Cargando…

Evaluating analytical quality in clinical biochemistry laboratory using Six Sigma

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, Six Sigma metrics has became the hotspot in all trades and professions, which contributes a general procedure to explain the performance on sigma scale. Nowadays, many large companies, such as General Healthcare, Siemens, etc., have applied Six Sigma to clinical medici...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mao, Xuehui, Shao, Jing, Zhang, Bingchang, Wang, Yong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6039163/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30022890
http://dx.doi.org/10.11613/BM.2018.020904
_version_ 1783338631576944640
author Mao, Xuehui
Shao, Jing
Zhang, Bingchang
Wang, Yong
author_facet Mao, Xuehui
Shao, Jing
Zhang, Bingchang
Wang, Yong
author_sort Mao, Xuehui
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: In recent years, Six Sigma metrics has became the hotspot in all trades and professions, which contributes a general procedure to explain the performance on sigma scale. Nowadays, many large companies, such as General Healthcare, Siemens, etc., have applied Six Sigma to clinical medicine and achieved satisfactory results. In this paper, we aim to evaluate the process performance of our laboratory by using Sigma metrics, thereby choosing the correct analytical quality control approach for each parameter. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was conducted in the clinical chemistry laboratory of Shandong Provincial Hospital. The five-months data of internal quality control were harvested for the parameters: amylase (AMY), lactate dehydrogenase (LD), potassium, total bilirubin (TBIL), triglyceride, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), uric acid, high density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), urea, sodium, chlorine, magnesium, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), creatinine (CRE), total protein, creatine kinase (CK), total cholesterol, glucose (GLU), albumin (ALB). Sigma metrics were calculated using total allowable error, precision and percent bias for the above-mentioned parameters. RESULTS: Sigma values of urea and sodium were below 3. Sigma values of total protein, CK, total cholesterol, GLU and ALB were in the range of 3 to 6. Sigma values of AMY, uric acid, HDL-C, TBIL, ALT, triglyceride, AST, ALP and CRE were more than 6. CONCLUSION: Amylase was the best performer with a Sigma metrics value of 19.93, while sodium had the least average sigma values of 2.23. Actions should be taken to improve method performance for these parameters with sigma below 3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6039163
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60391632018-07-18 Evaluating analytical quality in clinical biochemistry laboratory using Six Sigma Mao, Xuehui Shao, Jing Zhang, Bingchang Wang, Yong Biochem Med (Zagreb) Short Communications INTRODUCTION: In recent years, Six Sigma metrics has became the hotspot in all trades and professions, which contributes a general procedure to explain the performance on sigma scale. Nowadays, many large companies, such as General Healthcare, Siemens, etc., have applied Six Sigma to clinical medicine and achieved satisfactory results. In this paper, we aim to evaluate the process performance of our laboratory by using Sigma metrics, thereby choosing the correct analytical quality control approach for each parameter. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was conducted in the clinical chemistry laboratory of Shandong Provincial Hospital. The five-months data of internal quality control were harvested for the parameters: amylase (AMY), lactate dehydrogenase (LD), potassium, total bilirubin (TBIL), triglyceride, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), uric acid, high density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), urea, sodium, chlorine, magnesium, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), creatinine (CRE), total protein, creatine kinase (CK), total cholesterol, glucose (GLU), albumin (ALB). Sigma metrics were calculated using total allowable error, precision and percent bias for the above-mentioned parameters. RESULTS: Sigma values of urea and sodium were below 3. Sigma values of total protein, CK, total cholesterol, GLU and ALB were in the range of 3 to 6. Sigma values of AMY, uric acid, HDL-C, TBIL, ALT, triglyceride, AST, ALP and CRE were more than 6. CONCLUSION: Amylase was the best performer with a Sigma metrics value of 19.93, while sodium had the least average sigma values of 2.23. Actions should be taken to improve method performance for these parameters with sigma below 3. Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine 2018-06-15 2018-06-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6039163/ /pubmed/30022890 http://dx.doi.org/10.11613/BM.2018.020904 Text en ©Croatian Society of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Short Communications
Mao, Xuehui
Shao, Jing
Zhang, Bingchang
Wang, Yong
Evaluating analytical quality in clinical biochemistry laboratory using Six Sigma
title Evaluating analytical quality in clinical biochemistry laboratory using Six Sigma
title_full Evaluating analytical quality in clinical biochemistry laboratory using Six Sigma
title_fullStr Evaluating analytical quality in clinical biochemistry laboratory using Six Sigma
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating analytical quality in clinical biochemistry laboratory using Six Sigma
title_short Evaluating analytical quality in clinical biochemistry laboratory using Six Sigma
title_sort evaluating analytical quality in clinical biochemistry laboratory using six sigma
topic Short Communications
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6039163/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30022890
http://dx.doi.org/10.11613/BM.2018.020904
work_keys_str_mv AT maoxuehui evaluatinganalyticalqualityinclinicalbiochemistrylaboratoryusingsixsigma
AT shaojing evaluatinganalyticalqualityinclinicalbiochemistrylaboratoryusingsixsigma
AT zhangbingchang evaluatinganalyticalqualityinclinicalbiochemistrylaboratoryusingsixsigma
AT wangyong evaluatinganalyticalqualityinclinicalbiochemistrylaboratoryusingsixsigma