Abstract
Introduction: External quality assessment is a key strategy to ensure the accuracy and precision of laboratory results. This process allows laboratories to demonstrate their competence and receive feedback on the performance of their analytical processes, and also allows the assessment of result comparability across different methods and laboratories. Objectives: To analyze the analytical performance of hematology analyzers in public laboratories within the network of the province of Córdoba, Argentina, and to compare these results against international quality standards and state-of-the-art specifications. Materials and Methods: Forty control sample kits with three concentration levels were distributed to participating laboratories. Results were assessed using statistical tools in accordance with ISO 13528 and compared to international quality requirements. Results: Significant heterogeneity was observed in platelet count results, leading to their exclusion from the analysis. Acceptable analytical performances were found for most laboratories, according to requirements based on biological variation, for white blood cell count, red blood cell count and hemoglobin. For hematocrit and mean corpuscular volume, less than half of the laboratories achieved acceptable performances; however, they showed acceptable performances when evaluated against requirements based on the state of the art. Conclusions: This study demonstrated a satisfactory comparability of results among public hematology laboratories in Córdoba. Participation in external quality assessment programs is crucial to promote continuous improvement and ensure the reliability of laboratory results. The implementation of policies to facilitate access to these tools in the public sector is strongly recommended.
References
1. Rohr UP, Binder C, Dieterle T, Giusti F, Messina CG, Toerien E, et al. The Value of In Vitro Diagnostic Testing in Medical Practice: A Status Report. PLoSOne. 2016;11(3):e0149856; https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149856
2. World Health Organization. WHO manual for organizing a national external quality assessment programme for health laboratories and other testing sites. 2016. [Internet]. Disponible en: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241549677
3. Jones GR, Sikaris K, Gill J. Allowable Limits of Performance for External Quality Assurance Programs – an Approach to Application of the Stock holm Criteria by the RCPA Quality Assurance Programs. Clin Biochem Rev. 2012;33(4):133-9; https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3529550/
4. Bundesärztekammer (German Medical Association), Instande. V. Guidelines of the German Medical Association on quality assurance in medical laboratory testing. GMS Z Forder Qualit at SichMed Lab. 2015; 6:Doc03, https://www.iacld.com/UpFiles/Documents/308672872.pdf.
5. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) [Internet]. [Accedido en octubre de 2024]. Disponible en: https://www.cms.gov/medicare/quality/clinical-laboratory-improvement-amendments?redirect=/CLIA
6. Jones GR. The role of EQA in harmonization in laboratory medicine - a global effort. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2017;27(1):23-29. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2017.004
7. International Standardization Organization. ISO 13528: StatisticalMethods for Use in Proficiency Testing by Interlaboratory Comparisons. 2022 ago.
8. Huber P. Robust statistics. New York, NY: John Wiley and sons, 1981. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/0471725250
9. Aarsand AK, Fernandez-Calle P, Webster C, Coskun A, Gonzales-Lao E, Diaz-Garzon J, et al. The EFLM Biological Variation Database [Internet]. [Accedido en octubre de 2024]. Disponible en: https://biologicalvariation.eu/
10. Westgard. Consolidated Comparison of Hematology and Coagulation Performance Specifications [Internet]. 2018 [Accedido en octubre de 2024]. Disponible en: https://westgard.com/clia-a-quality/qualityrequirements/hematology-goals.html
11. Di Rienzo JA, Casanoves F, Balzarini MG, Gonzalez L, Tablada M, Robledo CW. (2008). InfoStat, versión 2008, Grupo InfoStat, FCA, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina.
12. Joint Committee on Traceability in Laboratory Medicine. Joint Committee on Traceability in Laboratory Medicine Database. [Accedido en Octubre de 2024]. Disponible en: https://www.jctlmdb.org/
13. Harteveld CL, McCafferty R, Fawcett T, Erber WN; International Council for the Standardization of Haematology (ICSH). International Council for Standardization in Haematology technical report 2023: Renewal of the reference material for haemiglobin cyanide 19-1-B308 for usein standardization of blood haemoglobin measurements. Int J Lab Hematol. 2024 Jun; 46(3):575-576. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.14254
14. Grote-Koska D, Klauke R, Kaiser P, Kramer U, Macdonald R, Lerche D, et al. Total haemoglobin - a reference measuring system for improvement of standardisation. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2020;58(8):1314-1321, https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2019-1177
15. Deutsches Institutfür Normung e. V. (DIN). DIN 58932-3:2024-02. Haematology – Determination of the concentration of blood corpuscles in blood - Part 3: Reference method for the determination of the concentration of erythrocytes. 2024 feb.
16. Deutsches Institutfür Normung e. V. (DIN). DIN 58932-5:2007-10. Haematology – Determination of the concentration of blood corpuscles in blood – Part 5: Reference method for the determination of the concentration of thrombocytes. 2007 oct.
17. De la Salle B. Survey material choices in haematology EQA: a confounding factor in automated counting performance assessment. Bioche Med (Zagreb). 2017;27(1):63-72, https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2017.008
18. Coucke W, Soumali MR. Demystifying EQA statistics and reports. BiochemMed Zagreb). 2017;27(1):37-48, https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2017.006
19. Sandberg S, Fraser CG, Horvath AR, Jansen R, Jones G, Oosterhuis W, et al. Defining analytical performance specifications: Consensus Statement fromt he 1st Strategic Conference of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2015;53(6):833-5, https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2015-0067
20. Molina A, Guiñon L, Perez A, Segurana A, Bedini JL, Reverter JC, et al. State of the art vs biological variability: Comparison on hematology parameter susing Spanish EQAS data. Int J Lab Hematol. 2018;40(3):284-291, https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12783
21. Coşkun A, Carobene A, Kilercik M, Serteser M, Sandberg S, Aarsand AK, et al. European Biological Variation Study of the EFLM Working Group on Biological Variation. Within-subject and between-subject biological variation estimates of 21 hematological parameters in 30 healthy subjects. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2018;56(8):1309-1318, https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2017-1155
22. Salas A, Ricós C, Prada E, Ramón F, Morancho J, Jou JM, et al. Stateof- the-art Approach to Goal Setting. Clin Lab Med. 2017;37(1):73-84, ttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cll.2016.09.007
23. Randox Laboratories. RIQAS: The Largest International External Quality Assessment. [Internet] [Accedido en octubre de 2024]. Disponible en: https://www.randox.com/riqas-external-quality-assessment/
24. Westgard. 2016 State of the Art Hematology Performance Specifications [Internet]. 2016 [Accedido en octubre de 2024]. Disponible en: https://westgard.com/clia-a-quality/quality-requirements/sota-2016-hematology.html
25. Vis JY, Huisman A. Verification and quality control of routine hematology analyzers. Int J Lab Hematol. 2016;38 Suppl 1:100-9, https://doi.org/10.1111/ijlh.12503
