ABSTRACT
The ISO 15189 accreditation of biological analysis requires the presence of interpretation in the analysis report. The interpretation in the field of autoimmunity which includes many analyses and methods can be complex for biologists who may not have clinical data and for clinicians who may not be aware of technical difficulties. The French group of the european group EASI (European autoimmunity standardisation initiative) proposes a list of comments and advice in order to help biologists when interpreting auto-immune analyses results in several situations. These comments should be adapted to the clinical and biological situation (other biological results, clinical data ) and should alert the clinician. A dialogue between the biologist and the clinician is essential to adjust the interpretation on clinical data in order to provide a better health care for the patient.
Subject(s)
Accreditation , Autoimmunity , Humans , Reference StandardsABSTRACT
The ISO 15189 accreditation of biological analysis needs the validation of the analytical methods allowing the evaluation of their performance including all the factors that could influence the quality of their results. The field of autoimmunity includes many analyses and methods such as the indirect immunofluorescence technique (IIF) and the performance of this technique largely depends on the competency of staff members. For each staff member, the required levels of competency have to be precisely defined and evaluated after a period of formation before the final habilitation for the IIF technique. The French group of the international group called EASI (European autoimmunity standardisation initiative) proposes two habilitation forms to be filled with criteria, evidence and maintenance of target skills for the IIF preparation of slides and reading. These forms could be used as a model for the IIF formation and habilitation and have to be adapted to the routine practice of the laboratories.
Subject(s)
Autoimmune Diseases/diagnosis , Education, Continuing/standards , Immunologic Techniques/standards , Laboratories/standards , Professional Competence/standards , Accreditation , Autoimmune Diseases/immunology , Autoimmunity/physiology , Diagnostic Tests, Routine/standards , Education, Continuing/methods , Education, Continuing/organization & administration , Education, Professional, Retraining/methods , Education, Professional, Retraining/organization & administration , Education, Professional, Retraining/standards , Fluorescent Antibody Technique, Indirect/methods , Fluorescent Antibody Technique, Indirect/standards , France , Humans , Reference Standards , Societies, Scientific/organization & administration , Societies, Scientific/standards , Validation Studies as TopicABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: ISO 15189 accreditation remains a challenge for specialized laboratories. In the field of autoimmunity, beside the crucial problem of absence of standardization, laboratories have to manage the analytical performances of the large panel of assays in terms of sensitivity and specificity, but also on their measurement precision for which no reference values are available on biorepositories. METHODS: As an initiative of the French EASI (European Autoimmunity Standardization Initiative) group, French clinical diagnostic laboratories were requested to participate in a survey aiming to analyze the coefficients of variation (CVs) of intra-run and inter-run variability obtained with assays quantifying 14 different autoantibodies. Two performance goals corresponding to the 90th percentile and the 50th percentile (lowest CV values reached by 90% and 50% of laboratories respectively) defined for three levels of concentration were calculated. The impact on the assay performances of the number of measurements, of the nature of the internal quality control (IQC) and the type of immunoassay, was also analyzed. RESULTS: 414 and 616 values of intra-run and inter-run CVs were collected, respectively. The 50th percentile performance goals were comprised between 1.0% and 8.9% for the intra-run CVs, and between 1.8% and 14.6% for the inter-run CVs. At 90th percentile, the performance goals were comprised between 3.2% and 13.5% for the intra-run CVs, and between 7.3% and 30.8% for the inter-run CVs. CVs calculated from 10 values were similar to those obtained from more values. Higher imprecision was observed when the antibody levels of the IQC was lower than 2 fold the positive threshold. Commercial IQCs gave lower CVs than IQCs derived from patient samples. CONCLUSION: Our results allow proposing some acceptability limits for the precision performances of the autoantibody assays, compatible with the reality of life in diagnostic laboratories and clinical care.
