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

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 f...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine 2011-07, Vol.49 (7), p.1143-1149
Hauptverfasser: Carobene, Anna, Franzini, Carlo, Ceriotti, Ferruccio
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1149
container_issue 7
container_start_page 1143
container_title Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine
container_volume 49
creator Carobene, Anna
Franzini, Carlo
Ceriotti, Ferruccio
description 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.
doi_str_mv 10.1515/CCLM.2011.196
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_874898194</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>874898194</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c413t-7cc8c840e52ef89a98c2127bc81e56f6377423b89b504f0408201fbf9ac718bb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkcFu1DAQhiMEoqVw5Ip8QZyyxLEdOxKXdlsKYitUsXC1HK9NXZI49dhq9wV47jrdpb1wmpHmm1-jb4riLa4WmGH2cblcXSzqCuMFbptnxSGmhJeUEPz8oadl09T4oHgFcF1VmDHKXxYHNWacCsEPi79LP0wqOPAj8hbFK4OCgdRHQDb4AcVbjzbOWhPMGNHZXTRhVD26TKp3cYuOAQzAMM9-6CszGECQpsmHvD9npegeuBwdfJcgopv9JkxGO-u0is6P8Lp4YVUP5s2-HhU_P5-tl1_K1ffzr8vjVakpJrHkWgstaGVYbaxoVSt0jWveaYENa2xDOKc16UTbsYrailYim7GdbZXmWHQdOSo-7HKn4G-SgSgHB9r0vRqNTyBF1tIK3NJMljtSBw8QjJVTcIMKW4krOZuXs3k5m5fZfObf7ZNTN5jNI_1PdQbe7wEFWvU2qFE7eOIoYQJXLHOfdtyt6rPtjfkd0jY38tqn2T38_wDacpz__XS3g2juHuNV-CMbTjiTl2sqf30jp-zi5FSuyT1mQ7DM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>874898194</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of the results from two different External Quality Assessment Schemes supports the utility of robust quality specifications</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>De Gruyter journals</source><creator>Carobene, Anna ; Franzini, Carlo ; Ceriotti, Ferruccio</creator><creatorcontrib>Carobene, Anna ; Franzini, Carlo ; Ceriotti, Ferruccio</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1434-6621</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1437-4331</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1515/CCLM.2011.196</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21574887</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin: Walter de Gruyter</publisher><subject>analytical quality ; Biological and medical sciences ; biological variation ; Clinical Chemistry Tests - methods ; Clinical Chemistry Tests - standards ; external quality assessment ; General aspects ; Humans ; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) ; Medical sciences ; Quality Control ; quality specifications</subject><ispartof>Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine, 2011-07, Vol.49 (7), p.1143-1149</ispartof><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c413t-7cc8c840e52ef89a98c2127bc81e56f6377423b89b504f0408201fbf9ac718bb3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c413t-7cc8c840e52ef89a98c2127bc81e56f6377423b89b504f0408201fbf9ac718bb3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/CCLM.2011.196/pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwalterdegruyter$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/CCLM.2011.196/html$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwalterdegruyter$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923,66524,68308</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=24358105$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21574887$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Carobene, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franzini, Carlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ceriotti, Ferruccio</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of the results from two different External Quality Assessment Schemes supports the utility of robust quality specifications</title><title>Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine</title><addtitle>Clin Chem Lab Med</addtitle><description>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.</description><subject>analytical quality</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>biological variation</subject><subject>Clinical Chemistry Tests - methods</subject><subject>Clinical Chemistry Tests - standards</subject><subject>external quality assessment</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Quality Control</subject><subject>quality specifications</subject><issn>1434-6621</issn><issn>1437-4331</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNptkcFu1DAQhiMEoqVw5Ip8QZyyxLEdOxKXdlsKYitUsXC1HK9NXZI49dhq9wV47jrdpb1wmpHmm1-jb4riLa4WmGH2cblcXSzqCuMFbptnxSGmhJeUEPz8oadl09T4oHgFcF1VmDHKXxYHNWacCsEPi79LP0wqOPAj8hbFK4OCgdRHQDb4AcVbjzbOWhPMGNHZXTRhVD26TKp3cYuOAQzAMM9-6CszGECQpsmHvD9npegeuBwdfJcgopv9JkxGO-u0is6P8Lp4YVUP5s2-HhU_P5-tl1_K1ffzr8vjVakpJrHkWgstaGVYbaxoVSt0jWveaYENa2xDOKc16UTbsYrailYim7GdbZXmWHQdOSo-7HKn4G-SgSgHB9r0vRqNTyBF1tIK3NJMljtSBw8QjJVTcIMKW4krOZuXs3k5m5fZfObf7ZNTN5jNI_1PdQbe7wEFWvU2qFE7eOIoYQJXLHOfdtyt6rPtjfkd0jY38tqn2T38_wDacpz__XS3g2juHuNV-CMbTjiTl2sqf30jp-zi5FSuyT1mQ7DM</recordid><startdate>20110701</startdate><enddate>20110701</enddate><creator>Carobene, Anna</creator><creator>Franzini, Carlo</creator><creator>Ceriotti, Ferruccio</creator><general>Walter de Gruyter</general><general>De Gruyter</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110701</creationdate><title>Comparison of the results from two different External Quality Assessment Schemes supports the utility of robust quality specifications</title><author>Carobene, Anna ; Franzini, Carlo ; Ceriotti, Ferruccio</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c413t-7cc8c840e52ef89a98c2127bc81e56f6377423b89b504f0408201fbf9ac718bb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>analytical quality</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>biological variation</topic><topic>Clinical Chemistry Tests - methods</topic><topic>Clinical Chemistry Tests - standards</topic><topic>external quality assessment</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Quality Control</topic><topic>quality specifications</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Carobene, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franzini, Carlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ceriotti, Ferruccio</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Carobene, Anna</au><au>Franzini, Carlo</au><au>Ceriotti, Ferruccio</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of the results from two different External Quality Assessment Schemes supports the utility of robust quality specifications</atitle><jtitle>Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Chem Lab Med</addtitle><date>2011-07-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>49</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1143</spage><epage>1149</epage><pages>1143-1149</pages><issn>1434-6621</issn><eissn>1437-4331</eissn><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.</abstract><cop>Berlin</cop><pub>Walter de Gruyter</pub><pmid>21574887</pmid><doi>10.1515/CCLM.2011.196</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1434-6621
ispartof Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine, 2011-07, Vol.49 (7), p.1143-1149
issn 1434-6621
1437-4331
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_874898194
source MEDLINE; De Gruyter journals
subjects analytical quality
Biological and medical sciences
biological variation
Clinical Chemistry Tests - methods
Clinical Chemistry Tests - standards
external quality assessment
General aspects
Humans
Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)
Medical sciences
Quality Control
quality specifications
title Comparison of the results from two different External Quality Assessment Schemes supports the utility of robust quality specifications
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T23%3A29%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20the%20results%20from%20two%20different%20External%20Quality%20Assessment%20Schemes%20supports%20the%20utility%20of%20robust%20quality%20specifications&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20chemistry%20and%20laboratory%20medicine&rft.au=Carobene,%20Anna&rft.date=2011-07-01&rft.volume=49&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1143&rft.epage=1149&rft.pages=1143-1149&rft.issn=1434-6621&rft.eissn=1437-4331&rft_id=info:doi/10.1515/CCLM.2011.196&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E874898194%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=874898194&rft_id=info:pmid/21574887&rfr_iscdi=true