Setting analytical performance specifications using HbA1c as a model measurand

Analytical performance specifications (APS) for measurands describe the minimum analytical quality requirements for their measurement. These APS are used to monitor and contain the systematic (trueness/bias) and random errors (precision/imprecision) of a laboratory measurement to ensure the results are "fit for purpose" in informing clinical decisions about managing a patient's health condition. In this review, we highlighted the wide variation in the setting of APS, using different levels of evidence, as recommended by the Milan Consensus, and approaches. The setting of a priori defined outcome-based APS for HbA1c remains challenging. Promising indirect alternatives seek to link the clinical utility of HbA1c and APS by defining statistical confidence for interpreting the laboratory values, or through simulation of clinical performance at varying levels of analytical performance. APS defined based on biological variation estimates in healthy individuals using the current formulae are unachievable by nearly all routine laboratory methods for HbA1c testing. On the other hand, the APS employed in external quality assurance programs have been progressively tightened, and greatly facilitate the improved quality of HbA1c testing. Laboratories should select the APS that fits their intended clinical use and should document the data and rationale underpinning those selections. Where possible common APS should be adopted across a region or country to facilitate the movement of patients and patient data across health care facilities.

Proposed Imprecision Quality Goals for Urinary Albumin/Creatinine Ratio

BACKGROUND

The urinary albumin/creatinine ratio (ACR) is an important indicator of albuminuria. We aimed to estimate ACR uncertainty and its impact on test results and proposed imprecision quality goals based on the estimated uncertainty.

METHODS

The combined ACR uncertainty was calculated using the individual uncertainties of urinary albumin and creatinine. ACR confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated based on the expanded uncertainty. When the CI contained the ACR category boundary (30 or 300 mg/g), the cases were considered ambiguous. Quality goals for ACR were suggested using the number of ambiguous cases among actual patient results.

RESULTS

The number of ambiguous cases resulting from the combined ACR uncertainty was higher than expected based on biological variation (BV) quality goals. When the ACR met BV quality specifications, we estimated that 4.8-15.5% of the results may have been misclassified. To minimize the number of ambiguous results, the minimum, desirable, and optimum quality goals were set at 34.0%, 18.0%, and 4.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We expressed ACR uncertainty using the uncertainties of urinary albumin and creatinine and assessed the impact of this combined uncertainty on the test results. Subsequently, we proposed imprecision quality goals for ACR based on ambiguous results.