PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10620576

Causes of unsatisfactory performance in proficiency testing.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Proficiency testing (PT) provides a measure of the effectiveness of laboratory quality assurance programs. Test reports are released from processes that the laboratory judges to be in conformance with quality specifications; an evaluation of unsatisfactory performance (UNSAT) by a PT provider is an unexpected outcome for the laboratory. An understanding of the root cause(s) of testing errors provides an opportunity for the continuous improvement of laboratory services. METHODS: We used participant data from the New York State Department of Health PT program to characterize the quality of testing in the toxicology specialty. Outcomes from laboratory investigations into causes of UNSAT and information on quality control practices collected from all program participants were used to identify the root causes of error. RESULTS: Two classes of error were encountered: spurious test results caused by lapses in standard operating procedures and instrument malfunctions (300 per million assays) and common-cause analytic error (7000 per million assays or 0.7% rate of UNSAT). Causes of spurious results included inaccurate mathematical correction for specimen dilution, misinterpretation of instrument codes, and instrument sampling errors. Calibration drift was most frequently cited as the common-cause analytic error. Approximately one-half of the laboratories used an allowable error for the quality control of analytical systems that exceeded the threshold error specified by manufacturers for stable instrument performance. CONCLUSIONS: The causes of spurious results suggest the need for ongoing competency testing of analysts where analyst intervention is required in an otherwise automated process, and for continued diligence in mistake-proofing instrument design. The intrinsic quality of laboratory testing is unlikely to improve until the allowable error in quality control is consistent with manufacturer specifications for stable system performance.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R W Jenny, K Y Jackson-Tarentino. 2000. Causes of unsatisfactory performance in proficiency testing.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10620576/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Lab-on-a-chip devices for global health: past studies and future opportunities.

A rapidly emerging field in lab-on-a-chip (LOC) research is the development of devices to improve the health of people in developing countries. In this review, we identify diseases that are most in need of new health technologies, discuss special design criteria for LOC devices to be deployed in a variety of resource-poor settings, and review past research into LOC devices for global health. We focus mainly on diagnostics, the nearest-term application in this field.

Clinical Chemistry Tests↗

A note on the use of outlier criteria in Ontario laboratory quality control schemes.

OBJECTIVES: This paper examines the pitfalls that arise when an outlier is assessed using a criterion based on a fixed multiple of the standard deviation rather than an established statistical test. Although the former approach is statistically invalid, it is the favored method for identifying outliers in Ontario laboratory quality control protocols. DESIGN AND METHODS: Computer simulations are used to calculate the probability of a false positive result (classifying a valid observation as an outlier) when outlier criteria based on fixed multiples of the standard deviation are applied to samples containing no outliers. RESULTS: The estimated probability of a false positive result is tabulated over various sample sizes. Outlier criteria based on fixed multiples of the standard deviation are shown to be highly inefficient. CONCLUSIONS: This work presents arguments for discontinuing the widespread practice of using outlier criteria based on fixed multiples of the standard deviation to identify outliers in univariate samples.

Clinical Chemistry Tests↗

Sample to sample carryover: a source of analytical laboratory error and its relevance to integrated clinical chemistry/immunoassay systems.

BACKGROUND: Integrated systems that combine clinical chemistry and immunoassay analyzers are used routinely. Sample to sample carryover is an inherent risk and can cause erroneously high patient test results for immunoassays. IVD manufacturers and laboratories must be aware of this phenomenon and guard against it. METHODS: We used a sample carryover protocol that directs the clinical chemistry module to process samples with very high immunoassay analyte concentrations followed by samples with very low concentrations for the same analyte. Low concentration samples were then tested by the immunoassay module to determine if the clinical chemistry module caused primary sample tube to primary sample tube carryover of the immunoassay analyte. RESULTS: Sample carryover was assessed on the Abbott ci8200 for HBsAg, AFP, beta-hCG, and PSA. Observed HBsAg carryover met the design specification of <0.1 ppm. Carryover for the other analytes was <0.1 ppm or below the assay limit of detection. CONCLUSIONS: IVD manufacturers must design integrated systems to minimize primary specimen tube carryover and avoid analytical laboratory error that can impact patient safety. Carryover testing is difficult for clinical laboratories to perform in order to verify system performance. Laboratories must consider the potential for specimen carryover and its impact on results whether moving primary sample tubes between separate analyzers or using an integrated system.

Clinical Chemistry Tests↗