Causes of unsatisfactory performance in proficiency testing

Clinical Chemistry

Volumn 46, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 89-99

  Jenny, Richard W ^a   Jackson Tarentino, Kathryn Y ^a  

^a WADSWORTH CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; CALIBRATION; INSTRUMENT; LABORATORY TEST; PERFORMANCE; QUALITY CONTROL;

EID: 0033950781     PISSN: 00099147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/clinchem/46.1.89     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. 1. Jenny RW. Process capability and stability of analytical systems assessed from proficiency testing data. Clin Chem 1994;40: 723-8.
2. 2. Steindel SJ, Howanitz PJ, Renner SW. Reasons for proficiency testing failures in clinical chemistry and blood gas analysis. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1996;120:1094-101.
3. 3. Hoeltge GA, Duckworth JK. Review of proficiency testing performance of laboratories accredited by the College of American Pathologists. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1987;111:1011-4.
4. 4. Klee GG, Forsman RW. A user's classification of problems identified by proficiency testing surveys. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1988; 112:371-3.
5. 5. Witte DL, Van Ness SA, Angstadt DS, Pennell BJ. Errors, mistakes, blunders, outliers, or unacceptable results: how many? Clin Chem 1997;43:1352-6.
6. 6. Plebani M, Carraro P. Mistakes in a stat laboratory: types and frequency. Clin Chem 1997;43:1348-51.
7. 7. Jenny RW, Jackson KY. Evaluation of the rigor and appropriateness of CLIA '88 toxicology proficiency testing standards. Clin Chem 1992;38:496-500.
8. 8. US Department of Health and Human Services. Medicare, Medicaid, and CLIA programs; regulations implementing the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA): final rule. Fed Regist 1992;57:7002-186.
9. 9. Montgomery DC. Introduction to statistical quality control, 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1991:101-44.
10. 10. Ehrmeyer SS, Laessig RH, Leinweber JE, Oryall JJ. 1990 Medicare/CLIA final rules for proficiency testing: minimum intralaboratory performance characteristics (CV and bias) needed to pass. Clin Chem 1990;36:1736-40.
11. 11. Garber CC, Witte DL. Quality for tomorrow: by design or by checking? Clin Chem 1997;43:864-5.
12. 12. Hinckley CM. Defining the best quality-control systems by design and inspection. Clin Chem 1997;43:873-9.
13. 13. Lasky FD, Boser RB. Designing in quality through design control: a manufacturer's perspective. Clin Chem 1997;43:866-72.
14. 14. Warner A, Privitera M, Bates D. Standards of laboratory practice: antiepileptic drug monitoring. Clin Chem 1998;44:1085-95.
15. 15. Pesce AJ, Rashkin M, Kotagal U. Standards of laboratory practice: theophylline and caffeine monitoring. Clin Chem 1998;44: 1124-8.
16. 16. Jenny RW. Analytical goals for determinations of theophylline concentration in serum. Clin Chem 1991;37:154-8.
17. 17. Fraser CG. Desirable standards of performance for therapeutic drug monitoring. Clin Chem 1987;33:387-9.
18. 18. Steindel SJ. Tetrault G. Quality control practices for calcium, cholesterol, digoxin, and hemoglobin: a College of American Pathologists Q-probes study in 505 hospital laboratories. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1998;122:401-8.
19. 19. Howanitz PJ, Tetrault GA, Steindel SJ. Clinical laboratory quality control: a costly process now out of control. Clin Chim Acta 1997;260:163-74.
20. 20. Cembrowski GS, Engebretson MJ, Hackney JR, Carey RN. A systems approach to assure optimal proficiency testing in the hematology laboratory. Clin Lab Med 1993;13:973-85.
21. 21. Cembrowski GS, Hackney JR, Carey N. The detection of problem analytes in a single proficiency test challenge in the absence of the Health Care Financing Administration rule violations. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1993;117:437-43.