RESUMEN
The aim of this study was to perform the analytical validation of Alinity c and i analyzers (Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL, USA) for 39 clinical chemistry tests and 17 immunoassays. Precision was evaluated at least at two concentration levels for 5 days in quintuplicate, following CLSI EP15-A3. Method comparison included parallel analysis of leftover routine samples on Alinity analyzers and the previously used Cobas c501 and e601 (Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany). Linearity was tested by preparing sequential sample dilutions with high analyte concentration, following the CLSI EP6 document. For clinical chemistry tests, within-run coefficients of variation (CV) were up to 6.0% (beta-2-microglobulin), while between-run CVs up to 5.4% (immunoglobulin M). Among immunoassays, the highest within-run CV was obtained for vitamin B12 (6.9%), while between-run for CA 19-9 (4.3%). Complete agreement with Roche analyzers was observed for 16 (41%) clinical chemistry assays and 6 (35%) immunoassays. Half of all evaluated assays did not meet the desirable biological variation criteria for bias, being especially exceeded for alpha1-antitrypsin, apolipoprotein A1, ceruloplasmin, complement C3 and C4, hemoglobin A1c, lipoprotein (a) and myoglobin, as well as some tumor markers (CA 125, CEA, fPSA, AFP, and ferritin), hormones (cortisol, DHEA-S, insulin) and vitamins (25-OHD). Linearity in the tested ranges was confirmed. Overall, this study revealed that precision criteria derived from manufacturer's claims were not satisfied for all assays while comparison study for some assays yielded differences that imply the need for additional assay evaluation prior to introduction into routine practice.
Asunto(s)
Pruebas de Química Clínica , Vitamina B 12 , Ferritinas , Hemoglobina Glucada , Humanos , Inmunoensayo/métodosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare the analytical performances of the enzymatic method (EM) and capillary electrophoresis (CE) for hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) measurement. METHODS: Imprecision, carryover, stability, linearity, method comparison, and interferences were evaluated for HbA1c via EM (Abbott Laboratories, Inc) and CE (Sebia). RESULTS: Both methods have shown overall within-laboratory imprecision of less than 3% for International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC) units (<2% National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program [NGSP] units). Carryover effects were within acceptable criteria. The linearity of both methods has proven to be excellent (R2 = 0.999). Significant proportional and constant difference were found for EM, compared with CE, but were not clinically relevant (<5 mmol/mol; NGSP <0.5%). At the clinically relevant HbA1c concentration, stability observed with both methods was acceptable (bias, <3%). Triglyceride levels of 8.11 mmol per L or greater showed to interfere with EM and fetal hemoglobin (HbF) of 10.6% or greater with CE. CONCLUSION: The enzymatic method proved to be comparable to the CE method in analytical performances; however, certain interferences can influence the measurements of each method.
Asunto(s)
Electroforesis Capilar/normas , Pruebas de Enzimas/métodos , Pruebas de Enzimas/normas , Hemoglobina Glucada/análisis , Electroforesis Capilar/métodos , Humanos , Modelos Lineales , Reproducibilidad de los ResultadosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: This pilot study aimed to investigate the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) and compliance to the code of conduct (rules defined in institutional, governmental and professional guidelines) among laboratory technicians in Croatian medical laboratories. In addition, we explored the differences in compliance between participants of different age groups, laboratory ownership and accreditation status. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An anonymous and voluntary survey with 15 questions was conducted among Croatian medical laboratory technicians (N=217). The questions were divided into two groups: demographic characteristics and the use of PPE. The questions of the second part were graded according to the Likert scale (1-4) and an overall score, shown as median and range (min-max), was calculated for each participant. Differences between the overall scores were tested for each group of participants. RESULTS: The majority of participants always wear protective clothes at work, 38.7% of them always wear gloves in daily routine, more than 30.0% consume food and almost half of them drink beverages at workplace. A significantly lower overall score was found for participants working in public compared to private laboratories (36 (16-40) vs. 40 (31-40), P<0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in overall scores for participants of different age groups (P=0.456) and laboratory accreditation status (P=0.081). CONCLUSION: A considerable percentage of laboratory technicians in Croatian medical laboratories do not comply with safety measures. Lack of compliance is observed in all personnel regardless laboratory accreditation and participants' age. However, those working in private laboratories adhere more to the code of conduct.