Search

Objectives Numerous biological variation (BV) studies have been performed over the years, but the quality of these studies vary. The objectives of this study were to perform a systematic review and critical appraisal of BV studies on glycosylated albumin and to deliver updated BV estimates for glucose and HbA1c, including recently published high-quality studies such as the European Biological Variation study (EuBIVAS). Methods Systematic literature searches were performed to identify BV studies. Nine publications not included in a previous review were identified; four for glycosylated albumin, three for glucose, and three for HbA1c. Relevant studies were appraised by the Biological Variation Data Critical Appraisal Checklist (BIVAC). Global BV estimates were derived by meta-analysis of BIVAC-compliant studies in healthy subjects with similar study design. Results One study received BIVAC grade A, 2B, and 6C. In most cases, the C-grade was associated with deficiencies in statistical analysis. BV estimates for glycosylated albumin were: CVI=1.4% (1.2–2.1) and CVG=5.7% (4.7–10.6), whereas estimates for HbA1c, CVI=1.2% (0.3–2.5), CVG=5.4% (3.3–7.3), and glucose, CVI=5.0% (4.1–12.0), CVG=8.1% (2.7–10.8) did not differ from previously published global estimates. Conclusions The critical appraisal and rating of BV studies according to their methodological quality, followed by a meta-analysis, generate robust, and reliable BV estimates. This study delivers updated and evidence-based BV estimates for glycosylated albumin, glucose and HbA1c.

Resumen Introducción El objetivo de este estudio es comprobar la evolución de las especificaciones de la prestación analítica (EPA) utilizadas en programas de garantía externa de la calidad (EQA) y el papel de un programa de categoría 1 en la vigilancia de la estandarización de la prestación de los laboratorios clínicos en España. Métodos Se ha revisado la bibliografía sobre tipos de especificaciones de la calidad usados en programas de otros países y se ha comprobado su evolución; se ha comparado el posible impacto de distintas EPA empleadas en ocho países en la toma de decisiones clínicas con tres ejemplos de magnitudes: sodio, tirotropina (TSH) y tiempo de tromboplastina parcial activado (TTPA). Resultados Se ha evidenciado la estandarización entre métodos analíticos comprobando si los resultados medios se desvían respecto al valor de referencia certificado del control dentro de las EPA derivadas de la variación biológica (VB). Las EPA usadas en EQA han evolucionado desde el estado del arte hacia la VB. Si se aplican los resultados que se aceptarían con algunas EPA se podrían producir decisiones clínicas erróneas. Conclusiónes En España, solo 2 de las 18 magnitudes biológicas estudiadas se pueden considerar bien estandarizadas. Sería necesaria una colaboración más estrecha entre los laboratorios y proveedores de sistemas analíticos para resolver las discrepancias.

Background Objective interpretation of laboratory test results used to diagnose and monitor diabetes mellitus in part requires the application of biological variation data (BVD). The quality of published BVD has been questioned. The aim of this study was to quality assess publications reporting BVD for diabetes-related analytes using the Biological Variation Data Critical Appraisal Checklist (BIVAC); to assess whether published BVD are fit for purpose and whether the study design and population attributes influence BVD estimates and to undertake a meta-analysis of the BVD from BIVAC-assessed publications. Methods Publications reporting data for glucose, HbA1c, adiponectin, C-peptide, fructosamine, insulin like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), insulin like growth factor binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3), insulin, lactate and pyruvate were identified using a systematic literature search. These publications were assessed using the BIVAC, receiving grades A, B, C or D, where A is of highest quality. A meta-analysis of the BVD from the assessed studies utilised weightings based upon BIVAC grades and the width of the data confidence intervals to generate global BVD estimates. Results BIVAC assessment of 47 publications delivered 1 A, 3 B, 39C and 4 D gradings. Publications relating to adiponectin, C-peptide, IGF-1, IGFBP-3, lactate and pyruvate were all assessed as grade C. Meta-analysis enabled global BV estimates for all analytes except pyruvate, lactate and fructosamine. Conclusions This study delivers updated and evidence-based BV estimates for diabetes-related analytes. There remains a need for delivery of new high-quality BV studies for several clinically important analytes.

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.

A proposal to calculate and use the reference change value (RCV) as an objective guide for interpreting the numerical results obtained in clinical laboratory serial testing is introduced in this study.A database showing the results of a compilation of 191 publications on biological variation and including information on a number of analytes provided the standardized criterion based on biology for calculating the RCVs.For each of the 261 analytes included in the study, the RCV was determined using Harris's formula, replacing analytical imprecision with the desirable specification of analytical quality based on half the within-subject biological variation at 95% probability levels. The result is a guide for a common criterion to identify clinically significant changes in serial results.The RCV concept is an approach that can be offered by laboratories to assess changes in serial results. The RCV data in this study are presented as a point of departure for a widely applicable objective guide to interpret changes in serial results.

Introduction Current external quality assurance schemes have been classified into six categories, according to their ability to verify the degree of standardization of the participating measurement procedures. SKML (Netherlands) is a Category 1 EQA scheme (commutable EQA materials with values assigned by reference methods), whereas SEQC (Spain) is a Category 5 scheme (replicate analyses of non-commutable materials with no values assigned by reference methods). Aim The results obtained by a group of Spanish laboratories participating in a pilot study organized by SKML are examined, with the aim of pointing out the improvements over our current scheme that a Category 1 program could provide. Method Imprecision and bias are calculated for each analyte and laboratory, and compared with quality specifications derived from biological variation. Results Of the 26 analytes studied, 9 had results comparable with those from reference methods, and 10 analytes did not have comparable results. The remaining 7 analytes measured did not have available reference method values, and in these cases, comparison with the peer group showed comparable results. The reasons for disagreement in the second group can be summarized as: use of non-standard methods (IFCC without exogenous pyridoxal phosphate for AST and ALT, Jaffe kinetic at low-normal creatinine concentrations and with eGFR); non-commutability of the reference material used to assign values to the routine calibrator (calcium, magnesium and sodium); use of reference materials without established commutability instead of reference methods for AST and GGT, and lack of a systematic effort by manufacturers to harmonize results. Conclusions Results obtained in this work demonstrate the important role of external quality assurance programs using commutable materials with values assigned by reference methods to correctly monitor the standardization of laboratory tests with consequent minimization of risk to patients.

A database with reliable information to derive definitive analytical quality specifications for a large number of clinical laboratory tests was prepared in this work. This was achieved by comparing and correlating descriptive data and relevant observations with the biological variation information, an approach that had not been used in the previous efforts of this type. The material compiled in the database was obtained from published articles referenced in BIOS, CURRENT CONTENTS, EMBASE and MEDLINE using "biological variationlaboratory medicine" as key words, as well as books and doctoral theses provided by their authors. The database covers 316 quantities and reviews 191 articles, fewer than 10 of which had to be rejected. The within- and between-subject coefficients of variation and the subsequent desirable quality specifications for precision, bias and total error for all the quantities accepted are presented. Sex-related stratification of results was justified for only four quantities and, in these cases, quality specifications were derived from the group with lower within-subject variation. For certain quantities, biological variation in pathological states was higher than in the healthy state. In these cases, quality specifications were derived only from the healthy population (most stringent). Several quantities (particularly hormones) have been treated in very few articles and the results found are highly discrepant. Therefore, professionals in laboratory medicine should be strongly encouraged to study the quantities for which results are discrepant, the 90 quantities described in only one paper and the numerous quantities that have not been the subject of study.