Research Article

Calculation of measurement uncertainty of 20 Clinical Chemistry Analytes according to the practical ISO approach

Volume: 14 Number: 1 January 1, 2023
EN

Calculation of measurement uncertainty of 20 Clinical Chemistry Analytes according to the practical ISO approach

Abstract

Purpose: Measurement Uncertainty (MU) is a valuable tool for evaluating analytical performance and interpreting results in clinical laboratories. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has proposed a practical approach for MU calculation in its ISO/TS 20914:2019 guide. This study aimed to calculate the MU values of 20 clinical chemistry analyses per the ISO guideline and compare them with the Maximum expanded allowable measurement uncertainty (MAU) values. Methods: The study was performed using 6-month internal quality control (IQC) values (uRw) and calibrator uncertainty (ucal) in line with the recommendations of the ISO/TS 20914:2019 guideline. The common MU value was calculated for 20 clinical chemistry tests on two identical devices, Roche Cobas 6000 c501 (Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany) analyzers. The calculated MU values for the tests were compared with the current MAU values in the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Biological Variation database (the current Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments/CLIA recommendation for Ethanol has been selected). Results: MU values for Alanine aminotransferase, C-reactive Protein, Iron, Ethanol, Total Bilirubin, Triglyceride, and Blood urea nitrogen remained within the MAU limits. The MU values of the other 13 tests (excluding Aspartate aminotransferase, Glucose, and Potassium Level 2 IQC) exceeded the MAU values. Conclusion: It was observed that the uRw value affected the MU value the most. Close monitoring and evaluation of uRw and thus IQC and implementation of corrective and preventive actions may reduce MU.

Keywords

References

  1. 1. Milinković N, Ignjatović S, Šumarac Z, et al. Uncertainty of Measurement in Laboratory Medicine. J Med Biochem. 2018;37(3):279-288. doi:10.2478/jomb-2018-0002
  2. 2. Bureau International des Poids et Mesures. JCGM 200:2012 International Vocabulary of Metrology—Basic and General Concepts and Associated Terms, 2008 Version with Minor Corrections. 3rd ed.
  3. 3. Westgard JO, Westgard SA. Total analytic error. From concept to application. https://www.aacc.org/cln/articles/2013/september/total-analytic-error (Accessed at: 21.02.2022).
  4. 4. Ćelap I, Vukasović I, Juričić G, et al. Minimum requirements for the estimation of measurement uncertainty: Recommendations of the joint Working group for uncertainty of measurement of the CSMBLM and CCMB. Biochem Medica. 2017;27(3):030502. doi:10.11613/BM.2017.030502
  5. 5. Braga F and Panteghini M. Performance specifications for measurement uncertainty of common biochemical measurands according to Milan models. Clin Chem Lab Med CCLM. 2021;59(8):1362-1368. doi:10.1515/cclm-2021-0170
  6. 6. Bureau International des Poids et Mesures. JCGM 100:2008 Evaluation of measurement data — Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement, GUM 1995 with minor corrections.
  7. 7. ISO 15189:2012. Medical laboratories — Requirements for quality and competence. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2012.
  8. 8. ILAC-G17:01. ILAC Guidelines for Measurement Uncertainty in Testing. International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC). Available from: https://ilac.org/publications-and-resources/ilac-guidance-series/ (Accessed at: 25.02.2022).

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Clinical Sciences (Other)

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

January 1, 2023

Submission Date

September 14, 2022

Acceptance Date

November 29, 2022

Published in Issue

Year 1970 Volume: 14 Number: 1

EndNote
Çat A, Uçar KT (January 1, 2023) Calculation of measurement uncertainty of 20 Clinical Chemistry Analytes according to the practical ISO approach. Acıbadem Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 14 1 1–9.

Cited By