Cargando…
Lot verification practices in Ontario clinical chemistry laboratories - Results of a patterns-of-practice survey
OBJECTIVES: Verifying new reagent or calibrator lots is crucial for maintaining consistent test performance. The Institute for Quality Management in Healthcare (IQMH) conducted a patterns-of-practice survey and follow-up case study to collect information on lot verification practices in Ontario. MET...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9399155/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36035320 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plabm.2022.e00300 |
_version_ | 1784772461058850816 |
---|---|
author | Rutledge, Angela C. Johnston, Anna Booth, Ronald A. Veljkovic, Kika Bailey, Dana Vandenberghe, Hilde Waite, Gayle Allen, Lynn C. Don-Wauchope, Andrew Chan, Pak Cheung Stemp, Julia Edmond, Pamela Leung, Victor Aslan, Berna |
author_facet | Rutledge, Angela C. Johnston, Anna Booth, Ronald A. Veljkovic, Kika Bailey, Dana Vandenberghe, Hilde Waite, Gayle Allen, Lynn C. Don-Wauchope, Andrew Chan, Pak Cheung Stemp, Julia Edmond, Pamela Leung, Victor Aslan, Berna |
author_sort | Rutledge, Angela C. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: Verifying new reagent or calibrator lots is crucial for maintaining consistent test performance. The Institute for Quality Management in Healthcare (IQMH) conducted a patterns-of-practice survey and follow-up case study to collect information on lot verification practices in Ontario. METHODS: The survey had 17 multiple-choice questions and was distributed to 183 licensed laboratories. Participants provided information on materials used and approval/rejection criteria for their lot verification procedures for eight classes of testing systems. The case study provided a set of lot comparison data and was distributed to 132 laboratories. Responses were reviewed by IQMH scientific committees. RESULTS: Of the 175 laboratories that responded regarding reagent lot verifications, 74% verified all tests, 11% some, and 15% none. Of the 171 laboratories that responded regarding calibrator lot verifications, 39% verified all calibrators, 4% some, and 57% none. Reasons for not performing verifications ranged from difficulty performing parallel testing to high reagent cost. For automated chemistry assays and immunoassays, 23% of laboratories did not include patient-derived materials in reagent lot verifications and 42% included five to six patient materials; 58% of laboratories did not include patient-derived materials in calibrator lot verifications and 23% included five to six patient materials. Different combinations of test-specific rules were used for acceptance criteria. For a failed lot, 98% of laboratories would investigate further and take corrective actions. Forty-three percent of laboratories would accept the new reagent lot in the case study. CONCLUSION: Responses to the survey and case study demonstrated variability in lot verification practices among laboratories. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9399155 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93991552022-08-25 Lot verification practices in Ontario clinical chemistry laboratories - Results of a patterns-of-practice survey Rutledge, Angela C. Johnston, Anna Booth, Ronald A. Veljkovic, Kika Bailey, Dana Vandenberghe, Hilde Waite, Gayle Allen, Lynn C. Don-Wauchope, Andrew Chan, Pak Cheung Stemp, Julia Edmond, Pamela Leung, Victor Aslan, Berna Pract Lab Med Original Research Article OBJECTIVES: Verifying new reagent or calibrator lots is crucial for maintaining consistent test performance. The Institute for Quality Management in Healthcare (IQMH) conducted a patterns-of-practice survey and follow-up case study to collect information on lot verification practices in Ontario. METHODS: The survey had 17 multiple-choice questions and was distributed to 183 licensed laboratories. Participants provided information on materials used and approval/rejection criteria for their lot verification procedures for eight classes of testing systems. The case study provided a set of lot comparison data and was distributed to 132 laboratories. Responses were reviewed by IQMH scientific committees. RESULTS: Of the 175 laboratories that responded regarding reagent lot verifications, 74% verified all tests, 11% some, and 15% none. Of the 171 laboratories that responded regarding calibrator lot verifications, 39% verified all calibrators, 4% some, and 57% none. Reasons for not performing verifications ranged from difficulty performing parallel testing to high reagent cost. For automated chemistry assays and immunoassays, 23% of laboratories did not include patient-derived materials in reagent lot verifications and 42% included five to six patient materials; 58% of laboratories did not include patient-derived materials in calibrator lot verifications and 23% included five to six patient materials. Different combinations of test-specific rules were used for acceptance criteria. For a failed lot, 98% of laboratories would investigate further and take corrective actions. Forty-three percent of laboratories would accept the new reagent lot in the case study. CONCLUSION: Responses to the survey and case study demonstrated variability in lot verification practices among laboratories. Elsevier 2022-08-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9399155/ /pubmed/36035320 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plabm.2022.e00300 Text en © 2022 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Article Rutledge, Angela C. Johnston, Anna Booth, Ronald A. Veljkovic, Kika Bailey, Dana Vandenberghe, Hilde Waite, Gayle Allen, Lynn C. Don-Wauchope, Andrew Chan, Pak Cheung Stemp, Julia Edmond, Pamela Leung, Victor Aslan, Berna Lot verification practices in Ontario clinical chemistry laboratories - Results of a patterns-of-practice survey |
title | Lot verification practices in Ontario clinical chemistry laboratories - Results of a patterns-of-practice survey |
title_full | Lot verification practices in Ontario clinical chemistry laboratories - Results of a patterns-of-practice survey |
title_fullStr | Lot verification practices in Ontario clinical chemistry laboratories - Results of a patterns-of-practice survey |
title_full_unstemmed | Lot verification practices in Ontario clinical chemistry laboratories - Results of a patterns-of-practice survey |
title_short | Lot verification practices in Ontario clinical chemistry laboratories - Results of a patterns-of-practice survey |
title_sort | lot verification practices in ontario clinical chemistry laboratories - results of a patterns-of-practice survey |
topic | Original Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9399155/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36035320 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plabm.2022.e00300 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rutledgeangelac lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey AT johnstonanna lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey AT boothronalda lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey AT veljkovickika lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey AT baileydana lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey AT vandenberghehilde lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey AT waitegayle lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey AT allenlynnc lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey AT donwauchopeandrew lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey AT chanpakcheung lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey AT stempjulia lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey AT edmondpamela lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey AT leungvictor lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey AT aslanberna lotverificationpracticesinontarioclinicalchemistrylaboratoriesresultsofapatternsofpracticesurvey |