Lack of consensus in inter-laboratory haematology results in selected laboratories in the southern and northern zones of Ghana.

Ibrahim B Halidu, Amos X Gafa, Samuel D K Blanney, Benjamin T Barimah, David Akan-Enge, Joseph Boachie, Kate A Kontor, Patrick Adu
{"title":"Lack of consensus in inter-laboratory haematology results in selected laboratories in the southern and northern zones of Ghana.","authors":"Ibrahim B Halidu, Amos X Gafa, Samuel D K Blanney, Benjamin T Barimah, David Akan-Enge, Joseph Boachie, Kate A Kontor, Patrick Adu","doi":"10.4314/gmj.v57i3.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the inter-laboratory comparability and intra-assay reproducibility of full blood count (FBC) results.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Exploratory cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Three and two selected medical laboratories in the northern and southern zones, respectively.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Forty-nine individuals per zone; 16 type 2 diabetes mellitus, 16 with HbAS haemoglobin type and 17 normal samples.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Each sample was run eleven times through the analysers in the participating laboratories to evaluate intra-laboratory reproducibility and comparability of FBC results.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measure: </strong>Intra-laboratory reproducibility was evaluated using %coefficient variation (%CV). Interlaboratory comparisons were assessed through t-test or One-Way ANOVA for two-sample and three-sample tests. All statistical testing was undertaken using the two-tailed assumption.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>Statistically significantly different haemoglobin levels were estimated in both northern and southern zones (mean difference 0.00 g/dL to 3.75 g/dL vs 0.18 g/dL to 1.92 g/dL respectively). Also, total WBC counts significantly differed across laboratories in both northern and southern zones (mean difference 0.15 ×10<sup>9</sup>/L - 3.86 ×10<sup>9</sup>/L vs 0.02 ×10<sup>9</sup>/L to 1.39 ×10<sup>9</sup>/L respectively). Furthermore, platelet counts significantly differed across the participating laboratories in the northern and southern zones (mean difference 0.40 ×10<sup>9</sup>/L to 299.76 ×10<sup>9</sup>/L vs 5.7 ×10<sup>9</sup>/L to 76.9 ×10<sup>9</sup>/L respectively). Moreover, there was evidence of non-reproducibility of results within the respective laboratories in each zone as the respective %CV were outside the acceptable limits.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The intra-laboratory non-reproducibility and inter-laboratory non-comparability of FBC results highlight the need to establish a national quality assessment scheme to harmonise laboratory practices nationwide.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This study was funded by the University of Cape Coast Individual-Led Research Support Grant (RSG-INDI-CoHAS-2019-107).</p>","PeriodicalId":94319,"journal":{"name":"Ghana medical journal","volume":"57 3","pages":"210-217"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11216730/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ghana medical journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/gmj.v57i3.8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To assess the inter-laboratory comparability and intra-assay reproducibility of full blood count (FBC) results.

Design: Exploratory cross-sectional study.

Setting: Three and two selected medical laboratories in the northern and southern zones, respectively.

Participants: Forty-nine individuals per zone; 16 type 2 diabetes mellitus, 16 with HbAS haemoglobin type and 17 normal samples.

Intervention: Each sample was run eleven times through the analysers in the participating laboratories to evaluate intra-laboratory reproducibility and comparability of FBC results.

Main outcome measure: Intra-laboratory reproducibility was evaluated using %coefficient variation (%CV). Interlaboratory comparisons were assessed through t-test or One-Way ANOVA for two-sample and three-sample tests. All statistical testing was undertaken using the two-tailed assumption.

Result: Statistically significantly different haemoglobin levels were estimated in both northern and southern zones (mean difference 0.00 g/dL to 3.75 g/dL vs 0.18 g/dL to 1.92 g/dL respectively). Also, total WBC counts significantly differed across laboratories in both northern and southern zones (mean difference 0.15 ×109/L - 3.86 ×109/L vs 0.02 ×109/L to 1.39 ×109/L respectively). Furthermore, platelet counts significantly differed across the participating laboratories in the northern and southern zones (mean difference 0.40 ×109/L to 299.76 ×109/L vs 5.7 ×109/L to 76.9 ×109/L respectively). Moreover, there was evidence of non-reproducibility of results within the respective laboratories in each zone as the respective %CV were outside the acceptable limits.

Conclusion: The intra-laboratory non-reproducibility and inter-laboratory non-comparability of FBC results highlight the need to establish a national quality assessment scheme to harmonise laboratory practices nationwide.

Funding: This study was funded by the University of Cape Coast Individual-Led Research Support Grant (RSG-INDI-CoHAS-2019-107).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
加纳南部和北部选定实验室的血液学结果缺乏共识。
目的:评估全血细胞计数(FBC)结果的实验室间可比性和测定内重现性:评估全血细胞计数(FBC)结果的实验室间可比性和测定内可重复性:设计:探索性横断面研究:研究地点:北部和南部地区分别选定的三家和两家医学实验室:每个区 49 人;16 名 2 型糖尿病患者、16 名 HbAS 血红蛋白类型患者和 17 名正常样本:干预措施:每个样本在参与实验室的分析仪上运行 11 次,以评估 FBC 结果的实验室内重现性和可比性。实验室间的比较通过 t 检验或单向方差分析进行双样本和三样本检验。所有统计检验均采用双尾假设:结果:据统计,北部和南部地区的血红蛋白水平存在明显差异(平均差异分别为 0.00 g/dL 至 3.75 g/dL 与 0.18 g/dL 至 1.92 g/dL)。北部和南部地区各实验室的白细胞总数也存在显著差异(平均差异分别为 0.15 ×109/L - 3.86 ×109/L vs 0.02 ×109/L - 1.39 ×109/L)。此外,北部和南部地区参与实验室的血小板计数也存在显著差异(平均差异分别为 0.40 ×109/L - 299.76 ×109/L vs 5.7 ×109/L - 76.9 ×109/L)。此外,有证据表明,各区实验室内的结果不具有重现性,因为各自的%CV 都超出了可接受的范围:结论:实验室内FBC结果的不可再现性和实验室间的不可比性突出表明,有必要建立国家质量评估计划,以统一全国的实验室操作:本研究由海岸角大学个人主导研究支持拨款(RSG-INDI-CoHAS-2019-107)资助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Addressing the roadblocks to hypertension management in Ghana: proceedings of a roundtable discussion. Antibiotic use in surgical infections at a tertiary teaching hospital in Ghana. Comparative analysis of clinical profile, laboratory profile and outcome in COVID-19 patients with and without hypothyroidism. Equity of access to free maternal and child health services among reproductive-age women in Delta State, Nigeria. Management and associated outcomes of COVID-19 infection among Ghanaian autoimmune rheumatic disease patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1