Analytical Performance Specifications. Relating Laboratory Performance to Quality Required for Intended Clinical Use.

Clinics in Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 55-73

  Dalenberg, Daniel A ^a   Schryver, Patricia G ^a   Klee, George G ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

Analytical bias; Analytical performance goals; Analytical precision; Detection limit; Linearity; Roche cobas 8000

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ANALYTIC METHOD; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CLINICAL LABORATORY; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; LABORATORY TEST; LIMIT OF DETECTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

CLINICAL CHEMISTRY TESTS; HUMANS; LABORATORIES; LIMIT OF DETECTION; LINEAR MODELS; MEDICAL LABORATORY SCIENCE; MODELS, THEORETICAL; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; QUALITY CONTROL;

EID: 84872450429     PISSN: 02722712     EISSN: 15579832     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cll.2012.11.005     Document Type: Review

References (25)

1. Middle J.G., Kane J.W. Oestradiol assays: fitness for purpose?. Ann Clin Biochem 2009, 46:441-456.
2. Thompson M., Ellison S.L., Wood R. Harmonized guidelines for single laboratory validation of methods of analysis (IUPAC technical report). Pure Appl Chem 2002, 74(5):835-855.
3. Tate J., Panteghini M. Standardisation - the theory and the practice. Clin Biochem Rev 2007, 28:127-130.
4. BIVDA. Directive 98/79/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 1998 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices. Official Journal of the European Communities 1998;41:L331/331-L331/337.
5. BIVDA. Revision of Directive 98/79/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 1998 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices. Public consultation. European Commission, Health and Consumers Directorate-General. Official Journal of the European Communities 2010(June 2010).
6. BIVDA. Revision of Directive 98/79/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 1998 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices. Summary responses to the Public Consultation. European Commission, Health and Consumers Directorate-General. Official Journal of the European Communities 2011.
7. Jhang J.S., Chang C.C., Fink D.J., et al. Evaluation of linearity in the clinical laboratory. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2004, 128(1):44-48.
8. Evaluation of the linearity of quantitative measurement procedures: a statistical approach; approved guideline, EP06-A 2003, vol. 23. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute.
9. 2012 Calibration verification/linearity program user's guide 2012, CAP, College of American Pathologist, Northfield.
10. Westgard JO. The meaning and application of total error. [World Wide Web]. 2007. Available at: . Accessed October 5, 2012. http://www.westgard/essay111.htm.
11. Kroll M.H., Praestgaard J., Michaliszyn E., et al. Evaluation of the extent of nonlinearity in reportable range studies. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000, 124(9):1331-1338.
12. Kroll M.H., Emancipator K. A theoretical evaluation of linearity. Clin Chem 1993, 39(3):405-413.
13. Emancipator K., Kroll M. A quantitative measure of nonlinearity. Clin Chem 1993, 39(5):766-772.
14. Young D., Friedman R. Effects of disease on clinical laboratory tests 2001, vols. 1 and 2. AACC Press, Washington, DC. 4th edition.
15. Fraser C.G., Petersen P.H. Analytical performance characteristics should be judged against objective quality specifications. Clin Chem 1999, 45(3):321-323.
16. Ricos C., Alvarez V., Cava F., et al. Current databases on biologic variation: pros, cons and progress. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1999, 59(7):491-500.
17. Westgard JO. Desirable specifications for total error, imprecision, and bias, derived from intra- and inter-individual biologic variation. 2012. Available at: . Accessed October 5, 2012. http://www.westgard.com/biodatabase1.htm.
18. Klee G., Schryver P., Kisabeth R. Analytic bias specifications based on the analysis of effects on performance of medical guidelines. Scand J Clin Lab Invest 1999, 59(7):509-512.
19. Klee G.G. A conceptual model for establishing tolerance limits for analytic bias and imprecision based on variations in population test distributions. Clin Chim Acta 1997, 260(2):175-188.
20. Klee G.G. Establishment of outcome-related analytic performance goals. Clin Chem 2010, 56(5):714-722.
21. The guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement 1993, International Organization for Standardization, Geneve, Switzerland. 1st edn. BIPM (Ed.).
22. Smolcic V., Bilic-Zulle L., Fisic E. Validation of methods performance for routine biochemistry analytes at cobas 6000 analyzer series module C501. Biochem Med 2011, 21(2):182-190.
23. Bowling J., Katayev A. An evaluation of the Roche cobas C111. Lab Med 2010, 41(7):398-402.
24. Cattozzo G., Albeni C., Calonaci A., et al. Evaluation of the analytical performance of the Beckman Coulter AU680 automated analytical system based on quality specifications for allowable performance derived from biological variation. Clin Chem Lab Med 2011, 49(9):1563-1567.
25. Ilenia I., Braga F., Mozzi R., et al. Is the accuracy of serum albumin measurements suitable for clinical application of the test?. Clin Chim Acta 2011, 412(9-10):791-792.