To rule-in, or not to falsely rule-out, that is the question: evaluation of hs-cTnT EQA performance in light of the ESC-2020 guideline

OBJECTIVES

To accurately evaluate non-ST-elevated acute cardiac syndrome (NSTE-ACS), the quality of high-sensitive cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) assays is of vital importance. The 2020 revision of the NSTE-ACS guideline includes clinical decision-limits (CDL's) to both rule-in and rule-out NSTE-ACS for most commercially available platforms, providing both 0/1 h and 0/2 h delta limits. Our study evaluated whether laboratories are able to meet the analytical performance specifications for imprecision (APS) for hs-cTnT.

METHODS

Results from external quality assurance (EQA) in commutable samples were used to evaluate the current and historic performance of analyzers. The performance of analyzers that either passed or failed to comply with 0/1 h-APS were used on a real-world dataset of first hs-cTnT-values to simulate 10.000 samples of t=0, t=1 and t=2 h values with multiple delta's for all relevant CDL's. We compared the simulated values to the input values to obtain the percentage of aberrant results simulated.

RESULTS

The majority of analyzers complies with APS for rule-in in 2022 (0/1 h: 90.4 % and 0/2 h: 100 %), compliance for the 0/1 h rule-out is still far from optimal (0/1 h: 30.7 %, 0/2 h: 75.4 %), with improving compliance over the past years (rule-in p=<0.0001, rule-out p=0.011, χ2). Whilst 0/1 h-APS-passing analyzers have a minute risk to falsely rule-out patients whom should be ruled-in (0.0001 %), failing performance increases this risk to 2.1 % upon using 0/1 h CDL's. Here, adopting 0/2 h CDL's is favorable (0.01 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Laboratories that fail to meet hs-cTnT 0/1 h-APS should improve their performance to the required and achievable level. Until performance is reached clinics should adopt the 0/2 h CDL's.

Analytical performance specifications and quality assurance of point-of-care testing in primary healthcare

Point-of-care testing (POCT) is the fastest-growing segment of laboratory medicine. This review focuses on the essential aspects of setting analytical performance specifications (APS) and performing quality assurance for POCT in primary healthcare. In-vitro diagnostic medical devices for POCT are typically small and easy to operate. Users often have little to no laboratory experience and may not necessarily see the value of conducting quality assurance on their devices. Therefore, training, guidance, and motivation should be integral parts of the total quality management system, as they are vital for managing errors and ensuring reliable results. It is common to believe that the analytical quality of POCT should be comparable to that of laboratory testing, and as a result, APS should be the same. This paper challenges this concept. The APS for POCT can often be less stringent compared to those used in a central laboratory because the requester is closer to both the analytical and clinical situation. Point-of-care instruments should be selected based on clinical needs, the required analytical quality and user-friendliness in the intended usage setting.Quality assurance should include both internal quality control (IQC) and external quality assessment (EQA). It is recommended that IQC protocols should be dependent on the complexity of the POCT device. A scoring system to determine how frequent IQC should be analyzed in primary healthcare on different types of POCT devices has been suggested. The main challenge in EQA for POCT involves using suitable control materials that reflect instrument performance on patient samples. Obtaining commutable control materials for POCT is difficult since the matrix often is whole blood. An essential aspect of EQA for POCT is that feedback reports should be easily interpretable. Users should receive advice from the EQA organizer regarding the root causes of deviating results. Quality assurance for POCT is not an easy task and presents numerous challenges. However, there is evidence that quality assurance improves the quality of POCT measurements and, consequently, can enhance patient outcomes.

Using analytical performance specifications in a medical laboratory

Analytical performance specifications (APS) are used for the quantitative assessment of assay analytical performance, with the aim of providing information appropriate for clinical care of patients. One of the major locations where APS are used is in the routine clinical laboratory. These may be used to assess and monitor assays in a range of settings including method selection, method verification or validation, external quality assurance, internal quality control and assessment of measurement uncertainty. The aspects of assays that may be assessed include imprecision, bias, selectivity, sample type, analyte stability and interferences. This paper reviews the practical use of APS in a routine clinical laboratory, using the laboratory I supervise as an example.

The role of analytical performance specifications in international guidelines and standards dealing with metrological traceability in laboratory medicine

The goal of metrological traceability is to have equivalent results for a measurand in clinical samples (CSs) irrespective of the in-vitro diagnostic medical device (IVD-MD) used for measurements. The International Standards Organization standard 17511 defines requirements for establishing metrological traceability of values assigned to calibrators, trueness control materials and human samples used with IVD-MDs. Each step in metrological traceability has an uncertainty associated with the value assigned to a material. The uncertainty at each step adds to the uncertainty from preceding steps such that the combined uncertainty gets larger at each step. The combined uncertainty for a CS result must fulfil an analytical performance specification (APS) for the maximum allowable uncertainty (umax CS). The umax CS can be partitioned among the steps in a metrological traceability calibration hierarachy to derive the APS for maximum allowable uncertainty at each step. Similarly, the criterion for maximum acceptable noncommutability bias can be derived from the umax CS. One of the challenges in determining if umax CS is fulfilled is determining the repeatability uncertainty (u Rw) from operating an IVD-MD within a clinical laboratory. Most of the current recommendations for estimating u Rw from internal quality control data do not use a sufficiently representative time interval to capture all relevant sources of variability in measurement results. Consequently, underestimation of u Rw is common and may compromise assessment of how well current IVD-MDs and their supporting calibration hierarchies meet the needs of clinical care providers.

APS calculator: a data-driven tool for setting outcome-based analytical performance specifications for measurement uncertainty using specific clinical requirements and population data

OBJECTIVES

According to ISO 15189:2022, analytical performance specifications (APS) should relate to intended clinical use and impact on patient care. Therefore, we aimed to develop a web application for laboratory professionals to calculate APS based on a simulation of the impact of measurement uncertainty (MU) on the outcome using the chosen decision limits, agreement thresholds, and data of the population of interest.

METHODS

We developed the "APS Calculator" allowing users to upload and select data of concern, specify decision limits and agreement thresholds, and conduct simulations to determine APS for MU. The simulation involved categorizing original measurand concentrations, generating measured (simulated) results by introducing different degrees of MU, and recategorizing measured concentrations based on clinical decision limits and acceptable clinical misclassification rates. The agreements between original and simulated result categories were assessed, and values that met or exceeded user-specified agreement thresholds that set goals for the between-category agreement were considered acceptable. The application generates contour plots of agreement rates and corresponding MU values. We tested the application using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data, with decision limits from relevant guidelines.

RESULTS

We determined APS for MU of six measurands (blood total hemoglobin, plasma fasting glucose, serum total and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and total folate) to demonstrate the potential of the application to generate APS.

CONCLUSIONS

The developed data-driven web application offers a flexible tool for laboratory professionals to calculate APS for MU using their chosen decision limits and agreement thresholds, and the data of the population of interest.

Analytical performance specifications based on biological variation data - considerations, strengths and limitations

Analytical performance specifications (APS) are typically established through one of three models: (i) outcome studies, (ii) biological variation (BV), or (iii) state-of-the-art. Presently, The APS can, for most measurands that have a stable concentration, be based on BV. BV based APS, defined for imprecision, bias, total allowable error and allowable measurement uncertainty, are applied to many different processes in the laboratory. When calculating APS, it is important to consider the different APS formulae, for what setting they are to be applied and if they are suitable for the intended purpose. In this opinion paper, we elucidate the background, limitations, strengths, and potential intended applications of the different BV based APS formulas. When using BV data to set APS, it is important to consider that all formulae are contingent on accurate and relevant BV estimates. During the last decade, efficient procedures have been established to obtain reliable BV estimates that are presented in the EFLM biological variation database. The database publishes detailed BV data for numerous measurands, global BV estimates derived from meta-analysis of quality-assured studies of similar study design and automatic calculation of BV based APS.

How clinical laboratories select and use Analytical Performance Specifications (APS) in Italy

OBJECTIVES

Even if the topic of the analytical quality required to provide laboratory results "fit for purpose" exists since the beginning of the modern medical laboratory, there is the suspect that the expression "Analytical Performance Specifications" (APS) is not well-known. To investigate this aspect a survey was conducted.

METHODS

A questionnaire with seven questions related to the knowledge about the topic, the sources of information and the criteria used by the laboratories to set the APS and their applications was prepared. It was distributed to all the clinical pathology laboratories of Lombardy Region (143) and to the members of SIBioC Laboratory Medicine (excluding Lombardy).

RESULTS

We received 201 replies: 127 from Lombardy and 74 from the rest of Italy. Fifteen percent declared to ignore the meaning of APS and only 64 % of those knowing the meaning of the term declared to use them in the daily practice. The state-of-the-art was the principle used more frequently to set APS (about 48 %) followed by biological variation (41 %), and APS were typically applied to set goals for Internal Quality Control for selected measurands. Usually imprecision or total error APS were used, much less frequently uncertainty APS. In fact only 27 % of the laboratories declared to have calculated the measurement uncertainty for part or the majority of their measurands.

CONCLUSIONS

Even considering the limits of a survey that relies upon self-declarations, it appears clearly that, at list in Italy, there is some work to be done to promote the concept and the use of APS.

Analytical performance specifications for combined uncertainty budget in the implementation of metrological traceability

In addition to the correct implementation of calibration traceability, the definition and fulfillment of maximum allowable measurement uncertainty (MAU) are essential in assuring that laboratory measurements are clinically usable. Across the entire calibration hierarchy, three major contributors to the measurement uncertainty (MU) budget are identified, starting with the higher-order reference providers, extending through the in vitro diagnostic (IVD) manufacturers and their processes for assigning calibrator values, and ending with medical laboratories generating the random variability of results reported to clinicians. To understand if it is possible to achieve MAU and, consequently, to fix the possible drawbacks, the definition of combined MU budget limits across the entire calibration hierarchy has a central role. In particular, quality specifications for MU of reference and commercial calibrator materials should be defined according to the MAU on clinical samples. All involved stakeholders (i.e., higher-order reference providers, IVD manufacturers, medical laboratories) should be prepared to improve their performance whenever the clinical application of the test is made questionable by the failure to achieve MAU.

What the Milan conference has taught us about analytical performance specification model definition and measurand allocation

Analytical performance specifications (APS) represent the criteria that specify the quality required for laboratory test information to satisfy clinical needs. In 2014 the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) considered timely to update the topic of APS by organizing a conference in Milan in which some strategic concepts were proposed. Here I summarize the essential points representing the EFLM Strategic Conference heritage and discuss the approaches that will permit us to become more concrete, including roles and main actions expected from each of involved stakeholders for contributing a quantum leap forward in the way of practicality of Milan consensus about APS.

Current performance of C-reactive protein determination and derivation of quality specifications for its measurement uncertainty

From External Quality Assessment data, current harmonization of CRP measuring systems appears to be satisfactory, the inter-assay CV being well below 10%. The inter-method variability is even better (close to 3%) when the widely used measuring systems are compared at CRP concentrations employed as cut-off for detecting sub-clinical infection (i.e., 10.0 mg/L) and measurement variability estimated, according to ISO 20914:2019 Technical Specification, from the intermediate within-lab reproducibility of 6-month consecutive measurement data. According to the state-of-the-art model (which is better suited for CRP), the maximum allowable measurement uncertainty (MAU) for CRP measurement on clinical samples with 10.0 mg/L concentrations is 3.76% (desirable quality). As measurement uncertainty (MU) of the only available reference material (ERM-DA474/IFCC) is ∼3%, to fulfil desirable MAU on clinical samples, IVD manufacturers should work to keep the contribution of remaining MU sources (commercial calibrator and intermediate within-lab reproducibility) lower than 2.3%.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of within-subject and between-subject biological variation data of coagulation and fibrinolytic measurands

OBJECTIVES

The diagnosis and monitoring of bleeding and thrombotic disorders depend on correct haemostatic measurements. The availability of high-quality biological variation (BV) data is important in this context. Many studies have reported BV data for these measurands, but results are varied. The present study aims to deliver global within-subject (CVI) and between-subject (CVG) BV estimates for haemostasis measurands by meta-analyses of eligible studies, by assessment with the Biological Variation Data Critical Appraisal Checklist (BIVAC).

METHODS

Relevant BV studies were graded by the BIVAC. Weighted estimates for CVI and CVG were obtained via meta-analysis of the BV data derived from BIVAC-compliant studies (graded A-C; whereby A represents optimal study design) performed in healthy adults.

RESULTS

In 26 studies BV data were reported for 35 haemostasis measurands. For 9 measurands, only one eligible publication was identified and meta-analysis could not be performed. 74% of the publications were graded as BIVAC C. The CVI and CVG varied extensively between the haemostasis measurands. The highest estimates were observed for PAI-1 antigen (CVI 48.6%; CVG 59.8%) and activity (CVI 34.9%; CVG 90.2%), while the lowest were observed for activated protein C resistance ratio (CVI 1.5%; CVG 4.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides updated BV estimates of CVI and CVG with 95% confidence intervals for a wide range of haemostasis measurands. These estimates can be used to form the basis for analytical performance specifications for haemostasis tests used in the diagnostic work-up required in bleeding- and thrombosis events and for risk assessment.

Judging the clinical suitability of analytical performance of cardiac troponin assays

New millennium diagnostic criteria for acute myocardial infarction precipitated a revolutionary shift from an approach based primarily on electrocardiography and clinical symptoms to a strategy based on biomarkers, and preferably cardiac troponins (cTn) I and T. In the last 20 years, clinical recommendations have strengthened the role of cTn and led to the development of highly sensitive (hs-cTn) assays, which are now leading players in all current clinical practice guidelines. To optimize the clinical use of these hs-cTn assays, focus on their analytical aspects has become increasingly important, emphasizing the need for the establishment of suitable analytical performance by the definition and implementation of appropriate specifications. An accurate estimate of measurement uncertainty, together with the acquisition of the highest analytical quality when very low concentrations of hs-cTn are measured, are essential requirements and should represent a practical laboratory standard in assuring optimal clinical use. Additional goals for further improving the quality of laboratory information should be the establishment of robust data concerning biological variation of cTn and the resolution of practical challenges opposed to the harmonization of cTn I results obtained by differing commercial measuring systems.

Definition and application of performance specifications for measurement uncertainty of 23 common laboratory tests: linking theory to daily practice

Laboratories should estimate and validate [using analytical performance specifications (APS)] the measurement uncertainty (MU) of performed tests. It is therefore essential to appropriately define APS for MU, but also to provide a perspective on suitability of the practical application of these APS. In this study, 23 commonly ordered measurands were allocated to the models defined during the 2014 EFLM Strategic Conference to derive APS for MU. Then, we checked if the performance of commercial measuring systems used in our laboratory may achieve them. Most measurands (serum alkaline phosphatase, aspartate aminotransferase, creatine kinase, γ-glutamyltransferase, lactate dehydrogenase, pancreatic amylase, total proteins, immunoglobulin G, A, M, magnesium, urate, and prostate-specific antigen, plasma homocysteine, and blood red and white cells) were allocated to the biological variation (BV) model and desirable APS were defined accordingly (2.65%, 4.75%, 7.25%, 4.45%, 2.60%, 3.15%, 1.30%, 2.20%, 2.50%, 2.95%, 1.44%, 4.16%, 3.40%, 3.52%, 1.55%, and 5.65%, respectively). Desirable APS for serum total cholesterol (3.00%) and urine albumin (9.00%) were derived using outcome-based model. Lacking outcome-based information, serum albumin, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and blood platelets were temporarily reallocated to BV model, the corresponding desirable APS being 1.25%, 2.84%, 9.90%, and 4.85%, respectively. A mix between the two previous models was employed for serum digoxin, with a 6.00% desirable APS. In daily practice by using our laboratory systems, 16 tests fulfilled desirable and five minimum APS, while two (serum albumin and plasma homocysteine) exceeded goals, needing improvements.

Biological variation estimates obtained from Chinese subjects for 32 biochemical measurands in serum

OBJECTIVES

The European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) have established a program of work to make available, and to enable delivery of well characterized data describing the biological variation (BV) of clinically important measurands. Guided by the EFLM work the study presented here delivers BV estimates obtained from Chinese subjects for 32 measurands in serum.

METHODS

Samples were drawn from 48 healthy volunteers (26 males, 22 females; age range, 21-45 years) for 5 consecutive weeks at Chinese laboratory. Sera were stored at -80 °C before triplicate analysis of all samples on a Cobas 8000 modular analyzer series. Outlier and homogeneity analyses were performed, followed by CV-ANOVA, to determine BV estimates with confidence intervals.

RESULTS

The within-subject biological variation (CV_I) estimates for 30 of the 32 measurands studied, were lower than listed on the EFLM database; the exceptions were alanine aminotransferase (ALT), lipoprotein (a) (LP(a)). Most of the between-subject biological variation (CV_G) estimates were lower than the EFLM database entries.

CONCLUSIONS

This study delivers BV data for a Chinese population to supplement the EFLM BV database. Population differences may have an impact on applications of BV Data.

Quality in laboratory medicine and the Journal: walking together

Quality in laboratory medicine is defined as "an unfinished journey", as the more essential the laboratory information provided, the more assured its quality should be. In the past decades, the Journal Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine has provided a valuable forum for garnering new insights into the analytical and extra-analytical phases of the testing cycle, and for debating crucial aspects of quality in clinical laboratories. The impressive number of papers published in the Journal is testimony to the efforts made by laboratory professionals, national and international scientific societies and federations in the quest to continuously improve upon the pre-, intra- and post-analytical steps of the testing cycle, thus enhancing the quality of laboratory information. The paper appearing in this special issue summarizes the most important and interesting contributions published in the Journal, thus updating our knowledge on quality in laboratory medicine and offering further stimuli to identify the most valuable measures of quality in clinical laboratories.

Pancreatic lipase: why laboratory community does not take enough care of this clinically important test?

Although being the recommended laboratory test to diagnose acute pancreatitis, serum pancreatic lipase (LIP) is among the poorly standardized laboratory tests, and laboratory stakeholders often appear to not take enough care of the quality of its measurements. Here we discuss some important issues that, if not correctly managed and solved, make misdiagnosis of acute pancreatitis by using serum LIP a real possibility. First, the current unavailability of a suitable higher-order reference material to be used as common calibrator should be filled up to definitively improve the inter-method bias. Second, knowledge of the analytical characteristics that may explain the defective performance of LIP assays should be deepened. IVD manufacturers should be more explicit in providing this information, including description of their internal protocol for transferring LIP values from internal references to commercial calibrators. Third, recommended models for accurately estimating measurement uncertainty and reliably defining analytical performance specifications for LIP measurements should be applied. Finally, investments considering alternative options for measuring LIP (e.g., targeted to the development of automated LIP immunoassays) should be warranted. All involved stakeholders (standardization bodies, higher-order reference providers, in vitro diagnostics manufacturers, and laboratory professionals) should contribute to fill the existing gap.

Optimizing Available Tools for Achieving Result Standardization: Value Added by Joint Committee on Traceability in Laboratory Medicine (JCTLM)

BACKGROUND

The JCTLM created a Task Force on Reference Measurement System Implementation (TF-RMSI) to provide guidance on metrological traceability implementation for the in vitro diagnostics (IVD) community.

CONTENT

TF-RMSI investigated the reference measurement systems (RMS) for 13 common measurands by applying the following procedural steps: (a) extracting data from the JCTLM database of available certified reference materials (CRMs) and reference measurement procedures (RMPs); (b) describing the RMS to which each recruited CRM or RMP belongs; (c) identifying the intended use of the CRMs, and, if used as a common calibrator for IVD measuring systems and/or trueness assessment of field methods was included, checking the CRM's certificate for information about commutability with clinical samples; and (d) checking if the CRM or RMP measurement uncertainty (MU) has the potential to be small enough to avoid significantly affecting the analytical performance specifications (APS) for MU of clinical sample results when the MU from the IVD calibrator and from the end-user measuring system were combined.

SUMMARY

We produced a synopsis of JCTLM-listed higher-order CRMs and RMPs for the selected measurands, including their main characteristics for implementing traceability and fulfilling (or not) the APS for suitable MU. Results showed that traceability to higher-order references can be established by IVD manufacturers within the defined APS for most of the 13 selected measurands. However, some measurands do not yet have suitable CRMs for use as common calibrators. For these measurands, splitting clinical samples with a laboratory performing the RMP may provide a practical alternative for establishing a calibration hierarchy.

Performance specifications for measurement uncertainty of common biochemical measurands according to Milan models

OBJECTIVES

Definition and fullfillment of analytical performance specifications (APS) for measurement uncertainty (MU) allow to make laboratory determinations clinically usable. The 2014 Milan Strategic Conference have proposed models to objectively derive APS based on: (a) the effect of analytical performance on clinical outcome; (b) biological variation components; and (3) the state of the art of the measurement, defined as the highest level of analytical performance technically achievable. Using these models appropriately, we present here a proposal for defining APS for standard MU for some common biochemical measurands.

METHODS

We allocated a group of 13 measurands selected among the most commonly laboratory requested tests to each of the three Milan models on the basis of their biological and clinical characteristics. Both minimum and desirable levels of quality of APS for standard MU of clinical samples were defined by using information obtained from available studies.

RESULTS

Blood total hemoglobin, plasma glucose, blood glycated hemoglobin, and serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 were allocated to the model 1 and the corresponding desirable APS were 2.80, 2.00, 3.00, and 10.0%, respectively. Plasma potassium, sodium, chloride, total calcium, alanine aminotransferase, creatinine, urea, and total bilirubin were allocated to the model 2 and the corresponding desirable APS were 1.96, 0.27, 0.49, 0.91, 4.65, 2.20, 7.05, and 10.5%, respectively. For C-reactive protein, allocated to the model 3, a desirable MU of 3.76% was defined.

CONCLUSIONS

APS for MU of clinical samples derived in this study are essential to objectively evaluate the reliability of results provided by medical laboratories.

Critical appraisal and meta-analysis of biological variation estimates for kidney related analytes

Objective

Kidney markers are some of the most frequently used laboratory tests in patient care, and correct clinical decision making depends upon knowledge and correct application of biological variation (BV) data. The aim of this study was to review available BV data and to provide updated BV estimates for the following kidney markers in serum and plasma; albumin, creatinine, cystatin C, chloride, potassium, sodium and urea.

Content

Relevant studies were identified from a historical BV database as well as by systematic literature searches. Retrieved publications were appraised by the Biological Variation Data Critical Appraisal Checklist (BIVAC). Meta-analyses of BIVAC compliant studies with similar design were performed to deliver global estimates of within-subject (CVI) and between-subject (CVG) BV estimates. Out of the 61 identified papers, three received a BIVAC grade A, four grade B, 48 grade C, five grade D grade and one was not appraised as it did not report numerical BV estimates. Most studies were identified for creatinine (n=48). BV estimates derived from the meta-analysis were in general lower than previously reported estimates for all analytes except urea. For some measurands, BV estimates may be influenced by age or states of health, but further data are required.

Summary

This review provides updated global BV estimates for kidney related measurands. For all measurands except for urea, these estimates were lower than previously reported.

Outlook

For the measurands analyzed in this review, there are sufficient well-designed studies available to publish a trustworthy estimate of BV. However, for a number of newly appearing kidney markers no suitable data is available and additional studies are required.

Spanish society of laboratory medicine external quality assurance programmes: evolution of the analytical performance of clinical laboratories over 30 years and comparison with other programmes

The purpose of this study is to understand the evolution of the analytical performance of the laboratories participating in the Spanish society of laboratory medicine (SEQC^ML) external quality assurance (EQA) programmes during its 30 years of operation and to compare it with the performance of other EQA programmes to establish whether the results are similar. The results obtained during this period are evaluated by applying the biological variability (BV) and state of the art-derived quality specifications. In addition, the results are compared with those obtained by other EQA programme organisations. It is noted that the laboratories participating in the EQA-SEQC^ML programmes have improved their performance over 30 years of experience and that the specifications derived from biological variation are achievable. It is difficult to compare EQA programmes, due to lack of accessibility and the differences in the design of these programmes (control materials, calculations used and analytical specifications established). The data from this study show that for some biological magnitudes the results obtained by the programmes are not yet harmonised, although efforts are being made to achieve this. Organisers of EQA programmes should also join the harmonisation effort by providing information on their results to enable comparison.

Performance of Afinion HbA1c measurements in general practice as judged by external quality assurance data

Background It has been debated whether point-of care (POC) glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) measurements methods can be used for diagnosing persons with diabetes mellitus. The aim of this study was to evaluate the analytical performance of the POC Afinion HbA1c system in the hands of the users, and to investigate which predictors that were associated with good participant performance. Methods External quality assurance (EQA) data from seven surveys in 2017-2018 with a total of 5809 Afinion participants from a POC total quality system in Norway were included in this study (response rate 90%). The control materials were freshly drawn pooled EDTA whole blood. Each participant was evaluated against the analytical performance specification of ±6% from the target value, while the Afinion system was evaluated against the pooled within-laboratory CV <2%, the between-laboratory CV <3.5%, and bias <0.3%HbA1c. Logistic regression analyses were used to investigate which factors were associated with good participant performance. Results The participant pass rates for each survey varied from 98.2% to 99.7%. The pooled within-laboratory CV varied from 1.3% to 1.5%, the between-laboratory CV varied from 1.5% to 2.1%, and bias varied between -0.17 and -0.01 %HbA1c in all surveys. Reagent lot was the only independent factor to predict good participant performance. Conclusions Afinion HbA1c fulfilled the analytical performance specifications and is robust in the hands of the users. It can therefore be used both in diagnosing and monitoring persons with diabetes mellitus, given that the instrument is monitored by an EQA system.

Impact of implementing a category 1 external quality assurance scheme for monitoring harmonization of clinical laboratories in Spain

BACKGROUND

The objective of the present study was to examine the evolution of the analytical performance specifications (APS) used in External Quality Assurance (EQA) schemes, as well as the efficacy of a category 1 EQA scheme in monitoring the harmonization of clinical laboratory results in Spain.

METHODS

A review of the literature on the types of quality specifications used in schemes in other countries and their evolution was performed. In addition, a comparative analysis of the potential impact that different APS from eight countries had on clinical decision-making was made based on three measurands: sodium, thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT).

RESULTS

Harmonization of analytical methods was demonstrated by assessing whether average results deviated from the certified reference value of control materials within the APS derived from biological variation (BV). The APS used in EQA have evolved from state-of-the-art models to BV. Poor clinical decision-making would occur if the results accepted by some APS were applied.

CONCLUSIONS

In Spain, only 2 of the 18 measurands studied are considered to be well harmonized. Closer collaboration between laboratories and analytical system providers would be required to resolve discrepancies.

Expressing analytical performance from multi-sample evaluation in laboratory EQA

BACKGROUND

To provide its participants with an external quality assessment system (EQAS) that can be used to check trueness, the Dutch EQAS organizer, Organization for Quality Assessment of Laboratory Diagnostics (SKML), has innovated its general chemistry scheme over the last decade by introducing fresh frozen commutable samples whose values were assigned by Joint Committee for Traceability in Laboratory Medicine (JCTLM)-listed reference laboratories using reference methods where possible. Here we present some important innovations in our feedback reports that allow participants to judge whether their trueness and imprecision meet predefined analytical performance specifications.

METHODS

Sigma metrics are used to calculate performance indicators named 'sigma values'. Tolerance intervals are based on both Total Error allowable (TEa) according to biological variation data and state of the art (SA) in line with the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Milan consensus.

RESULTS

The existing SKML feedback reports that express trueness as the agreement between the regression line through the results of the last 12 months and the values obtained from reference laboratories and calculate imprecision from the residuals of the regression line are now enriched with sigma values calculated from the degree to which the combination of trueness and imprecision are within tolerance limits. The information and its conclusion to a simple two-point scoring system are also graphically represented in addition to the existing difference plot.

CONCLUSIONS

By adding sigma metrics-based performance evaluation in relation to both TEa and SA tolerance intervals to its EQAS schemes, SKML provides its participants with a powerful and actionable check on accuracy.