Method comparisons - what do we learn from the Nordic Reference Interval Project 2000 (NORIP) Pål Rustad Fürst Medical Laboratory Labquality Days 12/2-2005.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
NORIP, Malmø 27/ NOBIDA Nordic Reference Interval Project Biobank and Database Common Nordic Reference Intervals NFKK meeting 27/ Pål Rustad.
Advertisements

ERRORS IN THE LABORATORY Dr Joe Fleming PhD. MCB, FRCPath CMC Vellore.
NORIP, Malmø 27/ NORIP concept Common Nordic Reference Intervals NFKK meeting 27/ Pål Rustad Fürst Medical Laboratory, Oslo
CHEMISTRY ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY Fall
The Importance of Commutability of Reference Materials Used as Calibrators: The Example of Ceruloplasmin I. Zegers, R. Beetham, T. Keller, J. Sheldon,
Quality Assurance.
LABORATORY QUALITY CONTROL
Kidney Function Tests Contents: Functional units Kidney functions Renal diseases Routine kidney function tests Serum creatinine Creatinine clearance.
Chemometrics Method comparison
Serum Creatinine and eGFR Where Are We Now? Dr Mike Bosomworth Lead Clinician - Blood Sciences Leeds Teaching Hospitals 16 th April
IFCC EQAS for Reference Laboratories ________________________________________
Quality Assurance.
Reference system and centralised calibration for milk (payment) testing Dave Barbano Cornell University Ithaca, NY.
Measurements for 8 Common Analytes in Native Sera Identify Inadequate Standardization among 6 Routine Laboratory Assays H.C.M. Stepman, U. Tiikkainen,
ABC of Quality Control A problem based approach RT ERASMUS NHLS / FACULTY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, UNIVERSITY OF STELLENBOSCH 20th July, 2007, Bela Bela.
Evaluation of Beckton-Dickinson PST II and SST II Blood Collection Tubes P Graham, B Martin, M Roser, G Jones Department of Chemical Pathology, St Vincent’s.
Creatinine methods and eGFR reporting in the SW and Wessex Region of the ACB Introduction The NSF for Renal Services recommends that for the NHS in England,
Mock OSCE Debriefing. Station No 1 Glucose estimation  Principle  Requirements Semi-automatic analyser Adjustable pipette GOD-PAP reagents Working literature.
Lecture 4 Basic Statistics Dr. A.K.M. Shafiqul Islam School of Bioprocess Engineering University Malaysia Perlis
Quality Control Lecture 5
Kidney Function Tests.
G Jones, M Roser Department of Chemical Pathology
ERT 207 ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY 13 JAN 2011 Lecture 4.
Interferences - are some methods better than others? Graham Jones Department of Chemical Pathology St Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney.
1 An overview of manageable preanalyti- cal factors XXX Nordic Congress in Clinical Biochemistry  Copenhagen  Ulrik Gerdes Klinisk Biokemisk.
NORIP, Malmö 27/ Implementation phase of NORIP Gunnar Nordin, EQUALIS, Uppsala Common Nordic Reference Values, Session 15, NFKK 24 – 27 April 2004.
1 Tests of Significance In this section we deal with two tests used for comparing two analytical methods, one is a new or proposed method and the other.
FT in diagnostic of HBV Analytical & pre-analytical variability FibroTest and FibroMax.
CHEMISTRY ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY Fall Lecture 6.
Chapter 4 Statistics. Is my red blood cell count high today?
Chapter 4 Statistics Tools to accept or reject conclusion from experimental measurements Deal with random error only.
Meeting of ICAR Reference Laboratory Network, 16 June ICAR Session Niagara Falls ICAR Reference Laboratory Network - 4 th Meeting, Niagara.
Ert 207 Analytical chemistry
Laboratory Quality Control An Overview. Definitions (1) Quality Control - QC refers to the measures that must be included during each assay run to verify.
1 Exercise 7: Accuracy and precision. 2 Origin of the error : Accuracy and precision Systematic (not random) –bias –impossible to be corrected  accuracy.
Verification of qualitative methods
Comparability of methods and analysers Nora Nikolac
Mauro Panteghini Who, what and when to do in validation/verification of methods.
Application of Westgard multi rules in medical laboratories
© The Strategic Projects Team Hosted by the Greater East Midlands Commissioning Support Unit National Pathology Programme Standardisation and Harmonisation.
L ABORATORY Q UALITY C ONTROL. INTRODUCTION _A major role of the clinical laboratory is the measurement of substances in body fluids or tissues for the.
 Remember Chemistry panel Quality Control:-  In a medical laboratory, it is a statistical process used to monitor and evaluate the analytical process.
Pre- analytic Analytic Post- analytic  S pecimen collection  Specimen transport  Specimen quality  Result accuracy  Clerical.
Figure 4. Macular Pigment Optical Density Meso-zeaxanthin Ocular Supplementation Trial in Normals (MOST N) Eithne E. Connolly 1, 2, Stephen Beatty 1, 2,
CLINICAL LABORATORIES THE ROLE: A science that uses sophisticated instruments and techniques with the application of theoretical knowledge to perform complex.
Patient Safety Monitoring in International Laboratories (SMILE) Mark Swartz, MT(ASCP), SMILE QA/QC Coordinator Improving the Sensitivity of QC Monitoring:
Result Authorisation – Correct or Not? Julie RYAN FAACB Chair SRAC AACB Healthscope Pathology.
TESTS OF SIGNIFICANCE. It is a test to compare the results of the method with those accepted method.
Diagnostic clinical chemistry
Hematology Unit 2 Chapter 7 Sample Collection and Handling Copyright © 2015 by Mosby, an imprint of Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Six sigma matrix-total
and its Interference Effects Upon Abbott Aeroset/Architect Assays
CHOICE OF METHODS AND INSTRUMENTS
Paleolithic ketogenic diet
Clinical Biochemistry An Introduction
به نام خدا تضمين کيفيت در آزمايشگاه
W. Greg Miller, Graham R.D. Jones  Advances in Chronic Kidney Disease 
USE OF CLINICAL LABORATORY
Controversial aspects of NORIP
Uncertainty: the biochemistry perspective
Introduction To Medical Technology
AEROSET® & ARCHITECT® cSystem™
ARCHITECT cSystems & AEROSET System
AEROSET® & ARCHITECT® cSystem™
ARCHITECT cSystems & AEROSET System
A proposal for Derivation of Analytical Quality Goal for Precision
STANDARDISATION, HARMONISATION AND TRACEABILITY
USE OF CLINICAL LABORATORY
Annette Thomas Chair IFCC C-AQ Director Weqas
ARCHITECT® c System™ AEROSET®
Presentation transcript:

Method comparisons - what do we learn from the Nordic Reference Interval Project 2000 (NORIP) Pål Rustad Fürst Medical Laboratory Labquality Days 12/2-2005

NORIP Two important goals are about to be achieved in the Nordic countries for 25 common biochemical quantities: –Common Nordic reference intervals (see –Improvement in trueness of measurement systems using NFKK Reference Serum X

Can the laboratories use the proposed reference intervals??? Preanalytical aspects Analytical aspects NORIP reference intervals are traceable to target values of X irrespective of uncertainty and bias

NFKK Reference serum X Part of NOBIDA, purchase from DEKS Intention: Nordic laboratories may test trueness of their methods before implementing new reference intervals –Traceability Target values traceable to reference methods Exception: Some enzymes, HDL-cholesterol, TIBC –Commutability Frozen unprocessed serum pool Fresh donors blood, collected in dry bags and allowed to coagulate, pooled, filtered, mixed, dispensed in polypropylene vials, frozen at –80  C without further processing - i.e. interferences as for a mean patient sample –Durability Stored at -80 °C and sent to the laboratory on dry ice

Traceability Tranferred values Nordic Trueness Project 120 Nordic routine laboratories measured a ll materials in parallel during 5 days on 10 NORIP quantities Several ref. labs  IMEP 17, Material 1 (frozen unprocessed serumpool) HK02 (commercial/lyophilized) CAL (frozen unprocessed serumpool) transferred value X (frozen unprocessed serumpool) DGKC 2002  DGKC 1997  }

Traceability comparison Are transferred values achieved by using routine methods correct??

Traceability comparison Conclusions Transferred values by use of routine methods are only safe if both materials are commutable Agreement within uncertainty for all tested quantities for CAL is an indication of good commutability and correct target values Transferred values from Nordic Trueness Project are used as target values for CAL and for X (i.e. traceability for NORIP reference intervals for non-enzymes)

How to use X in the routine laboratory? Measurement protocol –Local calibrator and X measured in parallel ~ removed between run variation –10 replicates of each ~ removed within run variation Calculations (spreadsheet)spreadsheet Uncorrected and corrected relative bias: B u =(M x -T x )/T x B k =(T c /M c ·M x -T x )/T x Uncertainty: X, local calibrator, measurements, rounding Evaluation A measurement error is regarded as important if it is statistically significant and it exeeds a quality goal

Quality goal x total biological variation

Protocol ensures that known sources of uncertainty are minimized to detect true bias! –Material Traceability, commutability, durability –Measurement protocol Minimized measurement uncertainty –Calculations Based on statistical and medical considerations –Evaluation Collection of data from several laboratories may reveal some important error sources

EQA with X in Norway Collected 39 spreadsheets from Norway –makes it possible to evaluate sources of error: »measurement system mean bias »local errors or robustness of measurement system May be difficult to argue with diagnostic industry if... –Uncertainty of target value for X is high »Ex: Albumin, sodium –Producer’s uncertainty on calibrator is high How will the diagnostic industry react? (… answer on last page!)

Measurement systems Potassium ProducerNumber Abbott Aeroset 2 Abbott Architect 3 Bayer Advia DB Dimension RxL 1 Roche Cobas Integra Roche Cobas Integra Roche Cobas Integra Roche Hitachi Roche Hitachi Roche Hitachi Roche Modular 6 Vitros250 2 Vitros950 3

Target: 41.5 g/L (IMEP 17, RID/CRM 470) Albumin Target: 41.5 g/L (IMEP 17, RID/CRM 470) Generelly high Abbott Bayer Roche Roche Roche Ortho Aeroset Advia 1650 Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros Architect Expect less dispersion between open than between filled squares Roche ref. lab.

Creatinine Reference limits Original suggestion: female: 50-90, male Corrected methods: female: 45-90, male Jaffé-methods corrected: Y = (Yo-I)·Tc/(Tc-I) Vitros corrected (enz): Y=1.02 · Yo -8.1  mol/L Enzymatic methods Yn = (Yo-I)·Tc/(Tc-I) i.e. Slope = Tc/(Tc-I) Intercept = -I·TC/(Tc-I)

Target: 73.9 µmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Creatinine Target: 73.9 µmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target mmol/L (IMEP 17, gravimetry/FAES)) Sodium Target mmol/L (IMEP 17, gravimetry/FAES)) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: mmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Calcium Target: mmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: mmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Magnesium Target: mmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: 20.0 µmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Iron Target: 20.0 µmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: 68.7 g/L (NORIP, biuret) Protein Target: 68.7 g/L (NORIP, biuret) Abbott Advia 1650 Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: mmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Glucose Target: mmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: 5.22 mmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Cholesterol Target: 5.22 mmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: µmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Urate Target: µmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: mmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Carbamide (urea) Target: mmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Generally high Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: U/L (NORIP consensus, Roche Modular) Lactate dehydrogenase (LD) Target: U/L (NORIP consensus, Roche Modular) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Suggestions for follow up Collect spreadsheets from all Nordic countries Discuss discovered deviations with diagnostic industry Agree with diagnostic industry on possible national/Nordic corrections

Reactions from diagnostic industy Abbott Norway took initiative to collect spreadsheets from ”their” laboratories in Norway –National factor for magnesium –Will consider correction of their creatinine Jaffé method Roche measured X in their reference lab. –Changed their reference method from atomic absorption to IDMS for calcium –Consider changing calcium routine method Ortho (Vitros) measured X in their reference lab. Konelab ordered X

Thank you for your attention!

Effect of correction

Target: mmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Potassium Target: mmol/L (IMEP 17, IDMS) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: mmol/L (NORIP, ion chromatography, scintillation counting) Phosphate Target: mmol/L (NORIP, ion chromatography, scintillation counting) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: 68.9 µmol/L(NORIP consensus) Total iron binding capacity (TIBC) Target: 68.9 µmol/L(NORIP consensus) Abbott Advia 1650 Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: 8.97 µmol/L (NORIP, Jendrassik) Bilirubin Target: 8.97 µmol/L (NORIP, Jendrassik) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: mmol/L (NORIP consensus, direct methods) HDL-cholesterol Target: mmol/L (NORIP consensus, direct methods) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros

Target: mmol/L (NORIP, GC/IDMS) Triglycerides Target: mmol/L (NORIP, GC/IDMS) Abbott Bayer Cobas Hitachi Modular Vitros