Una Ørvim Sølvik1, Aslaug Johanne Risøy1,2, Reidun L S Kjome1,2, Sverre Sandberg1,3,4. 1. 1 Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. 2. 2 Centre for Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. 3. 3 Norwegian Quality Improvement of Laboratory Examinations (Noklus), Haraldsplass Deaconess Hospital, Bergen, Norway. 4. 4 Laboratory of Clinical Biochemistry, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many pharmacy services involve laboratory testing using point-of-care (POC) instruments. Our aim was to describe the implementation of quality control of the HbA1c POC instruments and investigate the performance in internal quality control (IQC) and external quality control (EQA) for HbA1c POC instruments in Norwegian community pharmacies. METHODS: Two project pharmacists from each of 11 pharmacies participated in a training program covering capillary blood sampling, how to use the POC HbA1c instrument (DCA Vantage) and IQC and EQA. The pharmacies were enrolled in an EQA program for HbA1c, and their performance was compared with that of general practitioners' (GP) offices. RESULTS: Two of 89 (2.2%) IQC measurements were outside the acceptance interval. Seven out of 11 pharmacies sent in results in EQA in all the three surveys during six months. Two pharmacies did not analyze the control material in any of the surveys, one pharmacy analyzed the control material in one of the surveys, and one pharmacy analyzed two of the surveys. Of these pharmacies, 56-100% obtained "very good" evaluation for trueness and 71-100% obtained "very good" evaluation for precision. The corresponding numbers for GP offices were 75-87% for trueness and 84-94% for precision. No pharmacies obtained a "poor" evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Norwegian community pharmacies can perform IQC and EQA on a HbA1c POC instrument, and the performance is comparable with that of GP offices. The compliance in the EQA surveys was modest, but the duration of the study and participation in the EQA program was probably too short to implement all the new procedures for all pharmacies.
BACKGROUND: Many pharmacy services involve laboratory testing using point-of-care (POC) instruments. Our aim was to describe the implementation of quality control of the HbA1c POC instruments and investigate the performance in internal quality control (IQC) and external quality control (EQA) for HbA1c POC instruments in Norwegian community pharmacies. METHODS: Two project pharmacists from each of 11 pharmacies participated in a training program covering capillary blood sampling, how to use the POC HbA1c instrument (DCA Vantage) and IQC and EQA. The pharmacies were enrolled in an EQA program for HbA1c, and their performance was compared with that of general practitioners' (GP) offices. RESULTS: Two of 89 (2.2%) IQC measurements were outside the acceptance interval. Seven out of 11 pharmacies sent in results in EQA in all the three surveys during six months. Two pharmacies did not analyze the control material in any of the surveys, one pharmacy analyzed the control material in one of the surveys, and one pharmacy analyzed two of the surveys. Of these pharmacies, 56-100% obtained "very good" evaluation for trueness and 71-100% obtained "very good" evaluation for precision. The corresponding numbers for GP offices were 75-87% for trueness and 84-94% for precision. No pharmacies obtained a "poor" evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Norwegian community pharmacies can perform IQC and EQA on a HbA1c POC instrument, and the performance is comparable with that of GP offices. The compliance in the EQA surveys was modest, but the duration of the study and participation in the EQA program was probably too short to implement all the new procedures for all pharmacies.
Entities:
Keywords:
EQA; HbA1c; IQC; POC; community pharmacy; diabetes
Authors: David B Sacks; Mark Arnold; George L Bakris; David E Bruns; Andrea Rita Horvath; M Sue Kirkman; Ake Lernmark; Boyd E Metzger; David M Nathan Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: José Antonio Fornos-Pérez; N Floro Andrés-Rodríguez; J Carlos Andrés-Iglesias; Reyes Luna-Cano; Javier García-Soidán; Blanca Lorenzo-Veiga; Rocío Mera-Gallego; Rosario García-Riestra Journal: Endocrinol Nutr Date: 2016-10
Authors: Adam Vegh; Daniel Vegh; Dorottya Banyai; Gabor Kammerhofer; Zita Biczo; Balazs Voros; Marta Ujpal; Juan Francisco Peña-Cardelles; Zehra Yonel; Arpad Joob-Fancsaly; Peter Hermann; Zsolt Nemeth Journal: In Vivo Date: 2022 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.406
Authors: Emma Barron; Shivani Misra; Emma English; W Garry John; Michael Sampson; Max O Bachmann; Julian Barth; Nick Oliver; K G M M Alberti; Chirag Bakhai; Simon O'Neill; Bob Young; Nicholas J Wareham; Kamlesh Khunti; Susan Jebb; Jenifer Smith; Jonathan Valabhji Journal: BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care Date: 2020-12