Search

Objectives: Adequate analytical quality of reported results is primarily ensured by performing internal quality control (iQC). Currently, several different iQC practices are in use. As a prelude to the revision of a Dutch guidance document on analytical QC, a questionnaire was sent out to gain insights in the applied practices and the need for guidance., Methods: A questionnaire, containing 20 multiple-choice questions with possibilities for explanation and comment on iQC practices and aspects was distributed to all clinical chemistry laboratories within the Netherlands. Results were reported descriptively., Results: Responses were received from 27 clinical laboratories (response 43 %). In 30 % the iQC was based on the analytical characteristics only, while 30 % used a 6-Sigma method, 19 % risk-based beyond 6-Sigma and 22 % used an alternative approach. 89 % of laboratories used a virtual analyzer model for iQC setup within one or more laboratory sites. Practices for determining standard deviation (SD) values included determining SD for each new iQC material (35 %), using historical SD values for new materials (35 %), and incorporating clinical tolerances into the SD value (31 %). Furthermore, 44 % of laboratories used patient moving averages for one or more tests. Daily iQC management was based on either "traffic lights" indicating in or out of control status, and review of all QC charts, often using multiple software systems., Conclusions: A large heterogeneity of iQC practices in clinical laboratories was observed in the Netherlands. Several starting points for further research and/or guidance were identified, particularly in relation to the determination of SD values, the virtual analyzer model and methods to ensure analyzer equivalence., (© 2024 the author(s), published by De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston.)

Background: Patient-based real-time quality control (PBRTQC) avoids limitations of traditional quality control methods based on the measurement of stabilized control samples. However, PBRTQC needs to be adapted to the individual laboratories with parameters such as algorithm, truncation, block size, and control limit., Methods: In a computer simulation, biases were added to real patient results of 10 analytes with diverse properties. Different PBRTQC methods were assessed on their ability to detect these biases early., Results: The simulation based on 460 000 historical patient measurements for each analyte revealed several recommendations for PBRTQC. Control limit calculation with "percentiles of daily extremes" led to effective limits and allowed specification of the percentage of days with false alarms. However, changes in measurement distribution easily increased false alarms. Box-Cox but not logarithmic transformation improved error detection. Winsorization of outlying values often led to a better performance than simple outlier removal. For medians and Harrell-Davis 50 percentile estimators (HD50s), no truncation was necessary. Block size influenced medians substantially and HD50s to a lesser extent. Conversely, a change of truncation limits affected means and exponentially moving averages more than a change of block sizes. A large spread of patient measurements impeded error detection. PBRTQC methods were not always able to detect an allowable bias within the simulated 1000 erroneous measurements. A web application was developed to estimate PBRTQC performance., Conclusions: Computer simulations can optimize PBRTQC but some parameters are generally superior and can be taken as default., (© American Association for Clinical Chemistry 2020. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Patient-based real-time quality control (PBRTQC) is a laboratory tool for monitoring the performance of the testing process. It includes well-established procedures like Bull's algorithm, average of nomals, moving median, moving average (MA) and exponentially (weighted) MAs. Following the setup and optimization processes, a key step prior to the routine implementation of PBRTQC is the verification and documentation of the performance of the PBRTQC as part of the laboratory quality system. This verification process should provide a realistic representation of the performance of the PBRTQC in the environment it is being implemented in, to allow proper risk assessment by laboratory practitioners. This document focuses on the recommendation on performance verification of PBRTQC prior to implementation.

For many years the concept of patient-based quality control (QC) has been discussed and implemented in hematology laboratories; however, the techniques have not been widely implemented in clinical chemistry. This is mainly because of the complexity of this form of QC, as it needs to be optimized for each population and often for each analyte. However, the clear advantages of this form of QC, together with the ongoing realization of the shortcomings of "conventional" QC, have driven a need to provide guidance to laboratories to assist in deploying patient-based QC. This overview describes the components of a patient-based QC system (calculation algorithm, block size, truncation limits, control limits) and the relationship of these to the analyte being controlled. We also discuss the need for patient-based QC system optimization using patient data from the individual testing laboratory to reliably detect systematic errors while ensuring that there are few false alarms. The term patient-based real-time quality control covers many activities that use data from patient samples to detect analytical errors. These activities include the monitoring of patient population parameters such as the mean or median analyte value or using single within-patient changes such as the delta check. In this report, we will restrict the discussion to population-based parameters. This overview is intended to serve as a guide for the implementation of a patient-based QC system. The report does not cover the clinical evaluation of the population., (© 2019 American Association for Clinical Chemistry.)

Moving average quality control (MA QC) was described decades ago as an analytical quality control instrument. Although a potentially valuable tool, it is struggling to meet expectations due to its complexity and need for evidence-based guidance. For this review, relevant literature and the world wide web were examined in order to (i) explain the basic concepts and current understanding of MA QC, (ii) discuss moving average (MA) optimization methods, (iii) gain insight into practical aspects related to applying MA in daily practice and (iv) describe future prospects to enable more widespread acceptance and application of MA QC. Each of the MA QC optimization methods currently available has their own advantages and disadvantages. Recently developed simulation methods provide realistic error detecting properties for MA QC and are available for laboratories. Operational MA management issues have been identified that allow developers of MA software to upgrade their packages to support optimal MA QC application and guide laboratories on MA management issues, such as MA alarm workup. The new insights into MA QC characteristics and operational issues, together with supporting online tools, may promote more widespread acceptance and application of MA QC.

The article presents letter to the editor focuses on the advantages of incorporating Patient-Based Real-Time Quality Control (PBRTQC) as a complementary tool in modern quality assurance strategies. Topics include the role of PBRTQC in enhancing error detection and patient safety, the optimization of laboratory-specific settings for improved performance, and the challenges of implementation due to software limitations and sample variability.

Technical quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QA/QC) are important activities within medical laboratories to ensure the adequate quality of obtained test results. QA/QC tools available at medical laboratories include external QC and internal QC, patient-based real-time quality control (PBRTQC) tools such as moving average quality control (MAQC), limit checks, delta checks, and multivariate checks, and finally, analyzer flagging. Recently, for PBRTQC tools, new optimization and validation methods based on error detection simulation have been developed to obtain laboratory-specific insights into PBRTQC error detection. These developments have enabled implementation and application of these individual tools in routine clinical practice. As a next step, they also enable performance comparison of the individual QA/QC tools and integration of all the individual QA/QC tools in order to obtain the most powerful and efficient QA/QC plans. In this review, a brief overview of the individual QA/QC tools and their characteristics is provided and the error detection simulation approaches are explained. Finally, a new concept entitled integrated quality assurance and control (IQAC) is presented. To enable IQAC, a conceptual framework is suggested and demonstrated for sodium, based on available published data. The proposed IQAC framework provides ways and tools by which the performance of different QA/QC tools can be compared in a so-called QA/QC error detection table to enable optimization and validation of the overall QA/QC plan in terms of alarm rate as well as pre-analytical, analytical, and post-analytical error detection performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Moving average quality control (MA QC) is a patient-based real-time quality control system. Advantages compared to conventional periodic internal quality control (IQC) include absence of commutability problems and continuous monitoring of performance. We implemented MA QC for multiple routine hematology and chemistry parameters. We describe the evaluation process and provide practical tools to aid MA QC implementation. Nine parameters (serum sodium, calcium, bicarbonate and free thyroxine, hemoglobin [Hb], mean corpuscular volume, mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration [MCHC], reticulocyte count and erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR]) were chosen for initial consideration. Using data extractions from the laboratory information system (LIS; General Laboratory Information Management System), evaluation of usefulness and optimization of MA QC settings was performed using bias detection curves. After this, MA QC settings were incorporated in our LIS for further evaluation and implementation in routine care. Three out of nine parameters (Hb, ESR, and sodium) were excluded from MA QC implementation due to high variation and technical issues in the LIS. For the six remaining parameters, MA QC showed added value to IQC and was therefore implemented in the LIS. For three parameters a direct MA alarm work-up method was set up, including newly developed built-in features in the LIS. For the other parameters, we identified MA utilization beyond real-time monitoring. Implementation of MA QC has added value for our laboratory setting. Additional utilization beyond real-time QC monitoring was identified. We find MA QC especially useful for trend monitoring, detection of small shifts after maintenance and inter-analyzer comparisons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, there has been renewed interest in the "old" average of normals concept, now generally referred to as moving average quality control (MA QC) or patient-based real-time quality control (PBRTQC). However, there are some controversies regarding PBRTQC which this review aims to address while also indicating the current status of PBRTQC. This review gives the background of certain newly described optimization and validation methods. It also indicates how QC plans incorporating PBRTQC can be designed for greater effectiveness and/or (cost) efficiency. Furthermore, it discusses controversies regarding the complexity of obtaining PBRTQC settings, the replacement of iQC, and software functionality requirements. Finally, it presents evidence of the added value and practicability of PBRTQC. Recent developments in, and availability of, simulation methods to optimize and validate laboratory-specific PBRTQC procedures have enabled medical laboratories to implement PBRTQC in their daily practice. Furthermore, these methods have made it possible to demonstrate the practicability and added value of PBRTQC by means of two prospective "clinical" studies and other investigations. Although internal QC will remain an essential part of any QC plan, applying PBRTQC can now significantly improve its performance and (cost) efficiency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The quest to use patient results as quality control for routine clinical chemistry testing has long been driven by issues of the unavailability and cost of suitable quality control material and the matrix effects of synthetic material. Hematology laboratories were early adopters of average of normals techniques, primarily because of the difficulty in acquiring appropriate, stable quality control material, while in the chemistry laboratories, the perceived advantages and availability of synthetic material outweighed the disadvantages. However, the increasing volume of testing in clinical chemistry plus the capability of computer systems to deal with large and complex calculations has now made the use of patient-based quality control algorithms feasible. The desire to use patient-based quality control is also driven by increasing awareness that common quality control rules and frequency of analysis may fail to detect clinically significant assay biases. The non-commutability of quality control material has also become a problem as laboratories seek to harmonize results across regions and indeed globally. This review describes the history of patient-based quality control in clinical chemistry, summarizes the various approaches that can be implemented by laboratory professionals, and discusses how patient-based quality control can be integrated with traditional quality control techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: lab-monitor; quality assurance; quality control; real-time monitoring; real-time QC EN lab-monitor quality assurance quality control real-time monitoring real-time QC e163 e164 2 07/04/23 20230701 NES 230701 To the Editor, The modern clinical laboratory generally comprises a large set of different systems and procedures that are operated in a continuous mode. 2 van Rossum, HH, van den Broek, D. Design and implementation of quality control plans that integrate moving average and internal quality control: incorporating the best of both worlds. [Extracted from the article]

Background: New moving average quality control (MA QC) optimization methods have been developed and are available for laboratories. Having these methods will require a strategy to integrate MA QC and routine internal QC. Methods: MA QC was considered only when the performance of the internal QC was limited. A flowchart was applied to determine, per test, whether MA QC should be considered. Next, MA QC was examined using the MA Generator (www.huvaros.com), and optimized MA QC procedures and corresponding MA validation charts were obtained. When a relevant systematic error was detectable within an average daily run, the MA QC was added to the QC plan. For further implementation of MA QC for continuous QC, MA QC management software was configured based on earlier proposed requirements. Also, protocols for the MA QC alarm work-up were designed to allow the detection of temporary assay failure based on previously described experiences. Results: Based on the flowchart, 10 chemistry, two immunochemistry and six hematological tests were considered for MA QC. After obtaining optimal MA QC settings and the corresponding MA validation charts, the MA QC of albumin, bicarbonate, calcium, chloride, creatinine, glucose, magnesium, potassium, sodium, total protein, hematocrit, hemoglobin, MCH, MCHC, MCV and platelets were added to the QC plans. Conclusions: The presented method allows the design and implementation of QC plans integrating MA QC for continuous QC when internal QC has limited performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study which discusses the use of bias detection curves for moving average (MA) optimization and MA validation charts for validation of MA quality control procedures. Topics include simulation of Bias introduction and MA bias for multiple MA procedures, use of Bull's algorithm in many automated hematology analyzers, and application of MA in other fields of laboratory medicine. It further concludes that MA validation charts are useful for optimization of MA procedures.

Background A moving average (MA) optimization and validation method, based on a realistic simulation of MA bias detection using reported consecutive results, is demonstrated for creatinine. Methods We aimed for reproducible and fast bias detection between scheduled internal quality control measurements and a manageable number of false MA alarms. For this, multiple MA procedures were investigated for their bias detection properties by power function analysis and simulation of the number of results needed for MA bias detection. An optimal MA procedure was chosen based on the range of bias detectable within scheduled QC measures. Results Power function analysis showed that increasing batch sizes and more stringent truncation limits always improved MA bias detection probabilities per MA result. However, these variables could significantly delay MA bias detection over time. The selected optimal MA procedure resulted in a reproducible creatinine bias detection of a 20% bias in 23–145 creatinine results and a 40% bias in 22–60 creatinine results. Conclusions Our method of simulating MA bias detection gives a more realistic estimate of the MA bias detection properties when compared to power function analysis and is therefore useful for implementation of MA as a continuous analytical quality control instrument. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]