)< 0.0001
201335529.6§,∥ (27.8–31.6)45335.3§ (33.3–37.4)35037.8 (35.3–40.5)1532.4 (24.6–42.8)< 0.0001
BUN201031451.2§,∥ (48.2–54.3)31363.1§ (59.0–67.5)25564.6 (59.1–70.6)1143.7 (34.0–56.2)< 0.0001
201132146.4§,∥ (43.8–49.1)35262.8§ (59.2–66.7)28663.7 (58.7–69.0)1246.4 (32.7–65.9)< 0.0001
201232545.0§,∥ (42.7–47.5)39563.3§,¶ (59.9–67.0)30364.5∥,** (59.8–69.5)1338.5¶,** (28.3–52.4)< 0.0001
201335148.1§,∥ (45.3–51.1)44869.0§,¶ (65.2–73.1)32369.1∥,** (64.2–74.4)1539.2¶,** (29.9–51.5)< 0.0001
Chloride201030684.4§ (79.8–89.3)273108.3§ (101.6–115.3)4598.0 (81.2–118.3)1083.0 (63.5–108.4)< 0.0001
201131380.4§,∥ (77.0–84.0)311104.6§ (99.0–110.5)5396.0 (83.3–110.5)1190.1 (71.5–113.6)< 0.0001
201231685.1§ (81.1–89.2)341103.9§ (98.4–109.7)6590.3 (79.3–102.8)1276.0 (59.2–97.5)< 0.0001
201332388.3§ (84.4–92.4)38698.1§ (93.0–103.4)7199.6 (89.6–110.6)1589.2 (68.5–116.2)0.0213
Creatinine201031348.8§,∥ (46.1–51.6)31467.0§,¶ (62.9–71.5)27169.2∥,** (64.1–74.9)1138.2¶,** (23.1–63.0)< 0.0001
201132047.4§,∥ (44.9–50.0)35361.4§ (57.8–65.3)30664.2 (59.5–69.3)1244.8 (35.9–55.9)< 0.0001
201232448.6§,∥ (46.0–51.3)39762.9§ (59.3–66.8)33366.9∥,¶ (62.4–71.8)1341.9 (35.4–49.7)< 0.0001
201335051.0§,∥ (48.1–54.0)45368.3§,¶ (64.8–72.0)34971.3∥,** (66.7–76.1)1538.5¶,** (30.0–49.3)< 0.0001
γ-glutamyl transferase201031330.5§,∥ (28.6–32.5)31136.5§ (34.0–39.2)27136.2 (33.2–39.5)1124.8 (18.0–34.1)0.0005
201132028.2§,∥ (26.5–30.1)34835.6§ (33.4–37.9)30734.4 (31.9–37.1)1225.6 (20.6–31.9)< 0.0001
201232429.4§,∥ (27.6–31.2)39133.8§,¶ (31.8–35.9)33234.2∥,** (31.6–37.0)1319.6¶,** (14.5–26.3)0.0002
201335030.5§,∥,¶ (28.7–32.4)44335.1§,** (33.2–37.1)34837.0∥,†† (34.5–39.6)1519.1¶,**,†† (13.9–26.4)< 0.0001
Glucose201031326.6§,∥ (25.0–28.4)31436.2§ (33.9–38.7)27033.9 (31.2–36.9)1128.2 (21.8–36.3)< 0.0001
201132025.4§,∥ (24.0–26.9)35334.4§ (32.4–36.6)30634.5 (32.1–37.2)1226.9 (22.0–32.9)< 0.0001
201232426.0§,∥ (24.5–27.6)39734.1§,¶ (32.1–36.1)33034.6∥,** (32.2–37.1)1321.2¶,** (15.6–28.9)< 0.0001
201335026.1§,∥ (24.4–28.0)45235.5§ (33.5–37.6)34633.2 (30.8–35.7)1523.6 (17.1–32.5)< 0.0001
LDH201030717.2§ (15.5–19.1)23924.1§ (21.3–27.3)14820.2 (17.2–23.8)1121.7 (10.8–43.9)0.0007
201131215.0§ (13.7–16.4)25621.3§ (19.0–23.8)15718.3 (15.9–21.1)1216.8 (11.0–25.7)< 0.0001
201231515.2§,∥ (14.1–16.4)28420.3§ (18.6–22.1)15920.0 (17.3–23.2)1313.9 (8.0–24.3)< 0.0001
201332719.3§ (17.8–20.8)30823.3§ (21.2–25.6)16522.2 (19.5–25.4)1413.7 (9.7–19.3)0.0032
Phosphorus201028735.8§ (33.6–38.3)14246.8§ (42.0–52.1)5345.0 (37.3–54.3)1041.2 (28.2–60.4)0.0001
201129332.1§,∥ (30.1–34.3)15942.9§ (38.9–47.4)6445.6 (37.8–54.9)1127.3 (19.7–37.8)< 0.0001
201229831.6§,∥ (29.5–33.9)18239.0§ (35.3–43.2)6842.6 (36.2–50.1)1227.5 (18.8–40.3)0.0001
201330331.0§,∥ (29.1–33.1)18940.3§,¶ (36.5–44.4)7239.1∥,** (32.7–46.6)1423.9¶,** (17.1–33.5)< 0.0001
Potassium201030652.9§,∥ (49.8–56.1)28377.3§,¶ (72.2–82.9)4976.3 (63.9–91.1)1148.2 (36.9–63.0)< 0.0001
201131349.9§,∥ (46.9–53.0)31978.2§ (73.6–83.0)5773.9 (63.4–86.0)1254.8 (44.7–67.2)< 0.0001
201231548.6§,∥ (46.0–51.4)34968.2§,¶ (64.6–72.1)6960.2 (51.5–70.4)1343.4 (33.9–55.7)< 0.0001
201332246.3§,∥ (43.4–49.3)39571.2§ (67.4–75.3)7463.9 (55.5–73.6)1549.1 (35.1–68.7)< 0.0001
Sodium201030663.9§,∥ (60.1–68.0)28385.1§ (79.9–90.8)48100.4 (84.7–119.1)1167.8 (47.5–96.7)< 0.0001
201131365.3§,∥ (61.6–69.2)31988.6§ (83.6–93.8)5792.6 (79.4–108.0)1280.1 (57.4–111.8)< 0.0001
201231662.8§,∥ (59.5–66.3)34991.4§ (86.6–96.4)6987.5 (76.8–99.6)1369.4 (52.8–91.3)< 0.0001
201332359.8§,∥ (56.6–63.2)39586.1§,¶ (81.7–90.8)7481.5∥,** (71.9–92.4)1555.0¶,** (41.1–73.6)< 0.0001
Total bilirubin201031226.6§,∥ (24.9–28.5)31036.8§,¶ (33.8–40.0)24840.1∥,** (36.4–44.3)1120.2¶,** (15.4–26.6)< 0.0001
201131928.7§,∥ (26.9–30.7)35037.8§ (35.8–40.5)27838.0 (34.8–41.4)1229.2 (22.1–38.6)< 0.0001
201232327.0§,∥ (25.2–29.0)39433.9§ (31.7–36.2)29934.4 (31.4–37.6)1324.2 (19.2–30.5)< 0.0001
201334828.3§,∥ (26.4–30.4)44635.1§ (33.0–37.3)31937.7 (35.0–40.7)1526.5 (19.2–36.7)< 0.0001
Total calcium201029557.8§,∥ (54.4–61.5)16481.9§ (74.9–89.5)6074.9 (62.7–89.4)1065.2 (48.5–87.6)< 0.0001
201130257.6§,∥ (54.4–60.9)18582.9§,¶ (76.9–89.2)7175.4 (64.9–87.5)1154.6 (42.6–69.9)< 0.0001
201230557.6§,∥ (54.3–60.9)20579.4§ (73.4–85.9)7467.6 (58.8–77.6)1246.5 (31.5–68.5)< 0.0001
201331252.1§,∥ (49.1–55.3)21777.5§ (71.3–84.2)7671.8 (62.5–82.5)1454.8 (44.3–67.8)< 0.0001
Total cholesterol201031529.2§,∥ (27.6–30.9)31437.7§ (35.2–40.3)27237.4 (34.6–40.5)1126.5 (18.1–39.0)< 0.0001
201132228.4§,∥ (26.9–30.0)35136.6§ (34.6–38.7)30833.8 (31.5–36.3)1227.0 (19.4–37.6)< 0.0001
201232427.5§,∥ (26.0–29.1)38936.0§ (34.0–38.1)33134.5 (32.1–37.1)1329.8 (24.3–36.5)< 0.0001
201335230.1§,∥ (28.3–31.9)45037.7§ (35.7–39.9)34936.1 (33.8–38.6)1526.0 (20.5–32.9)< 0.0001
Total protein201031459.1§,∥ (55.6–62.8)31278.4§ (73.3–83.9)24873.8 (67.0–81.2)1161.5 (48.6–77.7)< 0.0001
201132158.8§,∥ (55.9–61.8)35074.3§ (70.1–78.7)27575.1 (69.5–81.0)1252.9 (40.5–69.0)< 0.0001
201232555.2§,∥ (52.4–58.1)39473.0§ (69.0–77.3)29370.3 (65.3–75.8)1353.6 (39.3–73.0)< 0.0001
201334056.9§,∥ (53.7–60.3)43377.4§ (73.1–82.0)31171.5 (66.4–77.0)1553.2 (40.4–70.1)< 0.0001
Triglyceride201031237.1§,|| (34.2–40.2)30445.0§ (41.3–49.0)26945.0 (41.4–48.9)1135.8 (21.5–59.8)0.0023
201131839.8§,∥ (36.8–43.0)34147.2§ (43.4–51.3)30548.1 (44.4–52.2)1235.3 (19.4–64.2)0.0029
201231036.4§,∥ (33.8–39.3)30145.0§ (41.3–49.1)25944.6 (41.1–48.5)1134.0 (21.0–55.0)0.0005
201334935.3§,∥ (32.8–38.0)43945.7§,¶ (42.6–49.0)34744.4∥,** (41.4–47.5)1526.1¶,** (21.5–31.8)< 0.0001
Uric acid201031134.4§,∥ (32.4–36.6)28145.5§ (42.2–49.1)20743.5 (39.3–48.2)1133.3 (25.7–43.3)< 0.0001
201131831.8§,∥ (30.1–33.6)31543.0§ (40.2–46.0)22542.7 (38.7–47.1)1135.5 (24.2–52.0)< 0.0001
201232230.1§,∥ (28.4–31.8)35243.7§,¶ (41.0–46.6)23639.3 (35.7–43.2)1326.3 (20.4–33.9)< 0.0001
201334633.0§,∥ (31.0–35.2)38645.7§,¶ (42.8–48.8)24540.8∥,** (37.2–44.7)1524.6¶,** (19.4–31.1)< 0.0001

*Number of laboratories; †Geometric mean of the VIS; ‡P value represents overall differences across groups as determined by ANOVA using log-transformed values; §, ∥, ¶, **, ††Matching letters indicate statistical significance based on Tukey's multiple comparison.

Abbreviations: see Table 1.

Table 3

Comparison of variance index scores between laboratories in the general hospital group between 2010 and 2013

Test itemYearAccredited laboratoryNon-accredited laboratoryP
N*VIS (95% CI)N*VIS (95% CI)
Albumin201020540.8 (38.5–43.4)10847.5 (43.5–52.0)0.0045
201121236.4 (34.1–38.9)10839.6 (36.0–43.6)0.1534
201221936.5 (34.3–38.9)10538.3 (34.9–42.1)0.3865
201322137.6 (35.4–39.9)12443.9 (39.8–48.6)0.0080
ALP201020339.3 (36.0–43.0)10945.4 (38.5–53.6)0.1310
201121040.3 (37.0–44.0)10949.1 (42.5–56.6)0.0209
201221739.9 (36.5–43.6)10642.9 (36.5–50.4)0.4376
201321943.4 (39.6–47.5)12153.1 (45.5–61.9)0.0262
ALT201020533.9 (31.7–36.3)11635.0 (31.2–39.2)0.6480
201121229.1 (27.2–31.3)11637.4 (33.8–41.4)< 0.0001
201221933.4 (31.3–35.6)11339.6 (36.0–43.5)0.0028
201322134.0 (31.6–36.5)13539.6 (35.8–43.9)0.0130
AST201020530.0 (27.9–32.2)11633.4 (30.3–36.8)0.0794
201121227.3 (25.5–29.3)11629.8 (26.7–33.2)0.1722
201221927.7 (25.7–29.8)11330.8 (27.9–34.0)0.0914
201322128.0 (26.0–30.1)13432.6 (29.2–36.4)0.0199
BUN201020546.9 (43.8–50.3)10960.2 (54.3–66.8)< 0.0001
201121241.2 (38.7–43.9)10958.4 (52.6–64.8)< 0.0001
201221942.2 (39.7–45.0)10651.4 (46.9–56.3)0.0005
201322142.3 (39.7–45.1)13059.7 (53.3–66.8)< 0.0001
Chloride201020376.0 (71.2–81.1)103103.9 (94.2–114.5)< 0.0001
201121074.7 (71.2–78.5)10393.4 (86.3–101.2)< 0.0001
201221777.5 (73.6–81.7)99104.2 (95.5–113.7)< 0.0001
201321983.1 (79.0–87.4)104100.2 (91.7–109.5)0.0004
Creatinine201020344.8 (41.9–47.9)11057.1 (51.8–62.9)< 0.0001
201121045.2 (42.4–48.1)11051.9 (46.8–57.5)0.0257
201221745.1 (42.5–47.9)10756.5 (50.6–63.1)0.0005
201321945.6 (43.0–48.3)13161.5 (54.8–69.0)< 0.0001
γ-glutamyl transferase201020327.7 (25.6–29.9)11036.5 (32.8–40.6)< 0.0001
201121027.8 (25.7–30.0)11029.1 (26.0–32.6)0.5024
201221728.5 (26.5–30.6)10731.2 (27.9–34.8)0.1758
201321927.9 (26.0–29.9)13135.3 (31.6–39.4)0.0004
Glucose201020323.2 (21.7–24.9)11034.3 (30.7–38.3)< 0.0001
201121023.2 (21.8–24.7)11030.3 (27.4–33.6)< 0.0001
201221723.8 (22.2–25.4)10731.3 (28.0–35.1)< 0.0001
201321922.1 (20.6–23.8)13134.5 (30.6–38.9)< 0.0001
LDH201020115.2 (13.5–17.1)10621.7 (17.9–26.4)0.0021
201120813.2 (12.0–14.6)10419.2 (16.1–23.0)0.0004
201221414.0 (12.9–15.2)10118.1 (15.4–21.4)0.0064
201321617.1 (15.8–18.5)11124.3 (20.6–28.7)0.0002
Phosphorus201019832.9 (30.6–35.4)8943.4 (38.0–49.4)0.0001
201120529.2 (27.2–31.4)8840.1 (35.1–45.8)< 0.0001
201221429.4 (27.4–31.7)8437.9 (32.6–44.1)0.0033
201321729.0 (27.0–31.2)8636.7 (32.1–42.0)0.0011
Potassium201020348.4 (45.1–51.9)10363.0 (56.5–70.2)< 0.0001
201121044.4 (41.4–47.6)10363.1 (56.6–70.3)< 0.0001
201221644.0 (41.5–46.7)9960.4 (53.9–67.7)< 0.0001
201321841.9 (39.0–45.1)10456.8 (50.9–63.4)< 0.0001
Sodium201020359.5 (55.3–64.0)10373.7 (66.0–82.3)0.0011
201121059.7 (56.0–63.6)10378.5 (70.0–88.0)< 0.0001
201221757.2 (54.0–60.6)9976.9 (68.9–85.9)< 0.0001
201321954.4 (51.1–58.0)10472.9 (65.9–80.7)< 0.0001
Total bilirubin201020325.6 (23.6–27.8)10928.6 (25.2–32.4)0.1378
201121027.6 (25.5–29.9)10931.0 (27.7–34.7)0.0926
201221726.8 (24.7–29.1)10627.5 (24.3–31.2)0.7206
201321926.0 (24.0–28.2)12932.6 (28.7–37.2)0.0036
Total calcium201020052.9 (49.2–57.0)9569.7 (62.7–77.5)< 0.0001
201120851.8 (48.5–55.3)9472.8 (66.0–80.3)< 0.0001
201221653.3 (49.8–57.1)8969.2 (62.9–76.1)< 0.0001
201321748.7 (45.7–52.1)9560.5 (53.6–68.4)0.0024
Total cholesterol201020527.8 (25.9–29.7)11032.1 (28.9–35.6)0.0188
201121226.0 (24.3–27.9)11033.7 (30.8–36.8)< 0.0001
201221925.7 (24.1–27.5)10531.6 (28.4–35.3)0.0007
201322126.4 (24.8–28.0)13137.5 (33.3–42.1)< 0.0001
Total protein201020557.1 (53.1–61.4)10962.9 (56.3–70.4)0.1389
201121253.4 (50.6–56.4)10970.9 (64.4–78.1)< 0.0001
201221950.9 (47.9–54.0)10665.1 (59.2–71.7)< 0.0001
201322150.5 (47.5–53.7)11971.0 (63.5–79.3)< 0.0001
Triglyceride201020332.2 (29.3–35.3)10948.5 (42.0–55.9)< 0.0001
201121035.3 (32.5–38.3)10850.3 (43.1–58.7)< 0.0001
201221232.7 (30.0–35.5)9846.2 (39.8–53.6)< 0.0001
201321929.4 (27.3–31.7)13047.9 (41.7–54.9)< 0.0001
Uric acid201020332.4 (30.2–34.7)10838.6 (34.4–43.2)0.0100
201121029.7 (27.7–31.7)10836.5 (33.3–40.0)0.0005
201221728.0 (26.2–29.9)10534.9 (31.6–38.5)0.0003
201321928.0 (26.3–29.9)12743.7 (38.8–49.3)< 0.0001

*Number of laboratories; †Geometric mean of the VIS; ‡P value by Student's t-test using log-transformed values.

Abbreviations: see Table 1.

DISCUSSION

The major finding of this study is that the 4-yr VIS was significantly different between laboratories with or without KLAP. The VIS scores in KLAP-accredited laboratories were significantly lower than those in laboratories without KLAP for all clinical chemistry tests; this difference justifies a high level of confidence in standardized services provided by accredited laboratories. The present study is the first to demonstrate a strong impact of practice standardization on the accuracy of test results. Implementation of laboratory standards is verified through the process of accreditation. In many countries, accreditation of medical laboratories has been established for several decades [9101112]. Accredited medical laboratories should have a well-functioning quality management system, demonstrate technical competence, and provide timely and customer-focused services that contribute to patient care. Our observation of a lower VIS in KLAP-accredited laboratories suggests that the KLAP assesses laboratories in accordance with the accepted standards. This finding provides external validation that KLAP-accredited laboratory services are accurate, traceable, and reproducible. Clinical laboratories must provide high-quality services by producing accurate, precise, relevant, and comprehensive data, which have a direct impact on the medical management of patients [1]. Enhancement of the quality of laboratory services involves laboratory quality management plans, including pre-analytic, analytic, and post-analytic plans, and standardization of activities and practices. A lack of standardization makes it impossible to guarantee the reliability or accuracy of laboratory test results, which increases the error rate and endangers patient safety [13]. Laboratory standards critical to patient safety include proficiency testing, laboratory accreditation, continuing education, safety goals, health information technology use, and electronic records. Therefore, accreditation bodies, consisting of independent entities as well as government authorities, should work to improve the quality of laboratory practices and patient safety. We used the VIS statistical parameter, obtained from the KEQAS, to assess the standardized performance of different laboratories. One could argue that the parameter accurately reflects laboratory standardization, because the KEQAS is run by a voluntary organization, and not government authorities. However, the KEQAS has great value in quality assessment, allowing a laboratory to confirm that its results are consistent with those of other laboratories using the same or similar methods, and thus to confirm that it is correctly following the methods [14]. It is also important for maintaining long-term accuracy of analytical methods, and thus, it was chosen as a parameter to assess the effect of standardization. In conclusion, our investigation of the KEQAS data confirmed that practice standardization is strongly associated with the accuracy of test results. Our analysis emphasizes the necessity of establishing a system for providing standardized diagnostic testing.
  12 in total

1.  Twenty-years of experiences in external quality assurance in Korea.

Authors:  H I Cho
Journal:  Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 0.267

2.  Medicare, Medicaid and CLIA programs; regulations implementing the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA)--HCFA. Final rule with comment period.

Authors: 
Journal:  Fed Regist       Date:  1992-02-28

3.  The World Health Organization African region laboratory accreditation process: improving the quality of laboratory systems in the African region.

Authors:  Guy-Michel Gershy-Damet; Philip Rotz; David Cross; El Hadj Belabbes; Fatim Cham; Jean-Bosco Ndihokubwayo; Glen Fine; Clement Zeh; Patrick A Njukeng; Souleymane Mboup; Daniel E Sesse; Tsehaynesh Messele; Deborah L Birx; John N Nkengasong
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.493

4.  Implementation of External Quality Assessment Scheme in Clinical Chemistry for District Laboratories in Bhutan.

Authors:  Rixin Jamtsho; Wilairat Nuchpramool
Journal:  Indian J Clin Biochem       Date:  2012-05-08

Review 5.  ISO 15189:2003--quality management, evaluation and continual improvement.

Authors:  David Burnett
Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 3.694

6.  ISO 15189 accreditation: Requirements for quality and competence of medical laboratories, experience of a laboratory I.

Authors:  Omer Guzel; Ebru Ilhan Guner
Journal:  Clin Biochem       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.281

Review 7.  Why is the laboratory an afterthought for managed care organizations?

Authors:  R W Forsman
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 8.327

8.  Measurement of improvement achieved by participation in international laboratory accreditation in sub-Saharan Africa: the Aga Khan University Hospital Nairobi experience.

Authors:  Edwin Kibet; Zahir Moloo; Peter J Ojwang; Shahin Sayed; Ann Mbuthia; Rodney D Adam
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 2.493

9.  External quality assessment of clinical laboratories in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  T P Whitehead; F P Woodford
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1981-09       Impact factor: 3.411

10.  The IFCC Working Group on laboratory errors and patient safety.

Authors:  Laura Sciacovelli; Mario Plebani
Journal:  Clin Chim Acta       Date:  2009-03-26       Impact factor: 3.786

View more
  7 in total

1.  Budget Impact of the Accreditation Program for Clinical Laboratories on Colorectal Cancer Screening via Fecal Immunochemical Testing: Results from the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea.

Authors:  Jae Kwan Jun; Na Young Sung; Seung Hoon Song; Seri Hong; Mi Ae Jang; Junghan Song; Jeong Ho Kim; Won Ki Min; You Kyoung Lee
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 3.464

2.  Effect of Accreditation on the Accuracy of Diagnostic Hematologic Tests: Standard Deviation Index Analysis.

Authors:  Young Ahn Yoon; Mi Ae Jang; Ji Sung Lee; Won Ki Min; Kye Chul Kwon; Yong Wha Lee; You Kyoung Lee
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 3.464

3.  Effect of the Standardization of Diagnostic Tests on the Prevalence of Diabetes Mellitus and Impaired Fasting Glucose.

Authors:  Bora Lee; Ji Sung Lee; Yong Wha Lee; Mi Ae Jang; Junghan Song; Jeong Ho Kim; Wee Gyo Lee; Won Ki Min; Juneyoung Lee; You Kyoung Lee
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2018-03-05       Impact factor: 2.153

4.  Introduction of quality management in a National Reference Laboratory in Germany.

Authors:  Susanne Homolka; Julia Zallet; Heidi Albert; Anne-Kathrin Witt; Katharina Kranzer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-15       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Impact of ISO/IEC 17025 laboratory accreditation in sub-Saharan Africa: a case study.

Authors:  Mercy A Okezue; Mojisola C Adeyeye; Steve J Byrn; Victor O Abiola; Kari L Clase
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 2.655

6.  Schemes and Performance Evaluation Criteria of Korean Association of External Quality Assessment (KEQAS) for Improving Laboratory Testing.

Authors:  Sollip Kim; Kyunghoon Lee; Hyung-Doo Park; Yong-Wha Lee; Sail Chun; Won-Ki Min
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 3.464

7.  Comprehensive Laboratory Data Analysis to Predict the Clinical Severity of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in 1,952 Patients in Daegu, Korea.

Authors:  Eun-Hyung Yoo; Soon Hee Chang; Do-Young Song; Chae Hoon Lee; Gyu Young Cheong; Sunggyun Park; Jae Hee Lee; Sooin Lee; Sang-Gyu Kwak; Chang-Ho Jeon; Kyung Eun Song
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 3.464

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.