Advances in internal quality control

References

• Plebani M. The detection and prevention of errors in laboratory medicine. Ann Clin Biochem. 2010;47(Pt 2):101–110.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plebani M. Errors in clinical laboratories or errors in laboratory medicine? Clin Chem Lab Med. 2006;44:750–759.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Badrick T. Integrating quality control and external quality assurance. Clin Biochem. 2021;95:15–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katayev A, Fleming JK. Past, present, and future of laboratory quality control: patient-based real-time quality control or when getting more quality at less cost is not wishful thinking. J Lab Precis Med. 2020;5:28–28.
   Google Scholar
• Kinns H, Pitkin S, Housley D, et al. Internal quality control: best practice. J Clin Pathol. 2013;66(12):1027–1032.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levey S, Jennings ER. The use of control charts in the clinical laboratory. Am J Clin Pathol. 1950;20(11):1059–1066.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim CY, Loh TP, Badrick T. Asking why: moving beyond error detection to failure mode and effects analysis. J Lab Precis Med. 2020;5:29–29.
   Google Scholar
• Westgard JO, Barry PL, Hunt MR, et al. A multi-rule Shewhart chart for quality control in clinical chemistry. Clin Chem. 1981;27(3):493–501.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olsen K. The first 110 years of laboratory automation: technologies, applications, and the creative scientist. J Lab Autom. 2012;17(6):469–480.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mayeux R. Biomarkers: potential uses and limitations. NeuroRx. 2004;1(2):182–188.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hawkins RC. Laboratory turnaround time. Clin Biochem Rev. 2007;28:179–194.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Downes FP. Public health laboratories in an age of austerity. NAM perspectives; 2013 [cited 2013 May 9]. Available from: https://nam.edu/perspectives-2013-public-health-laboratories-in-an-age-of-austerity/.
   Google Scholar
• Crowley MP, Murray M, Hayat A. Laboratory medicine resource management in times of austerity: an opportunity to rationalize services using vitamin B12 and folate testing as an example. Blood. 2012;120(21):4229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li H, Adeli K. Laboratory quality regulations and accreditation standards in Canada. Clin Biochem. 2009;42(4–5):249–255.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guzel O, Guner EI. ISO 15189 accreditation: requirements for quality and competence of medical laboratories, experience of a laboratory I. Clin Biochem. 2009;42(4–5):274–278.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yanikkaya-Demirel G. ISO 15189 accreditation: requirements for quality and competence of medical laboratories, experience of a laboratory II. Clin Biochem. 2009;42(4–5):279–283.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vogeser M, Brüggemann M, Lennerz J, et al. Laboratory-developed tests in the new European Union 2017/746 Regulation: opportunities and risks. Clin Chem. 2021;68(1):40–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bank PC, Jacobs LH, van den Berg SA, et al. The end of the laboratory developed test as we know it? R1m a National Multidisciplinary Taskforce of Laboratory Specialists on the interpretation of the IVDR and its complications. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2021;59(3):491–497.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panteghini M. Redesigning the surveillance of in vitro diagnostic medical devices and of medical laboratory performance by quality control in the traceability era. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2023;61(5):759–768.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danilenko U, Vesper HW, Myers GL, et al. An updated protocol based on CLSI document C37 for preparation of off-the-clot serum from individual units for use alone or to prepare commutable pooled serum reference materials. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2020;58(3):368–374.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sonntag O. Quality in the analytical phase. Biochem Med. 2010;20:147–153.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ricós C, Juvany R, Simón M, et al. Commutability and traceability: their repercussions on analytical bias and inaccuracy. Clin Chim Acta. 1999;280(1–2):135–145.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jennings I, Kitchen D, Kitchen S, et al. The importance of commutability in material used for quality control purposes. Int J Lab Hematol. 2019;41(1):39–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braga F, Panteghini M. Commutability of reference and control materials: an essential factor for assuring the quality of measurements in laboratory medicine. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2019;57(7):967–973.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulkarni S, Pierre SA, Kaliaperumal R. Efficacy of pooled serum internal quality control in comparison with commercial internal quality control in clinical biochemistry laboratory. J Lab Physicians. 2020;12(3):191–195.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ong L, Saw S, Sahabdeen NB, et al. Current 25-hydroxyvitamin D assays: do they pass the test? Clin Chim Acta. 2012;413(13–14):1127–1134.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hinge M, Lund ED, Brandslund I, et al. Patient pools and the use of "patient means" are valuable tools in quality control illustrated by a bone-specific alkaline phosphatase assay. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2016;54:403–406.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markus C, Coat S, Marschall HU, et al. Lot-to-lot reagent changes and commutability of quality testing materials for total bile acid measurements. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2023. DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2022-1278. Epub ahead of print.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller WG, Erek A, Cunningham TD, et al. Commutability limitations influence quality control results with different reagent lots. Clin Chem. 2011;57(1):76–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Punyalack W, Graham P, Badrick T. Finding best practice in internal quality control procedures using external quality assurance performance. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2018;56(9):e226–e228.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickman PE, Koerbin G, Badrick T, et al. The importance of low level QC for high sensitivity troponin assays. Clin Biochem. 2018;58:60–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones G, Calleja J, Chesher D, et al. Collective opinion paper on a 2013 AACB Workshop of experts seeking harmonisation of approaches to setting a laboratory quality control policy. Clin Biochem Rev. 2015;36:87–95.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sikaris K, Pehm K, Wallace M, et al. Review of serious failures in reported test results for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing of patients by SA Pathology; 2016 [cited 2016 Oct 13]. Available from: http://www.sapathology.sa.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/1fa1d43f-08ab-49e0-9875-369da73bc731/Final+Report+-+SA+PSA+Review+-+July+2016.pdf?MOD=AJPERES.
   Google Scholar
• Giannoli JM, Albarede S, Avellan T, et al. Recommendations for the application and follow-up of quality controls in medical laboratories. Biochem Med. 2021;31(2):020501.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandberg S, Fraser CG, Horvath AR, et al. Defining analytical performance specifications: consensus statement from the 1st strategic conference of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2015;53:833–835.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parvin CA, Kuchipudi L, Yundt-Pacheco J. Designing QC rules in the presence of laboratory bias: should a QC rule be centered on the instrument’s mean or the reference mean? Clin Chem. 2012;58:A205.
   Google Scholar
• Kuchipudi L, Yundt-Pacheco J, Parvin CA. Designing QC rules for multiple instruments: should a QC rule be centered on individual instrument means or on a fixed mean? Should the limits be based on individual instrument SDs or on a fixed SD?; 2022 [cited 2022 Dec 15]. Available from: https://www.qcnet.com/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=Jf3SU-9BKmg%3D&portalid=0.
   Google Scholar
• Preston LJ. A survey of quality indicator use in the clinical laboratory. Clin Lab Sci. 2008;21:25–32.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rosenbaum MW, Flood JG, Melanson SEF, et al. Quality control practices for chemistry and immunochemistry in a cohort of 21 large academic medical centers. Am J Clin Pathol. 2018;150(2):96–104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parvin CA. Quality-control (QC) performance measures and the QC planning process. Clin Chem. 1997;43(4):602–607.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar BV, Mohan T. Sigma metrics as a tool for evaluating the performance of internal quality control in a clinical chemistry laboratory. J Lab Physicians. 2018;10(2):194–199.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westgard JO. Charts of operational process specifications ("OPSpecs charts") for assessing the precision, accuracy, and quality control needed to satisfy proficiency testing performance criteria. Clin Chem. 1992;38(7):1226–1233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoenmakers CH, Naus AJ, Vermeer HJ, et al. Practical application of sigma metrics QC procedures in clinical chemistry. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2011;49:1837–1843.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozdemir S, Ucar F. Determination of sigma metric based on various TEa sources for CBC parameters: the need for sigma metrics harmonization. J Lab Med. 2022;46(2):133–141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parvin CA, Gronowski AM. Effect of analytical run length on quality-control (QC) performance and the QC planning process. Clin Chem. 1997;43(11):2149–2154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parvin CA. Assessing the impact of the frequency of quality control testing on the quality of reported patient results. Clin Chem. 2008;54(12):2049–2054.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parvin CA. What’s new in laboratory statistical quality control guidance? The 4th edition of CLSI C24, statistical quality control for quantitative measurement procedures: principles and definitions. J Appl Lab Med. 2017;1(5):581–584.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Parvin CA, Baumann NA. Assessing quality control strategies for HbA1c measurements from a patient risk perspective. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2018;12(4):786–791.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Levine JB. How the Westgard QC rules got their name: a personal recollection. Clin Chem. 2018;64(5):874–876.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker BS, Pearson LN, Schmidt RL. An analysis of multirules for monitoring assay quality control. Lab Med. 2020;51(1):94–98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim CY, Lee JJS, Choy KW, et al. Between and within calibration variation: implications for internal quality control rules. Pathology. 2023 Feb 16:S0031-3025(23)00053-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.pathol.2022.11.013. Epub ahead of print.
   Google Scholar
• Linnet K. Mean and variance rules are more powerful or selective than quality control rules based on individual values. Eur J Clin Chem Clin Biochem. 1991;29(7):417–424.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Asberg A, Bolann B, Mikkelsen G. Using the confidence interval of the mean to detect systematic errors in one analytical run. Scand J Clin Lab Invest. 2010;70(6):410–414.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansen RT, Laeven M, Kardol W. Internal quality control system for non-stationary, non-ergodic analytical processes based upon exponentially weighted estimation of process means and process standard deviation. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2002;40:616–624.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poh DKH, Lim CY, Tan RZ, et al. Internal quality control: moving average algorithms outperform Westgard rules. Clin Biochem. 2021;98:63–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kilpatrick ES. Quality control failures exceeding the weekly limit (QC FEWL): a simple tool to improve assay error detection. Ann Clin Biochem. 2019;56(6): 668–673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffmann RG, Waid ME, Henry JB. Clinical specimens and reference samples for the quality control of laboratory accuracy. Am J Med Technol. 1961;27:309–317.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hoffmann RG, Waid ME. The “average of normals” method of quality control. Am J Clin Pathol. 1965;43:134–141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cembrowski GS. Use of patient data for quality control. Clin Lab Med. 1986;6(4):715–733.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bull BS, Elashoff RM, Heilbron DC, et al. A study of various estimators for the derivation of quality control procedures from patient erythrocyte indices. Am J Clin Pathol. 1974;61(4):473–481.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bietenbeck A, Cervinski MA, Katayev A, et al. Understanding patient-based real-time quality control using simulation modeling. Clin Chem. 2020;66(8):1072–1083.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Badrick T, Bietenbeck A, Katayev A, et al. Implementation of patient-based real-time quality control. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci. 2020;57(8):532–547.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loh TP, Bietenbeck A, Cervinski MA, et al. Recommendation for performance verification of patient-based real-time quality control. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2020;58(8):1205–1213.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Badrick T, Bietenbeck A, Cervinski MA, et al. Patient-based real-time quality control: review and recommendations. Clin Chem. 2019;65(8):962–971.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loh TP, Cervinski MA, Katayev A, et al. Recommendations for laboratory informatics specifications needed for the application of patient-based real time quality control. Clin Chim Acta. 2019;495:625–629.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Badrick T, Cervinski M, Loh TP. A primer on patient-based quality control techniques. Clin Biochem. 2019;64:1–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Rossum HH, Bietenbeck A, Cervinski MA, et al. Benefits, limitations and controversies on patient-based real-time quality control (PBRTQC) and the evidence behind the practice. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2021;59(7):1213–1220.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Algeciras-Schimnich A, Bruns DE, Boyd JC, et al. Failure of current laboratory protocols to detect lot-to-lot reagent differences: findings and possible solutions. Clin Chem. 2013;59(8):1187–1194.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Andel E, Henricks LM, Giliams APM, et al. Moving average quality control of routine chemistry and hematology parameters - a toolbox for implementation. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2022;60(11):1719–1728.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Grande LAC, Goossens K, Van Uytfanghe K, et al. Monitoring the stability of the standardization status of FT4 and TSH assays by use of daily outpatient medians and flagging frequencies. Clin Chim Acta. 2017;467:8–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thienpont LM, Stöckl D. Percentiler and flagger – low-cost, on-line monitoring of laboratory and manufacturer data and significant surplus to current external quality assessment. J Lab Med. 2018;42(6):289–296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleming JK, Katayev A. Changing the paradigm of laboratory quality control through implementation of real-time test results monitoring: for patients by patients. Clin Biochem. 2015;48(7–8):508–513.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ng D, Polito FA, Cervinski MA. Optimization of a moving averages program using a simulated annealing algorithm: the goal is to monitor the process not the patients. Clin Chem. 2016;62(10):1361–1371.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Rossum HH, van den Broek D. Ten-month evaluation of the routine application of patient moving average for real-time quality control in a hospital setting. J Appl Lab Med. 2020;5(6):1184–1193.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• ISO. Medical laboratories: requirements for quality and competence. ISO 15189. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization; 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Bietenbeck A, Thaler MA, Luppa PB, et al. Stronger together: aggregated Z-values of traditional quality control measurements and patient medians improve detection of biases. Clin Chem. 2017;63(8):1377–1387
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Rossum HH, van den Broek D. Design and implementation of quality control plans that integrate moving average and internal quality control: incorporating the best of both worlds. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2019;57(9):1329–1338.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Rossum HH. When internal quality control is insufficient or inefficient: consider patient-based real-time quality control! Ann Clin Biochem. 2020;57(3):198–201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lukić V, Ignjatović S. Integrating moving average control procedures into the risk-based quality control plan in small-volume medical laboratories. Biochem Med. 2022;32(2):020711.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Y, Yu Q, Zhang X, et al. Comparison and optimization of various moving patient-based real-time quality control procedures for serum sodium. J Clin Lab Anal. 2021;35(10):e23985.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones GR. Average of delta: a new quality control tool for clinical laboratories. Ann Clin Biochem. 2016;53(Pt 1):133–140.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duan X, Wang B, Zhu J, et al. Regression-adjusted real-time quality control. Clin Chem. 2021;67(10):1342–1350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou R, Wang W, Padoan A, et al. Traceable machine learning real-time quality control based on patient data. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2022;60(12):1998–2004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu J, Tan CH, Badrick T, et al. Moving standard deviation and moving sum of outliers as quality tools for monitoring analytical precision. Clin Biochem. 2018;52:112–116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu J, Tan CH, Badrick T, et al. Moving sum of number of positive patient result as a quality control tool. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2017;55:1709–1714.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stepman HC, Stöckl D, Stove V, et al. Long-term stability of clinical laboratory data: sodium as benchmark. Clin Chem. 2011;57(11):1616–1617.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Houcke SK, Stepman HC, Thienpont LM, et al. Long-term stability of laboratory tests and practical implications for quality management. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2013;51(6):1227–1231.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woo J, LeFever D, Winkelman JW. Use of "average of normals" quality control procedure in the detection and resolution of assay discrepancies. Am J Clin Pathol. 1988;89(1):125–129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li T, Cao S, Wang Y, et al. Moving rate of positive patient results as a quality control tool for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T assays. Ann Lab Med. 2021;41(1):51–59.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koerbin G, Liu J, Eigenstetter A, et al. Missed detection of significant positive and negative shifts in gentamicin assay: implications for routine laboratory quality practices. Biochem Med. 2018;28(1):010705.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunetzky ES, Cembrowski GS. Performance characteristics of Bull’s multirule algorithm for the quality control of multichannel hematology analyzers. Am J Clin Pathol. 1987;88(5):634–638.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim CY, Badrick T, Loh TP. Patient-based quality control for glucometers: using the moving sum of positive patient results and moving average. Biochem Med. 2020;30(2):020709.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou Q, Loh TP, Badrick T, et al. Impact of combining data from multiple instruments on performance of patient-based real-time quality control. Biochem Med. 2021;31(2):020705.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar