Quality control review: implementing a scientifically based quality control system

Annals of Clinical Biochemistry

Volumn 53, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 32-50

  Westgard, James O ^a   Westgard, Sten A ^a  

^a Westgard QC Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Quality control; quality management; Six Sigma

Indexed keywords

MEASUREMENT ERROR; MONITORING; PLANNING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; VALIDATION STUDY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; LABORATORY TEST; PROCEDURES; STATISTICS;

CLINICAL LABORATORY TECHNIQUES; HUMANS; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; STATISTICS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84950327173     PISSN: 00045632     EISSN: 17581001     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0004563215597248     Document Type: Review

References (63)

1. J.O.Westgard. Internal quality control: planning and implementation strategies. Ann Clin Biochem2003; 40: 593–611.
2. ISO 15189. Medical laboratories – requirements for quality and competence, Geneva: ISO, 2012.
3. US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Medicare, medicaid, and CLIA programs: laboratory requirements relating to quality systems and certain personnel qualifications. Final Rule. Fed Regist2003; 16: 3650–3714.
4. M.Plebani. The CCLM contribution to improvements in quality and patient safety. Clin Chem Lab Med2013; 51: 39–46.
5. N.JassamJ.Yundt-PachecoJ.Jansen. Can current analytical quality performance in UK laboratories support evidence-based guidelines for diabetes and ischaemic heart disease? A pilot study and a proposal. Clin Chem Lab Med2013; 51: 1579–1584.
6. J.Nillson Orsini. The essential Deming: leadership principles from the father of quality W. Edwards Deming, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2013.
7. D.Burnett. A Practical guide to ISO 15189 in laboratory medicine, London: ACB Ventures Publications, 2013.
8. J.O.WestgardS.A.Westgard. Basic quality management systems, Madison WI: Westgard QC, Inc., 2014.
9. J.O.WestgardJ.J.SeehaferP.L.Barry. Allowable imprecision for laboratory tests based on clinical and analytical test outcome criteria. Clin Chem1994; 40: 1909–1914.
10. American Diabetes Association. Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes – 2013. Diabetes Care2013; 36: S11–S66.
11. NGSP website. www.ngsp.org (accessed 5 April 2015)
12. CLSI EP27. How to construct and interpret an error grid for diagnostic assays, Wayne PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2009.
13. P.H.PetersenC.G.FraserA.KallnerD.Kenny. Special issue: strategies to set global analytical quality specifications in laboratory medicine. Scand J Clin Lab Invest1999; 59: 473–585.
14. S.SandbergC.G.FraserA.R.Horvath. Defining analytical performance specifications: consensus statement from the 1st strategic conference of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Clin Chem Lab Med2015; 53: 833–835.
15. Special issue: 1st EFLM Strategic Conference Defining analytical performance goals – 15 years after the Stockholm conference. Clin Chem Lab Med 2015; 53: 829–958
16. A.K.AarsandT.RoraasS.Sandberg. Biological variation – reliable data is essential. Clin Chem Lab Med2015; 53: 153–154.
17. M.PlebaniA.PadoanL.Giuseppe. Biological variation: back to basic. Clin Chem Lab Med2015; 53: 155–156.
18. W.P.Oosterhuis. Gross overestimation of total allowable error based on biological variation. Clin Chem2011; 57: 1334–1336.
19. C.G.FraserH.Petersen. Quality goals in external quality assessment are best based on biology. Scand J Clin Lab Invest1993; 53(Suppl 212): 8–9.
20. E.M.S.GowansP.H.PetersenO.Blassbjerg. Analytical goals for the acceptance of common reference intervals for laboratories throughout a geographical area. Scand J Clin Lab Invest1988; 48: 757–764.
21. C.RicosV.AlverezF.Cava. Current databases on biologic variation. Scand J Clin Lab Invest1999; 59: 491–500.
22. W.P.OosterhuisS.Sandberg. Proposal for the modification of the conventional model for establishing performance specifications. Clin Chem Lab Med2015; 53: 925–937.
23. Westgard Web. Survey on use of analytical goals, www.westgard.com/global-goal-results.htm (accessed 1 July 2015)
24. EN/ISO 17511. In Vitro diagnostic medical devices. Measurement of quantities in biological samples; Metrological traceability of values assigned to calibrator and control materials, Geneva: ISO, 2002.
25. L.M.ThienpontK.Van UtfangheD.R.Cabaleiro. Metrological traceability of calibration in the estimation and use of common medical decision-making criteria. Clin Chem Lab Med2004; 42: 842–850.
26. NGSP website, www.ngsp.org (accessed 1 December 2014)
27. W.G.MillerG.L.MyersM.L.Gantzer. Roadmap for harmonization of clinical laboratory measurement procedures. Clin Chem2011; 57: 1108–1117.
28. ISO 14971. Medical devices – application of risk management to medical devices, Geneva: ISO, 2007.
29. CLSI EP5A2. Evaluation of precision performance of quantitative measurement methods, Wayne PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2004.
30. CLSI EP9A3. Measure procedure comparison and bias estimation using patient samples, Wayne PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2013.
31. J.O.Westgard. Basic method validation, 3rd edn. [Chapter 16]. Madison WI: Westgard QC, Inc., 2008.
32. A.CoskunJ.SerteserM.Kilercik. A new approach to calculating the Sigma Metric in clinical laboratories. Accred Qual Assur2015; 20: 147–152.
33. E.Lenters-WestraR.J.Slingerland. Three of 7 hemoglobin A1c point-of-care instruments do not meet generally accepted analytical performance criteria. Clin Chem2014; 60: 1062–1072.
34. CLSI EP23A. Laboratory quality control based on risk management, Wayne PA: Clinical & Laboratory Standards Institute, 2011.
35. S.A.Westgard. Prioritizing risk analysis quality control plans based on sigma-metrics. Clin Lab Med2013; 33: 41–53.
36. J.O.Westgard. Statistical quality control procedures. Clin Lab Med2013; 33: 111–124.
37. CLSI C24A3. Statistical quality control for quantitative measurement procedurs, Wayne PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2006.
38. A.WoodworthN.Korpi-SteinerJ.J.Miller. Utilization of assay performance characteristics to estimate hemoglobin A1c result reliability. Clin Chem2014; 60: 1073–1079.
39. L.KuchipudiJ.Yundt-PacheoC.A.Parvin. Abstract: computing a patient-based sigma metric. Clin Chem2010; 56: A35.
40. F.CeriottiD.BrugnoniS.Mattioli. How to define a significant deviation from the expected internal quality control result. Clin Chem Lab Med2015; 53: 913–918.
41. US Department of Health and Human Services. Individualized Quality Control Plan: A Step-by-Step Guide for Developing an IQCP. Atlanta GA: CDC, www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Legislation/CLIA/Downloads/IQCP-Workbook.pdf (2015, accessed 1 July 2015)
42. J.O.Westgard. Six Sigma risk analysis, Madison WI: Westgard QC, Inc., 2011.
43. J.K.FlemingA.Katayev. Changing the paradigm of laboratory quality control through implementation of real-time test results monitoring: for patients by patients. Clin Biochem2015; 48: 508–513.
44. M.A.Cervinski. Hitting a moving target: opportunities and challenges in using moving averages quality control. Clin Lab News2014. Nov: 4–5.
45. R.G.HoffmanM.E.Waid. The average of normal-method of quality control. Am J Clin Pathol1955; 43: 134–141.
46. G.S.CembrowskiE.P.ChandlerJ.O.Westgard. Assessment of average of normal-quality control procedures and guidelines for implementation. Am J Clin Pathol1984; 81: 492–499.
47. J.O.WestgardF.A.SmithP.J.Mountain. Design and assessment of average of normal (AON) patient data algorithms to maximize run lengths for automatic process control. Clin Chem1996; 42: 1683–1688.
48. W.G.MillerA.ErekT.D.Cunningham. Commutability limitations influence quality control results with different reagent lots. Clin Chem2011; 57: 76–83.
49. CLSI EP26A. User evaluation of between-reagent lot variation, Wayne PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2013.
50. C.Parvin. Assessing the impact of frequency of quality control testing on the quality of reported patient results. Clin Chem2008; 54: 2049–2054.
51. J.Yundt-PachecoC.Parvin. Validating the performance of QC procedures. Clin Lab Med2013; 33: 75–88.
52. C.H.H.SchoenmarkersA.J.M.NausH.J.Vermeer. Practical application of sigma metrics QC procedures in clinical chemistry. Clin Chem Lab Med2011; 49: 1837–1843.
53. H.KinnsS.PitkinD.Housley. Internal quality control: best practice. J Clin Pathol2013; 66: 1027–1032.
54. GUM. Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement, Geneva: ISO, 1995.
55. J.O.Westgard. Managing quality vs. measuring uncertainty in the medical laboratory. Clin Chem Lab Med2010; 48: 31–40.
56. J.O.WestgardS.A.Westgard. The quality of laboratory testing today: an assessment of σ metrics for analytic quality using performance data from proficiency testing surveys and the CLIA criteria for acceptable performance. Am J Clin Pathol2006; 125: 343–354.
57. J.O.WestgardS.A.Westgard. Assessing quality on the sigma scale from proficiency testing and external quality assessment surveys. Clin Chem Lab Med. Epub ahead of print 11 February 2015. DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2014-1241.
58. C.WeykampG.JohnP.Gillery. Investigation of 2 models to set and evaluate quality targets for HbA1c: Biological variation and sigma-metrics. Clin Chem2015; 61: 752–759.
59. CLSI GP35A. Development and use of quality indicators for process improvement and monitoring of laboratory quality, Wayne PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2010.
60. D.NevalainenL.BerteC.Kraft. Evaluating laboratory performance on quality indicators with the six sigma scale. Arch Pathol Lab Med2000; 124: 516–519.
61. M.PlebaniL.SciacovelliA.Aita. Performance criteria and quality indicators for the pre-analytical phase. Clin Chem Lab Med2015; 53: 943–948.
62. K.Sikaris. Performance criteria of the post-analytical phase. Clin Chem Lab Med2015; 53: 949–958.
63. Berwick D. A promise to learn – a commitment to act: improving the safety of patients in England. National Advisory Group on the Safety of Patients in England, August, 2013