Shahangian S, Krolak J M, Gaunt E E, Cohn R D
Laboratory Practice Assessment Branch, Division of Laboratory Systems, Public Health Practice Program Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30341-3724, USA.
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1998 Jun;122(6):503-11.
The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of using a prototype split-specimen design to assess integrity of a portion of the total testing process in medical clinics and laboratories.
Two or three tubes of venous blood were collected from 177 patients for analysis of one of three analytes (serum potassium, serum total cholesterol, and whole-blood hemoglobin). Patients were seen at one of the nine clinics participating in this study. In all cases, one tube of blood from each patient was sent to a commercial referral laboratory, and the other tube(s) forwarded to the laboratory that routinely tested specimens for the clinic (participating laboratory) for analysis. Each participating laboratory removed a preanalysis and sometimes a post-analysis aliquot from each specimen and forwarded these to the referral laboratory for analysis.
The study was conducted in six physician office laboratories (three serving 1 to 4 [mean, 2.7] internists and three serving 3 to 24 [mean, 12] family physicians) and three hospital laboratories (serving hospitals with 100 to more than 700 beds).
Study patients were voluntary participants and provided informed consent. Patient age ranged from 18 to 80 years, and for all the laboratory test was specifically ordered for clinical reasons. Patients who were unable or unwilling to provide informed consent, those for whom testing would require that they provide more than 100 mL of blood, those whose blood was being collected by fingerstick, and those with results that were part of a laboratory test profile were excluded.
Two main outcome measures were assessed: (1) percent differences between split-specimen results exceeding the maximum allowable imprecision level, which was based on published biological variation data (defined as one-half of the intraindividual percent coefficient of variation), for each analyte (result discrepancies); and (2) all "problems" (defined as departures from standard operating procedures) that could be documented by retrospective review of all relevant medical and laboratory records.
The rate of result discrepancies was 1 in 20 (5%) for patients in whom hemoglobin was analyzed, 12 in 57 (21%) for patients in whom potassium was analyzed, and 1 in 60 (2%) for patients in whom total cholesterol was analyzed. Results of samples obtained during the aliquoting and storage phases of the total testing process were subject to study-induced problems and were generally not useful in tracing problems to specific stages of the testing process. A total of 28 problems (involving 26 patients) were documented, but only 6 problems were due to routine testing processes.
The feasibility and limitations of a split-specimen design to detect result discrepancies were demonstrated. Most documented problems (22 of 28, or 79%) were study induced. To assess integrity of the total testing process, such problems need to be avoided.
本研究旨在评估使用原型分割样本设计来评估医疗诊所和实验室中部分总检测过程完整性的可行性。
从177名患者中采集两管或三管静脉血,用于分析三种分析物之一(血清钾、血清总胆固醇和全血血红蛋白)。患者在参与本研究的九个诊所之一就诊。在所有情况下,从每位患者采集的一管血被送往商业转诊实验室,另一管(些)被转送至为该诊所常规检测样本的实验室(参与实验室)进行分析。每个参与实验室从每个样本中取出一份分析前的样本,有时还会取出一份分析后的样本,并将这些样本转送至转诊实验室进行分析。
该研究在六个医师办公室实验室(三个为1至4名[平均2.7名]内科医生服务,三个为3至24名[平均12名]家庭医生服务)和三个医院实验室(为拥有100至700多张床位的医院服务)进行。
研究患者为自愿参与者并提供了知情同意书。患者年龄在18至80岁之间,所有实验室检测均因临床原因而专门开具。无法或不愿意提供知情同意书的患者、检测需要其提供超过100毫升血液的患者、通过指尖采血的患者以及检测结果是实验室检测项目一部分的患者被排除在外。
评估了两个主要观察指标:(1)分割样本结果之间的百分比差异超过基于已发表的生物学变异数据(定义为个体内变异系数百分比的一半)的最大允许不精密度水平的情况(结果差异),针对每种分析物;(2)通过回顾所有相关医疗和实验室记录可记录的所有“问题”(定义为偏离标准操作程序)。
分析血红蛋白的患者中,结果差异发生率为二十分之一(5%);分析钾的患者中,57例中有12例(21%);分析总胆固醇的患者中,60例中有1例(2%)。在总检测过程的样本分装和储存阶段获得的样本结果存在研究导致的问题,通常对将问题追溯到检测过程的特定阶段没有帮助。共记录了28个问题(涉及26名患者),但只有6个问题是由于常规检测过程导致的。
证明了分割样本设计检测结果差异的可行性和局限性。大多数记录在案的问题(28个中的22个,即79%)是由研究导致的。为了评估总检测过程的完整性,需要避免此类问题。