Point of care testing in Croatia: a survey of the Working group for point of care testing of the Croatian society of medical biochemistry and laboratory medicine.

Introduction: The aim of this study was to investigate attitudes and routine procedures in point of care testing (POCT) among non-laboratory and laboratory healthcare professionals in Croatia. Materials and methods: The Working Group (WG) for POCT of the Croatian society of medical biochemistry and laboratory medicine has designed two anonymous surveys for laboratory staff and non-laboratory staff with a total of 44 questions/statements on POCT (27 questions for non-laboratory staff and 17 for laboratory staff). Surveys were sent to 184 medical biochemistry laboratory (MBL) managers, the Croatian medical chamber and the Croatian chamber of nurses. The survey was disseminated using the online survey platform SurveyMonkey. Results: A total of 112 non-laboratory healthcare professionals and 50 laboratories participated in the survey, which represents a response rate of 0.25% for non-laboratory professionals and 27% for MBLs. The majority of non-laboratory staff stated that POCT enables better medical care for the patient (90/112) and that the implementation of new POCT devices should be the responsibility of a POCT team comprising laboratory and clinical healthcare professionals. The great majority of responding MBLs (42/50) acknowledge that POCT is necessary for better patient care, and also realize that validation of POCT devices and comparison to the central laboratory is necessary before implementation (49/50). Conclusions: The majority of participants consider POCT as a medical tool that enables better patient care but there is still a lack of communication between laboratory and clinical staff. The study identified some critical spots that will help to create national guidelines to ensure high patient safety when using POCT devices.

Analytical validation of 39 clinical chemistry tests and 17 immunoassays on the Alinity analytical system.

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.