PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15223695

Prerequisites for establishing common reference intervals.

Abstract

Establishment of common reference intervals for homogeneous populations within regions is based on the same basic principles as the IFCC recommendations for individual laboratories, but a few additional prerequisites are needed. Thus, the need for common standardization and traceability during production of the reference values and with the application of the common reference intervals in the laboratories becomes crucial. Furthermore, the external control system must be geared to the purpose, using matrix-correct control materials with concentration values traceable to the same reference methods, and validation of results according to analytical quality specifications designed for the use of common reference intervals. Here, the standards may have a restrictive influence on the establishing of common reference intervals, with their demands for the use of the producers' traceability, instead of a relevant high-quality reference preparation shared by all the participants. Two main strategies for measurements are analysis immediately after the sampling, and storage of samples until analysis in one or a few analytical runs. The former strategy needs constant standardization and stability of the performance in many laboratories and in several analytical runs, resulting in between-run variation, whereas the latter precludes this between-run variation, but makes demands on the stability of the components under storage. When a considerable number of laboratories decide to establish common reference intervals, it is possible to obtain large sample sizes of reference values, which reduces the confidence intervals around the reference limits. It also makes it possible to collect samples from many subgroups, such as racial groups and groups related to different environmental conditions, as well as the traditional groupings according to age and gender, pregnancy and use of oestrogens. If all these subgroups are large, e.g. n>500, the confidence limits will be small and criteria for partitioning can be applied. Choosing reference individuals is not easy, as definitions of health, as well as rule-in and rule-out criteria vary from one investigation to the other. Therefore, the strategy and the criteria must be thoroughly described. Arguments for establishing common reference intervals are not needed. On the contrary, lack of such common reference intervals should be explained.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P Hyltoft Petersen, P Rustad. 2004. Prerequisites for establishing common reference intervals.. https://doi.org/10.1080/00365510410006298

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

The truth about quality: medical usefulness and analytical reliability of laboratory tests.

BACKGROUND: In this age of evidence-based medicine, nothing is more important than the quality of laboratory tests. It is commonly thought that laboratory tests provide two-thirds to three-fourths of the information used for making medical decisions. If so, test results had better tell the truth about what is happening with our patients. METHODS: The age-old "truth standard" for the quality of evidence describes three dimensions that are important-a test should tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. This three-dimensional model can be used to characterize the clinical and analytical reliability of laboratory tests and guide the translation of outcome criteria, or quality goals, into practical specifications for method performance. RESULTS: Clinical reliability, or medical usefulness, should assess the correctness of patient classifications based on stated test interpretation guidelines, taking into account the precision and accuracy of the laboratory method, and allowing for the known within-subject biologic variation and the QC needed to detect method instability. Analytical reliability should assess the correctness of a test result based on a stated error limit, taking into account the precision and accuracy of the method and allowing for the QC necessary to detect method instability. These assessments challenge the reliability of current tests for cholesterol, glucose, and glycated hemoglobin in the implementation of U.S. national clinical guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based medicine must employ scientific methodology for translating test interpretation guidelines into practical, bench-level, operating specifications for the imprecision and inaccuracy allowable for a method and the QC necessary to detect method instability.

Chemistry, Clinical↗

Generic scheme for independent performance assessment in the molecular biology laboratory.

BACKGROUND: A variety of proficiency testing schemes are available for specific molecular analyses, but there is an acute need for more widely accessible schemes to assess and demonstrate general competence in DNA analysis. METHODS: Fifteen laboratories, including academic, clinical, and commercial organizations, were recruited into the prototype assessment exercise. A range of test samples were provided, and participants were required to extract DNA from simple matrices, perform PCR amplification, and score the samples as positive or negative by electrophoretic analysis of the amplification products. Results were requested as both gel images and a completed results table, and the performance of each laboratory was then scored on the submitted analytical results. RESULTS: Overall, laboratories performed the analysis successfully, with participants scoring a high proportion of the samples correctly in the two rounds of the scheme. However, not all of the laboratories were able to achieve amplification for all samples, and the performance of some laboratories was not consistent in the two rounds. In addition, several analytical problems were encountered at all stages of the process, including DNA extraction, PCR amplification, and correct recording of results. CONCLUSIONS: The generic approach described here has enabled effective cross-sectoral benchmarking of laboratories from a variety of analytical sectors. The problems encountered by some participating laboratories highlight the need for quality control and checks at all stages of the process to ensure accuracy of results. A statistical analysis of the results (ANOVA) allowed meaningful comparison of the consistency and sensitivity achieved by laboratories, demonstrating that an effective balance was achieved between the level of data obtained from laboratories and the time expenditure required from participants.

Chemistry, Clinical↗