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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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