Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Published in Association with the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)

Editor-in-Chief: Plebani, Mario

Ed. by Gillery, Philippe / Greaves, Ronda / Lackner, Karl J. / Lippi, Giuseppe / Melichar, Bohuslav / Payne, Deborah A. / Schlattmann, Peter


IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 3.556

CiteScore 2017: 2.34

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 1.114
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 1.188

Online
ISSN
1437-4331
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 49, Issue 7

Issues

Comparison of the results from two different External Quality Assessment Schemes supports the utility of robust quality specifications

Anna Carobene
  • PROLARIT, Milan, Italy
  • Diagnostica e Ricerca San Raffaele, Istituto Scientifico Universitario S. Raffaele, Milan, Italy
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Carlo Franzini / Ferruccio Ceriotti
  • PROLARIT, Milan, Italy
  • Diagnostica e Ricerca San Raffaele, Istituto Scientifico Universitario S. Raffaele, Milan, Italy
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2011-05-17 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2011.196

Abstract

Background: The definition of quality goals to evaluate the performance of laboratories participating in External Quality Assessment Schemes (EQAS) is currently not homogeneous. The aim of the work was to verify the applicability of quality goals based on biological variation comparing the results from two different EQAS.

Methods: We evaluated the performance of the laboratories participating in two Italian EQAS, presenting similar characteristics in terms of number of participants, type of EQA-samples, and program organization. The results were obtained during 2007 for 27 components in the regional scheme of Lombardy (RGL) and in the national scheme of Prolarit (PRL). The percentage total error of single measurements was calculated for each reported EQA value. The total error values at the 68th percentile, at selected critical concentration values, were compared with maximum tolerable error derived from biological variation.

Results: The performance of laboratories participating in the RGL scheme was significantly better. The frequency of satisfactory performance at, respectively, minimum, desirable and optimum levels was 98%, 80% and 59% in the RGL scheme, and 73%, 56% and 22% in the PRL scheme.

Conclusions: Due to the different performance shown in the two programs, objective analytical goals based on biological variability constitute the optimal solution.

Keywords: analytical quality; biological variation; external quality assessment; quality specifications

About the article

Corresponding author: Anna Carobene, Laboratorio di Standardizzazione, Diagnostica e Ricerca San Raffaele S.p.A, Via Olgettina 60, 20132 Milan, Italy Phone: +39-02-26432850, Fax: +39-02-26434178


Received: 2010-12-27

Accepted: 2011-03-06

Published Online: 2011-05-17

Published in Print: 2011-07-01


Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, Volume 49, Issue 7, Pages 1143–1149, ISSN (Online) 1437-4331, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2011.196.

Export Citation

©2011 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin Boston.Get Permission

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Ada Aita, Laura Sciacovelli, and Mario Plebani
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM), 2017, Volume 0, Number 0
[2]
David James, Darren Ames, Berenice Lopez, Rachel Still, Wiliam Simpson, and Patrick Twomey
Journal of Clinical Pathology, 2014, Volume 67, Number 8, Page 651
[3]
Carmen Ricós, Francisco Ramón, Angel Salas, Antonio Buño, Rafael Calafell, Jorge Morancho, Gabriella Gutiérrez-Bassini, and Josep M. Jou
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 2012, Volume 50, Number 3

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in