An approach for estimating measurement uncertainty in medical laboratories using data from long-term quality control and external quality assessment schemes

Abstract Background: The present study was prompted by the ISO 15189 requirements that medical laboratories should estimate measurement uncertainty (MU). Methods: The method used to estimate MU included the: a) identification of quantitative tests, b) classification of tests in relation to their clinical purpose, and c) identification of criteria to estimate the different MU components. Imprecision was estimated using long-term internal quality control (IQC) results of the year 2016, while external quality assessment schemes (EQAs) results obtained in the period 2015–2016 were used to estimate bias and bias uncertainty. Results: A total of 263 measurement procedures (MPs) were analyzed. On the basis of test purpose, in 51 MPs imprecision only was used to estimate MU; in the remaining MPs, the bias component was not estimable for 22 MPs because EQAs results did not provide reliable statistics. For a total of 28 MPs, two or more MU values were calculated on the basis of analyte concentration levels. Overall, results showed that uncertainty of bias is a minor factor contributing to MU, the bias component being the most relevant contributor to all the studied sample matrices. Conclusions: The model chosen for MU estimation allowed us to derive a standardized approach for bias calculation, with respect to the fitness-for-purpose of test results. Measurement uncertainty estimation could readily be implemented in medical laboratories as a useful tool in monitoring the analytical quality of test results since they are calculated using a combination of both the long-term imprecision IQC results and bias, on the basis of EQAs results.

[1]  R. Greaves,et al.  Practical application of biological variation and Sigma metrics quality models to evaluate 20 chemistry analytes on the Beckman Coulter AU680. , 2016, Clinical biochemistry.

[2]  Tony Badrick,et al.  Uncertainty in measurement and total error – are they so incompatible? , 2016, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[3]  Graham R.D. Jones,et al.  Measurement uncertainty for clinical laboratories - a revision of the concept. , 2016 .

[4]  M. Plebani,et al.  Measurement uncertainty – a revised understanding of its calculation and use , 2016, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[5]  James O Westgard,et al.  Useful measures and models for analytical quality management in medical laboratories , 2016, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[6]  Elvar Theodorsson,et al.  Total error vs. measurement uncertainty: revolution or evolution? , 2016, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[7]  Graham Ross Dallas Jones Measurement uncertainty for clinical laboratories – a revision of the concept , 2016, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[8]  R. Cartier,et al.  Uncertainty in measurement for 43 biochemistry, immunoassay, and hemostasis routine analytes evaluated by a method using only external quality assessment data , 2015, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[9]  Sverre Sandberg,et al.  Defining analytical performance specifications: Consensus Statement from the 1st Strategic Conference of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine , 2015, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[10]  Darren C. Ames,et al.  External quality assessment: best practice , 2014, Journal of Clinical Pathology.

[11]  G. White,et al.  Basics of estimating measurement uncertainty. , 2008, The Clinical biochemist. Reviews.

[12]  Bertil Magnusson,et al.  Handbook for Calculation of Measurement Uncertainty in Environmental Laboratories Version 3 January 2008 , 2003 .