The final part of the CRESS trilogy - how to evaluate the quality of stability studies.

High quality laboratory results are critical for patient management. However, poor sample quality can impact these results and patient safety. To ensure reliable and accurate results laboratories must be aware of each analyte's stability under various storage conditions and matrices to guarantee correct and dependable outcomes. This knowledge allows laboratories to define the allowable delay between sample collection and centrifugation/analysis for all analytes to guarantee appropriate results quality and interpretation. The EFLM WG-PRE therefore established a 4-step plan to tackle this issue, aiming to standardize and harmonize stability studies for improved comparison and meta-analysis. The plan included the development of checklists and how-to guides for performing and reporting stability studies as well as a central resource of stability data. This manuscript deals with the issue of evaluating publications and incorporating them into a central resource. To evaluate stability studies, the CRESS checklist was used to structure 20 sections used to judge the quality of studies. Each section has 4 levels of quality, with scores converted to numerical values and weighted based on expert opinion. Based on this, a final score ranging from A to D was determined. The procedure was then tested on six manuscripts and checked for agreement between expert judgements. The results demonstrated that the proposed evaluation process is a useful tool to distinguish between best in class manuscripts and those of lower quality. The EFLM WG-PRE strongly believes that the provided recommendations and checklists will help improving stability studies both in quality and standardisation.

Recommendation for the design of stability studies on clinical specimens.

OBJECTIVES: Knowledge of the stability of analytes in clinical specimens is a prerequisite for proper transport and preservation of samples to avoid laboratory errors. The new version of ISO 15189:2022 and the European directive 2017/746 increase the requirements on this topic for manufacturers and laboratories. Within the project to generate a stability database of European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE), the need to standardise and improve the quality of published stability studies has been detected, being a manifest deficit the absence of international guidelines for the performance of stability studies on clinical specimens. METHODS: These recommendations have been developed and summarised by consensus of the WG-PRE and are intended primarily to improve the quality of sample stability claims included in information for users provided by assay supplier companies, according to the requirements of the new European regulations and standards for accreditation. RESULTS: This document provides general recommendations for the performance of stability studies, oriented to the estimation of instability equations in the usual working conditions, allowing flexible adaptation of the maximum permissible error specifications to obtain stability limits adapted to the intended use. CONCLUSIONS: We present this recommendation based on the opinions of the EFLM WG-PRE group for the standardisation and improvement of stability studies, with the intention to improve the quality of the studies and the transferability of their results to laboratories.

Preanalytical quality improvement - an interdisciplinary journey, on behalf of the European Federation for Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE).

Since the beginning of laboratory medicine, the main focus was to provide high quality analytics. Over time the importance of the extra-analytical phases and their contribution to the overall quality became evident. However, as the initial preanalytical processes take place outside of the laboratory and mostly without its supervision, all professions participating in these process steps, from test selection to sample collection and transport, need to engage accordingly. Focusing solely on intra-laboratory processes will not be sufficient to achieve the best possible preanalytical quality. The Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) has provided several recommendations, opinion papers and scientific evidence over the past years, aiming to standardize the preanalytical phase across Europe. One of its strategies to reach this goal are educational efforts. As such, the WG-PRE has organized five conferences in the past decade with the sole focus on preanalytical quality. This year's conference mainly aims to depict the views of different professions on preanalytical processes in order to acquire common ground as basis for further improvements. This article summarizes the content of this 6th preanalytical conference.

A survey of practice in the management of haemolysis, icterus and lipaemia in blood specimens in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Haemolysis, icterus and lipaemia (HIL) are common interferants in laboratory medicine, potentially impacting patient care. This survey investigates HIL management in medical laboratories across the UK and Republic of Ireland (ROI). METHODS: A survey was sent to members of key professional organisations for laboratory medicine in the UK and ROI. Questions related to the detection, monitoring, quality control, and management of HIL. RESULTS: In total, responses from 124 laboratories were analysed, predominantly from England (52%) and ROI (36%). Most responses were from public hospitals with biochemistry services (90%), serving primary care (91%), inpatients (91%), and outpatients (89%). Most laboratories monitored H (98%), I (88%), and L (96%) using automated indices (93%), alone or in combination with visual inspection.Manufacturer-stated cut-offs were used by 83% and were applied to general chemistries in 79%, and immunoassays in 50%. Where HIL cut-offs are breached, 64% withheld results, while 96% reported interference to users. HIL were defined using numeric scales (70%) and ordinal scales (26%). HIL targets exist in 35% of laboratories, and 54% have attempted to reduce HIL. Internal Quality Control for HIL was lacking in 62% of laboratories, and just 18% of respondents have participated in External Quality Assurance. Laboratories agree manufacturers should: standardise HIL reporting (94%), ensure comparability between platforms (94%), and provide information on HIL cross-reactivity (99%). Respondents (99%) showed interest in evidence-based, standardised HIL cut-offs. CONCLUSIONS: Most respondents monitor HIL, although the wide variation in practice may differentially affect clinical care. Laboratories seem receptive to education and advice on HIL management.

The Relationship Between Intact Parathyroid Hormone and 25-Hydroxyvitamin D in United Kingdom Resident South Asians and Whites: A Comparative, Cross-Sectional Observational Study.

Ethnic differences in intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) at similar total 25 hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentrations have been reported between US resident Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics, but this has not been studied between South Asians and Whites. We, therefore, compared the iPTH relationship to 25(OH)D in UK resident South Asians and Whites. A comparative, cross-sectional observational study in which demographic and laboratory data on South Asian and White residents of Wolverhampton, UK were analyzed. Log-log models measured the association between 25(OH)D and the interaction term of ethnicity and iPTH. Seven hundred and seventy-two patients consisting of 315 white subjects (208 women) and 457 South Asian subjects (331 women) were studied. Compared to South Asians, White subjects were older, had higher serum concentrations of 25(OH)D, creatinine (lower eGFR), adjusted calcium and magnesium, but similar concentrations of iPTH and phosphate. In an adjusted model, variables significantly associated with 25(OH)D included age, creatinine, adjusted calcium and ethnicity; but not iPTH and the interaction term of ethnicity and iPTH (beta coefficient -0.071, 95% CI -0.209, 0.067, p=0.32). In our study cohort, iPTH was not, per se, influenced by 25 (OH)D. We found no ethnic differences in the association between iPTH and 25(OH)D between South Asians and White UK residents.

Clinicians' and laboratory medicine specialists' views on laboratory demand management: a survey in nine European countries.

BACKGROUND: Laboratory tests are an essential aspect of current medical practice and their use has grown exponentially. Several studies however have demonstrated inappropriate use of laboratory testing. This inappropriateness can lead to delayed or wrong diagnosis, negatively impacting patient safety and an increase in health care expenditure. The aim of the present small-scale survey was to obtain information on the current status of demand management in European laboratories, as well as the opinions of laboratory and clinical professionals in this regard. METHODS: Two surveys were developed, one for laboratory specialists and one for clinicians, covering information on current use, knowledge and opinions on the possible impact of different demand management strategies on patient outcome and health care costs. Additionally, we asked for the current state and willingness on collaboration of laboratory specialists and clinicians. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty responses, 72 laboratory specialists and 78 clinicians, from nine countries were received. Developing local ordering protocols/profiles in collaboration with clinicians was the most used strategy (80.3% of laboratories). Of clinicians, 85.6% considered measures to ensure appropriate use of tests necessary and 100% were interested in advice/information about their indication. Of the laboratory specialists 97.2% were either already participating or willing to participate in multidisciplinary groups on the appropriateness of test demand as were 60.3% of clinicians, and 85.9% of clinicians were interested in attending activities about laboratory test demand management. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our survey show that tools to improve the appropriate use of laboratory tests are already regularly used today. Laboratory medicine specialists as well as clinicians are willing to undertake additional shared activities aimed at improving patient-centered laboratory diagnostic workup.

The CRESS checklist for reporting stability studies: on behalf of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE).

To ensure that clinical laboratories produce results that are both accurate and of clinical utility it is essential that only samples of adequate quality are analysed. Although various studies and databases assessing the stability of analytes in different settings do exist, guidance on how to perform and report stability studies is lacking. This results in studies that often do not report essential information, thus compromising transferability of the data. The aim of this manuscript is to describe the Checklist for Reporting Stability Studies (CRESS) against which future studies should be reported to ensure standardisation of reporting and easy assessment of transferability of studies to other healthcare settings. The EFLM WG-PRE (European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase) produced the CRESS checklist following a detailed literature review and extensive discussions resulting in consensus agreement. The checklist consists of 20 items covering all the aspects that should be considered when producing a report on a stability study including details of what should be included for each item and a rationale as to why. Adherence to the CRESS checklist will ensure that studies are reported in a transparent and replicable way. This will allow other laboratories to assess whether published data meet the stability criteria required in their own particular healthcare scenario. The EFLM WG-PRE encourage researchers and authors to use the CRESS checklist as a guide to planning stability studies and to produce standardised reporting of future stability studies.

Inappropriate use of laboratory tests: How availability triggers demand - Examples across Europe.

INTRODUCTION: The appropriate use of laboratory diagnostics is increasingly at stake. The aim of this study was to depict some paradigmatic examples of under- and overutilization, as well as possible solutions across Europe. METHODS: We collected six examples from five European countries where a rise or decline of orders for specific laboratory parameters was observed after organizational changes but without evidence of changes in patient collective characteristics as source of this variation. RESULTS: The collected examples were the following: 1-Germany) Switch from a Brain-Natriuretic-Peptide assay to NT-pro Brain-Natriuretic-Peptide assay, resulting in a 374% increase in these analytics; 2-Spain) Implementation of a gatekeeping strategy in tumor marker diagnostics, resulting in a 15-61% reduction of these diagnostics; 3-Croatia) Stepwise elimination of creatine-kinase-MB assay from the laboratory portfolio; 4-UK) Removal of γ-glutamyl transferase from a "liver function" profile, resulting in 82% reduction of orders; 5-Austria) Implementation of a new device for rapid Influenza-RNA detection, resulting in a 450% increase of Influenza testing; 6-Spain) Insourcing of 1,25-(OH)2-Vitamin D measurements, leading to a 378% increase of these analyses. CONCLUSION: The six paradigmatic examples described in this manuscript show that availability of laboratory resources may considerably catalyze the demand, thus underscoring that inappropriate use of laboratory resources may be commonplace in routine laboratories all across Europe and most probably beyond. They also demonstrate that the application of simple strategies may assist in overcoming this issue. We believe that laboratory specialists need to refocus on the extra-analytical parts of the testing process and engage more in interdisciplinary patient-care.

Monitoring and capturing patient identification errors in laboratory medicine.

BACKGROUND: Specimen labelling and patient identification are significant contributors to the rate of error in the preanalytical phase of laboratory medicine. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and nature of preanalytical quality monitoring practices for patient identification and specimen labelling errors in Irish clinical laboratories. METHODS: A survey was developed by the Clinical Biochemistry Unit, Trinity College Dublin and the Irish External Quality Assessment Scheme (IEQAS), with the intention of gathering key information from each laboratory. Thirty-nine questions were organized into seven subsections covering general information, labelling requirements, information availability, rejection criteria, error monitoring, error reporting and interest in participation in an external quality assessment scheme. The survey was sent electronically to 63 laboratory quality managers at 55 laboratories in Ireland. RESULTS: A total of 39 responses (61% response rate) provided information on 94 separate laboratory departments or disciplines. Laboratories reported varying practices and requirements for labelling specimens and all accepted handwritten preprinted request forms. All (100%) respondents had defined rejection criteria both for specimen labelling and request form completion. Unsurprisingly, the rejection criteria differed between the various laboratory disciplines. Almost all respondents provided information to clinical staff on labelling requirements, but just over half provided training on the same. A large percentage of laboratories (74%) monitored the rate of specimen-labelling errors; however, only 46% had defined target limits for acceptable rates of error. CONCLUSION: The survey observed a wide variation in collection, recording and monitoring of errors but also confirmed significant interest in improving preanalytical monitoring and data collection.

Heparin and citrate additive carryover during blood collection.

Background Published evidence on the risk of additive carryover during phlebotomy remains elusive. We aimed to assess potential carryover of citrated and heparinized blood and the relative volume needed to bias clinical chemistry and coagulation tests. Methods We simulated standardized phlebotomies to quantify the risk of carryover of citrate and heparin additives in distilled water, using sodium and lithium as surrogates. We also investigated the effects of contamination of heparinized blood samples with increasing volumes of citrated blood and pure citrate on measurements of sodium, potassium, chloride, magnesium, total and ionized calcium and phosphate. Likewise, we studied the effects of contamination of citrated blood samples with increasing volumes of heparinized blood on heparin (anti-Xa) activity, lithium, activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), prothrombin time (PT) and thrombin time (TT). We interpreted these results based on measurement deviations beyond analytical, biological and clinical significance. Results Standardized phlebotomy simulations revealed no significant differences in concentration of surrogate markers. Clinically significant alterations were observed after contamination of heparinized blood samples with volumes of citrated blood beyond 5-50 µL for ionized calcium and beyond 100-1000 µL for sodium, chloride and total calcium. Investigations of pure citrate carryover revealed similar results at somewhat lower volumes. Heparinized blood carryover showed clinically significant interference of coagulation testing at volumes beyond 5-100 µL. Conclusions Our results suggest that during a standardized phlebotomy, heparin or citrate contamination is highly unlikely. However, smaller volumes are sufficient to severely alter test results when deviating from phlebotomy guidelines.

European survey on preanalytical sample handling - Part 1: How do European laboratories monitor the preanalytical phase? On behalf of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE).

INTRODUCTION: Compared to other activities of the testing process, the preanalytical phase is plagued by a lower degree of standardization, which makes it more vulnerable to errors. With the aim of providing guidelines and recommendations, the EFLM WG-PRE issued a survey across European medical laboratories, to gather information on local preanalytical practices. This is part one of two coherent articles, which covers all practices on monitoring preanalytical quality except haemolysis, icterus and lipemia (HIL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online survey, containing 39 questions dealing with a broad spectrum of preanalytical issues, was disseminated to EFLM member countries. The survey included questions on willingness of laboratories to engage in preanalytical issues. RESULTS: Overall, 1405 valid responses were received from 37 countries. 1265 (94%) responders declared to monitor preanalytical errors. Assessment, documentation and further use of this information varied widely among respondents and partially among countries. Many responders were interested in a preanalytical online platform, holding information on various aspects of the preanalytical phase (N = 1177; 87%), in a guideline for measurement and evaluation of preanalytical variables (N = 1235; 92%), and in preanalytical e-learning programs or webinars (N = 1125; 84%). Fewer responders were interested in, or already participating in, preanalytical EQA programs (N = 951; 71%). CONCLUSION: Although substantial heterogeneity was found across European laboratories on preanalytical phase monitoring, the interest in preanalytical issues was high. A large majority of participants indicated an interest in new guidelines regarding preanalytical variables and learning activities. This important data will be used by the WG-PRE for providing recommendations on the most critical issues.

European survey on preanalytical sample handling - Part 2: Practices of European laboratories on monitoring and processing haemolytic, icteric and lipemic samples. On behalf of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE).

INTRODUCTION: No guideline currently exists on how to detect or document haemolysis, icterus or lipemia (HIL) in blood samples, nor on subsequent use of this information. The EFLM WG-PRE has performed a survey for assessing current practices of European laboratories in HIL monitoring. This second part of two coherent articles is focused on HIL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online survey, containing 39 questions on preanalytical issues, was disseminated among EFLM member countries. Seventeen questions exclusively focused on assessment, management and follow-up actions of HIL in routine blood samples. RESULTS: Overall, 1405 valid responses from 37 countries were received. A total of 1160 (86%) of all responders stating to analyse blood samples - monitored HIL. HIL was mostly checked in clinical chemistry samples and less frequently in those received for coagulation, therapeutic drug monitoring and serology/infectious disease testing. HIL detection by automatic HIL indices or visual inspection, along with haemolysis cut-offs definition, varied widely among responders. A quarter of responders performing automated HIL checks used internal quality controls. In haemolytic/icteric/lipemic samples, most responders (70%) only rejected HIL-sensitive parameters, whilst about 20% released all test results with general comments. Other responders did not analysed but rejected the entire sample, while some released all tests, without comments. Overall, 26% responders who monitored HIL were using this information for monitoring phlebotomy or sample transport quality. CONCLUSION: Strategies for monitoring and treating haemolytic, icteric or lipemic samples are quite heterogeneous in Europe. The WG-PRE will use these insights for developing and providing recommendations aimed at harmonizing strategies across Europe.

[Joint EFLM-COLABIOCLI recommendation for venous blood sampling]. / Recommandations communes EFLM-COLABIOCLI relatives au prélèvement sanguin veineux.

This document provides a joint recommendation for venous blood sampling of the European federation of clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine (EFLM) Working Group for preanalytical phase (WG-PRE) and Latin American working group for preanalytical phase (WG-PRE-LATAM) of the Latin America confederation of clinical biochemistry (COLABIOCLI). It offers guidance on the requirements for ensuring that blood collection is a safe and patient-centered procedure and provides practical guidance on how to successfully overcome potential barriers and obstacles to its widespread implementation. The target audience for this recommendation are healthcare staff members directly involved in blood collection. This recommendation applies to the use of a closed blood collection system and does not provide guidance for the blood collection with an open needle and syringe and catheter collections. Moreover, this document neither addresses patient consent, test ordering, sample handling and transport nor collection from children and unconscious patients. The recommended procedure is based on the best available evidence. Each step was graded using a system that scores the quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendation. The process of grading was done at several face-to-face meetings involving the same mixture of stakeholders stated previously. The main parts of this recommendation are: 1) Pre-sampling procedures, 2) Sampling procedure, 3) Post-sampling procedures and 4) Implementation. A first draft of the recommendation was circulated to EFLM members for public consultation. WG-PRE-LATAM was also invited to comment the document. A revised version has been sent for voting on to all EFLM and COLABIOCLI members and has been officially endorsed by 33/40 EFLM and 21/21 COLABIOCLI members. We encourage professionals throughout Europe and Latin America to adopt and implement this recommendation to improve the quality of blood collection practices and increase patient and workers safety.

Sample transportation - an overview.

Transportation of blood samples is a major part of the preanalytical pathway and can be crucial in delaying laboratory results to the clinicians. A variety of aspects however makes sample transportation a complex, challenging and often overlooked task that needs thorough planning and dedicated resources. The purpose of this review is to outline the options available for this task and to emphasize the preanalytical aspects that need consideration in this process, e.g. performance specifications for sample transportation as stated in ISO standards 15189 and 20658, quality control of automated transportation systems, monitoring of sample integrity parameters and temperature surveillance in general and for external samplers in particular. All these are tasks that the laboratory must assure on a daily basis in terms of continuous quality control, and simultaneously the laboratory must remain alert to alterations in clinical demands (sample frequency, turn-around-times) and new regulations within this area (e.g. the recent General Data Protection Regulation from the EU).

Preanalytical challenges - time for solutions.

The European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) was originally established in 2013, with the main aims of (i) promoting the importance of quality in the preanalytical phase of the testing process, (ii) establishing best practices and providing guidance for critical activities in the preanalytical phase, (iii) developing and disseminating European surveys for exploring practices concerning preanalytical issues, (iv) organizing meetings, workshops, webinars or specific training courses on preanalytical issues. As education is a core activity of the WG-PRE, a series of European conferences have been organized every second year across Europe. This collective article summarizes the leading concepts expressed during the lectures of the fifth EFLM Preanalytical Conference "Preanalytical Challenges - Time for solutions", held in Zagreb, 22-23 March, 2019. The topics covered include sample stability, preanalytical challenges in hematology testing, feces analysis, bio-banking, liquid profiling, mass spectrometry, next generation sequencing, laboratory automation, the importance of knowing and measuring the exact sampling time, technology aids in managing inappropriate utilization of laboratory resources, management of hemolyzed samples and preanalytical quality indicators.

Blood sampling guidelines with focus on patient safety and identification - a review.

It has been well documented over recent years that the preanalytical phase is a leading contributor to errors in the total testing process (TTP). There has however been great progress made in recent years due to the exponential growth of working groups specialising in the field. Patient safety is clearly at the forefront of any healthcare system and any reduction in errors at any stage will improve patient safety. Venous blood collection is a key step in the TTP, and here we review the key errors that occur in venous phlebotomy process and summarise the evidence around their significance to patient safety. Recent studies have identified that patient identification and tube labelling are the steps that carry the highest risk with regard to patient safety. Other studies have shown that in 16.1% of cases, patient identification is incorrectly performed and that 56% of patient identification errors are due to poor labelling practice. We recommend that patient identification must be done using open questions and ideally three separate pieces of information. Labelling of the tube or linking the identity of the patient to the tube label electronically must be done in the presence of the patient whether it is before or after sampling. Combined this will minimise any chance of patient misidentification.

Managing inappropriate utilization of laboratory resources.

Background The inappropriate use of laboratory resources, due to excessive number of tests not really necessary for patient care or by failure to order the appropriate diagnostic test, may lead to wrong, missed or delayed diagnosis, thus potentially jeopardizing patient safety. It is estimated that 5-95% of tests are currently used inappropriately, depending on the appropriateness criteria, thus significantly contributing to the potential of generating medical errors, the third leading cause of death in the US. Content In this review, we discuss the reasons as well as the medical and financial consequences of inappropriate utilization of laboratory tests. We then provide demand management (DM) tools as a means for overcoming this issue and also discuss their benefits, challenges, limitations and requirements for successful implementation. Summary and outlook When based on current evidence, adapted to local conditions and developed in close collaboration with clinicians, DM is a reasonable strategy for progressing toward better management of over- and underuse of laboratory resources.

Joint EFLM-COLABIOCLI Recommendation for venous blood sampling

This document provides a joint recommendation for venous blood sampling of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) and Latin American Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE-LATAM) of the Latin America Confederation of Clinical Biochemistry (COLABIOCLI). It offers guidance on the requirements for ensuring that blood collection is a safe and patient-centered procedure and provides practical guidance on how to successfully overcome potential barriers and obstacles to its widespread implementation. The target audience for this recommendation are healthcare staff members directly involved in blood collection. This recommendation applies to the use of a closed blood collection system and does not provide guidance for the blood collection with an open needle and syringe and catheter collections. Moreover, this document neither addresses patient consent, test ordering, sample handling and transport nor collection from children and unconscious patients. The recommended procedure is based on the best available evidence. Each step was graded using a system that scores the quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendation. The process of grading was done at several face-to-face meetings involving the same mixture of stakeholders stated previously. The main parts of this recommendation are: 1) Pre-sampling procedures, 2) Sampling procedure, 3) Post-sampling procedures and 4) Implementation. A first draft of the recommendation was circulated to EFLM members for public consultation. WG-PRE-LATAM was also invited to comment the document. A revised version has been sent for voting on to all EFLM and COLABIOCLI members and has been officially endorsed by 33/40 EFLM and 21/21 COLABIOCLI members. We encourage professionals throughout Europe and Latin America to adopt and implement this recommendation to improve the quality of blood collection practices and increase patient and workers safety.