Recommendations for the application and follow-up of quality controls in medical laboratories.

This is a translation of the paper "Recommendations for the application and follow-up of quality controls in medical biology laboratories" published in French in the journal Annales de Biologie Clinique (Recommandations pour la mise en place et le suivi des contrôles de qualité dans les laboratoires de biologie médicale. Ann Biol Clin (Paris). 2019;77:577-97.). The recommendations proposed in this document are the result of work conducted jointly by the Network of Accredited Medical Laboratories (LABAC), the French Society of Medical Biology (SFBC) and the Federation of Associations for External Quality Assessment (FAEEQ). The different steps of the implementation of quality controls, based on a risk analysis, are described. The changes of reagent or internal quality control (IQC) materials batches, the action to be taken in case of non-conform IQC results, the choice of external quality assessment (EQA) scheme and interpretation of their results as well as the new issue of analyses performed on several automatic systems available in the same laboratory are discussed. Finally, the concept of measurement uncertainty, the robustness of the methods as well as the specificities of near-patient testing and rapid tests are described. These recommendations cannot apply for all cases we can find in medical laboratories. The implementation of an objective alternative strategy, supported with documented evidence, might be equally considered.

[Recommendations for the application and the follow-up of quality controls in medical biology laboratories]. / Recommandations pour la mise en place et le suivi des contrôles de qualité dans les laboratoires de biologie médicale.

The recommendations that we formulate in this document come from LABAC, SFBC and FAEEQ. They describe the different steps from the initial application of quality controls, based on risk analysis: the changes of reagent batches or internal quality controls (IQC) batches, the course when IQC are not in accordance with references, the choice of external quality evaluation and the interpretation of its results, the comparability of results obtained in several analysers used in the same laboratory. Lastly, measurement uncertainty, robustness of methods and specificities of near-patient biology and rapid tests are described. Note that these recommendations cannot develop all cases that we could find in laboratories. It remains necessary to carry out an objective strategy, supported with documentary evidences.

Pre-analytical effects of pneumatic tube system transport on routine haematology and coagulation tests, global coagulation assays and platelet function assays.

INTRODUCTION: Pneumatic tube system (PTS) in hospitals is commonly used for the transport of blood samples to clinical laboratories, as it is rapid and cost-effective. The aim was to compare the effects on haematology samples of a newly acquired ~2km-long PTS that links 2 hospitals with usual transport (non-pneumatic tube system, NPTS). METHODS: Complete blood cell count, routine coagulation assays, platelet function tests (PFT) with light-transmission aggregometry and global coagulation assays including ROTEM® and thrombin generation assay (TGA) were performed on blood samples from 30 healthy volunteers and 9 healthy volunteers who agreed to take aspirin prior to blood sampling. RESULTS: The turnaround time was reduced by 31% (p<0.001) with the use of PTS. No statistically significant difference was observed for most routine haematology assays including PFT, and ROTEM® analysis. A statistically significant, but not clinically relevant, shortening of the APTT after sample transport by PTS was found (mean±SD: 30s±1.8 vs. 29.5s±2.1 for NPTS). D-dimer levels were 7.4% higher after transport through PTS but were not discordant. A statistically significant increase of thrombin generation was found in both platelet poor- and platelet rich- plasma samples after PTS transport compared to NPTS transport. CONCLUSION: PTS is suitable for the transport of samples prior to routine haematology assays including PFT, but should not be used for samples intended for thrombin generation measurement.

Disk Diffusion Testing for Detection of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococci: Does Moxalactam Improve upon Cefoxitin?

Disk diffusion testing is widely used to detect methicillin resistance in staphylococci, and cefoxitin is currently considered the best marker for mecA-mediated methicillin resistance. In low-inoculum diffusion testing (colony suspension at 106 CFU/ml), the addition of moxalactam in combination with cefoxitin has been reported to improve on cefoxitin alone for the detection of methicillin-heteroresistant staphylococci. However, moxalactam is absent from EUCAST and CLSI guidelines, which use high-inoculum diffusion testing (colony suspension at 108 CFU/ml), calling into question the potential interest of including moxalactam in their recommendations. The inhibition zone diameters of cefoxitin and moxalactam, alone and in combination, were evaluated for concordance with mecA and mecC positivity in a large collection of clinical Staphylococcus isolates (611 Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus lugdunensis, and Staphylococcus saprophyticus isolates and 307 coagulase-negative staphylococci other than S. lugdunensis and S. saprophyticus isolates, of which 22% and 53% were mecA-positive, respectively) and in 25 mecC-positive S. aureus isolates using high-inoculum diffusion testing. Receiver operating characteristic, sensitivity, and specificity analyses indicated that the detection of mecA- and mecC-positive and negative isolates did not improve with moxalactam, either alone or in combination with cefoxitin, compared to cefoxitin alone. These findings were similar in both the S. aureus/S. lugdunensis/S. saprophyticus group and in the coagulase-negative staphylococci group. Our results do not support the use of moxalactam as an additional marker of methicillin resistance when testing with high-inoculum disk diffusion.