Sigma Metrics for Assessing the analytical performance of 14 biochemical analytes in Mansoura University Children's Hospital laboratories (MUCHLs) using CLIA LIMITS 1988 & 2024.
Nada Karam, Reham El-Farahaty, Abdel-Hady El-Gilany, Nessma A Nosser
{"title":"Sigma Metrics for Assessing the analytical performance of 14 biochemical analytes in Mansoura University Children's Hospital laboratories (MUCHLs) using CLIA LIMITS 1988 & 2024.","authors":"Nada Karam, Reham El-Farahaty, Abdel-Hady El-Gilany, Nessma A Nosser","doi":"10.1177/00045632251330163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Analytical quality is a crucial prerequisite for best practice in medical laboratory. Six-Sigma Methodology (SM) is a quality measurement tool used to evaluate laboratory performance. This study aims to assess the analytical phase baseline performance using SM and compare results using TEa of CLIA 1988 and CLIA 2024.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Coefficient of variation and bias were determined for fourteen analytes. The sigma level for each parameter was calculated using total allowable error (TEa) for CLIA 1988 and CLIA 2024. The quality goal index ratio was calculated for analytes with Sigma less than 3. Normalized method decision Charts were plotted for level 1 and 2 Bio-Rad internal quality control for both CLIA 1988 and 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Using CLIA TEa 1988, HDL-C, triglycerides & uric acid for level 1 and ALT, AST, HDL-C, calcium, triglycerides & uric acid for level 2 had six Sigma world class performance, meanwhile, only BUN for level 1 and 2 performed less than 3. Using CLIA TEa 2024, HDL-C, GGT, and triglycerides for level 1 and ALT, AST, calcium, GGT, and triglycerides for level 2 had world class quality performance. Meanwhile, creatinine, glucose, BUN for level 1 and BUN and creatinine for level 2 performed less than 3.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Evaluation of baseline analytical performance using SM revealed lower sigma values with stringent CLIA TEa 2024 versus tolerant CLIA TEa 1988. Improvement in the methodology of analytes with poor performance on some assay platforms with stringent quality control regimes is recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":8005,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Clinical Biochemistry","volume":" ","pages":"45632251330163"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Clinical Biochemistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00045632251330163","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Analytical quality is a crucial prerequisite for best practice in medical laboratory. Six-Sigma Methodology (SM) is a quality measurement tool used to evaluate laboratory performance. This study aims to assess the analytical phase baseline performance using SM and compare results using TEa of CLIA 1988 and CLIA 2024.
Materials and methods: Coefficient of variation and bias were determined for fourteen analytes. The sigma level for each parameter was calculated using total allowable error (TEa) for CLIA 1988 and CLIA 2024. The quality goal index ratio was calculated for analytes with Sigma less than 3. Normalized method decision Charts were plotted for level 1 and 2 Bio-Rad internal quality control for both CLIA 1988 and 2024.
Results: Using CLIA TEa 1988, HDL-C, triglycerides & uric acid for level 1 and ALT, AST, HDL-C, calcium, triglycerides & uric acid for level 2 had six Sigma world class performance, meanwhile, only BUN for level 1 and 2 performed less than 3. Using CLIA TEa 2024, HDL-C, GGT, and triglycerides for level 1 and ALT, AST, calcium, GGT, and triglycerides for level 2 had world class quality performance. Meanwhile, creatinine, glucose, BUN for level 1 and BUN and creatinine for level 2 performed less than 3.
Conclusion: Evaluation of baseline analytical performance using SM revealed lower sigma values with stringent CLIA TEa 2024 versus tolerant CLIA TEa 1988. Improvement in the methodology of analytes with poor performance on some assay platforms with stringent quality control regimes is recommended.
期刊介绍:
Annals of Clinical Biochemistry is the fully peer reviewed international journal of the Association for Clinical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine.
Annals of Clinical Biochemistry accepts papers that contribute to knowledge in all fields of laboratory medicine, especially those pertaining to the understanding, diagnosis and treatment of human disease. It publishes papers on clinical biochemistry, clinical audit, metabolic medicine, immunology, genetics, biotechnology, haematology, microbiology, computing and management where they have both biochemical and clinical relevance. Papers describing evaluation or implementation of commercial reagent kits or the performance of new analysers require substantial original information. Unless of exceptional interest and novelty, studies dealing with the redox status in various diseases are not generally considered within the journal''s scope. Studies documenting the association of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) with particular phenotypes will not normally be considered, given the greater strength of genome wide association studies (GWAS). Research undertaken in non-human animals will not be considered for publication in the Annals.
Annals of Clinical Biochemistry is also the official journal of NVKC (de Nederlandse Vereniging voor Klinische Chemie) and JSCC (Japan Society of Clinical Chemistry).