克罗地亚医学生物化学实验室的核查政策:实践调查

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Biochemia Medica Pub Date : 2022-06-15 Epub Date: 2022-04-15 DOI:10.11613/BM.2022.020703
Lara Milevoj Kopčinović, Gordana Juričić, Adriana Bokulić, Ines Vukasović, Ivana Ćelap, Helena Čičak, Marija Kocijančić, Marija Miloš, Mila Lovrić, Marija Siter Kuprešanin, Snježana Hrabrić Vlah, Manuela Miletić
{"title":"克罗地亚医学生物化学实验室的核查政策:实践调查","authors":"Lara Milevoj Kopčinović, Gordana Juričić, Adriana Bokulić, Ines Vukasović, Ivana Ćelap, Helena Čičak, Marija Kocijančić, Marija Miloš, Mila Lovrić, Marija Siter Kuprešanin, Snježana Hrabrić Vlah, Manuela Miletić","doi":"10.11613/BM.2022.020703","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The aim of this study was to screen practices used in verification procedures for methods/analysers among medical biochemistry laboratories (MBLs) in Croatia. We hypothesized that these procedures differ widely from laboratory to laboratory and wanted to gather specific data on steps used in the verification workflow.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In order to obtain data, an online survey was conducted. The survey, divided in two sections, contained 29 questions and statements addressing general characteristics and specific steps of the verification workflow of each individual MBL. The survey was disseminated among managers of all MBLs in Croatia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 108/196 (55%) laboratories participated in the survey. Forty nine MBLs were excluded from the second part of the survey: 14 have not implemented verification procedures, and 35 MBLs due to the absence of answers. The most relevant results of the second part of the survey showed that: 18/59 (0.31) of the responding MBLs have difficulties when defining acceptance criteria, 27/59 (0.46) used the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute protocol for precision estimation; the majority of MBLs used a median of 20 samples for method/analyser comparisons and estimated bias using internal quality control samples; reference intervals provided by external sources are mainly adopted; 60% of MBLs do not include linearity verification in their protocol and do not use the national document for the estimation of measurement uncertainty.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Heterogeneous verification protocols are routinely utilized across Croatian MBLs which clearly confirms that a national document might help in the harmonization of verification procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":9021,"journal":{"name":"Biochemia Medica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8996323/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Verification policies in Croatian medical biochemistry laboratories: a survey of the practice.\",\"authors\":\"Lara Milevoj Kopčinović, Gordana Juričić, Adriana Bokulić, Ines Vukasović, Ivana Ćelap, Helena Čičak, Marija Kocijančić, Marija Miloš, Mila Lovrić, Marija Siter Kuprešanin, Snježana Hrabrić Vlah, Manuela Miletić\",\"doi\":\"10.11613/BM.2022.020703\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The aim of this study was to screen practices used in verification procedures for methods/analysers among medical biochemistry laboratories (MBLs) in Croatia. We hypothesized that these procedures differ widely from laboratory to laboratory and wanted to gather specific data on steps used in the verification workflow.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In order to obtain data, an online survey was conducted. The survey, divided in two sections, contained 29 questions and statements addressing general characteristics and specific steps of the verification workflow of each individual MBL. The survey was disseminated among managers of all MBLs in Croatia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 108/196 (55%) laboratories participated in the survey. Forty nine MBLs were excluded from the second part of the survey: 14 have not implemented verification procedures, and 35 MBLs due to the absence of answers. The most relevant results of the second part of the survey showed that: 18/59 (0.31) of the responding MBLs have difficulties when defining acceptance criteria, 27/59 (0.46) used the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute protocol for precision estimation; the majority of MBLs used a median of 20 samples for method/analyser comparisons and estimated bias using internal quality control samples; reference intervals provided by external sources are mainly adopted; 60% of MBLs do not include linearity verification in their protocol and do not use the national document for the estimation of measurement uncertainty.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Heterogeneous verification protocols are routinely utilized across Croatian MBLs which clearly confirms that a national document might help in the harmonization of verification procedures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9021,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biochemia Medica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8996323/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biochemia Medica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2022.020703\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/4/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biochemia Medica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2022.020703","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/4/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是筛选克罗地亚医学生物化学实验室(MBLs)中方法/分析仪验证程序中使用的做法。我们假设这些程序在实验室和实验室之间差异很大,并且希望收集验证工作流程中使用的步骤的具体数据。为了获得数据,我们进行了一次在线调查。调查分为两个部分,包含29个问题和陈述,涉及每个MBL的一般特征和核查工作流程的具体步骤。这项调查在克罗地亚所有mbl的管理人员中进行了分发。结果共有108/196个实验室(55%)参与调查。49个mbl被排除在第二部分调查之外:14个没有实施验证程序,35个mbl由于没有答案。调查第二部分最相关的结果显示:18/59(0.31)的mbl在定义接受标准时存在困难,27/59(0.46)的mbl使用临床和实验室标准协会的方案进行精度估计;大多数mbl使用中位数为20个样本进行方法/分析仪比较,并使用内部质量控制样本估计偏差;主要采用外部来源提供的参考区间;60%的mbl在其方案中不包括线性验证,也不使用国家文件来估计测量不确定度。克罗地亚各MBLs经常使用不同的核查协议,这清楚地证实,一份国家文件可能有助于核查程序的统一。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Verification policies in Croatian medical biochemistry laboratories: a survey of the practice.

Introduction: The aim of this study was to screen practices used in verification procedures for methods/analysers among medical biochemistry laboratories (MBLs) in Croatia. We hypothesized that these procedures differ widely from laboratory to laboratory and wanted to gather specific data on steps used in the verification workflow.

Materials and methods: In order to obtain data, an online survey was conducted. The survey, divided in two sections, contained 29 questions and statements addressing general characteristics and specific steps of the verification workflow of each individual MBL. The survey was disseminated among managers of all MBLs in Croatia.

Results: A total of 108/196 (55%) laboratories participated in the survey. Forty nine MBLs were excluded from the second part of the survey: 14 have not implemented verification procedures, and 35 MBLs due to the absence of answers. The most relevant results of the second part of the survey showed that: 18/59 (0.31) of the responding MBLs have difficulties when defining acceptance criteria, 27/59 (0.46) used the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute protocol for precision estimation; the majority of MBLs used a median of 20 samples for method/analyser comparisons and estimated bias using internal quality control samples; reference intervals provided by external sources are mainly adopted; 60% of MBLs do not include linearity verification in their protocol and do not use the national document for the estimation of measurement uncertainty.

Conclusions: Heterogeneous verification protocols are routinely utilized across Croatian MBLs which clearly confirms that a national document might help in the harmonization of verification procedures.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Biochemia Medica
Biochemia Medica 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
3.00%
发文量
70
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Biochemia Medica is the official peer-reviewed journal of the Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Journal provides a wide coverage of research in all aspects of clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine. Following categories fit into the scope of the Journal: general clinical chemistry, haematology and haemostasis, molecular diagnostics and endocrinology. Development, validation and verification of analytical techniques and methods applicable to clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine are welcome as well as studies dealing with laboratory organization, automation and quality control. Journal publishes on a regular basis educative preanalytical case reports (Preanalytical mysteries), articles dealing with applied biostatistics (Lessons in biostatistics) and research integrity (Research integrity corner).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信