No abstract

External Quality Assurance (EQA) is vital to ensure acceptable analytical quality in medical laboratories. A key component of an EQA scheme is an analytical performance specification (APS) for each measurand that a laboratory can use to assess the extent of deviation of the obtained results from the target value. A consensus conference held in Milan in 2014 has proposed three models to set APS and these can be applied to setting APS for EQA. A goal arising from this conference is the harmonisation of EQA APS between different schemes to deliver consistent quality messages to laboratories irrespective of location and the choice of EQA provider. At this time there are wide differences in the APS used in different EQA schemes for the same measurands. Contributing factors to this variation are that the APS in different schemes are established using different criteria, applied to different types of data (e.g. single data points, multiple data points), used for different goals (e.g. improvement of analytical quality; licensing), and with the aim of eliciting different responses from participants. This paper provides recommendations from the European Federation of Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Task and Finish Group on Performance Specifications for External Quality Assurance Schemes (TFG-APSEQA) and on clear terminology for EQA APS. The recommended terminology covers six elements required to understand APS: 1) a statement on the EQA material matrix and its commutability; 2) the method used to assign the target value; 3) the data set to which APS are applied; 4) the applicable analytical property being assessed (i.e. total error, bias, imprecision, uncertainty); 5) the rationale for the selection of the APS; and 6) the type of the Milan model(s) used to set the APS. The terminology is required for EQA participants and other interested parties to understand the meaning of meeting or not meeting APS.

Our objective was to evaluate performance of the clinical laboratories for the detection of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) by using indirect immunofluorescence method (IIF), in France. A national external quality assessment (EQA) on ANA detection was organized by the French health products safety agency once a year since 1998. Between 606 to 687 laboratories together with six university reference laboratories experienced in performing tests in autoimmunity participated in the six-year consecutive survey. Each laboratory had to answer to methodological procedures and give coded responses. Variability in IIF methodological procedure was observed. Use of inappropriate microscope magnifications for reading slides or nonconventional cutoff dilution of serum were pointed out to concerned laboratories. Concerning ANA measurement, the rate of good responses ranged from 92.7% to 99.5% of the laboratories when the samples contained ANA. A wide dispersion of ANA titers obtained on a same sample was repeatly observed every year. Misinterpretation of particular fluorescence pattern was noticed. On ANA negative sample, the rate of good responses was 94.3%. In conclusion, ANA detection in routine practice is far from being standardized. However, EQA may have an impact on ANA detection performance when it is conducted on several consecutive year surveys, by providing advice for participating laboratories to limit inter laboratory variations related to methodological procedures.

Blood smear analysis is a well known technique in medical laboratories. Clinical relevance of this analysis and its interpretation are very important. Consequently, monitoring of laboratory performance by an external quality assessment scheme is strongly recommended. Most starting external quality organizers set up a scheme for clinical chemistry. Due to a lack of guidance documents, many organizers are reluctant to offer a hematology scheme. This article aims to be a very practical guidance document for external quality assessment organizers for the set up of blood smear schemes.

External Quality Assessment (EQA) schemes are national or transnational programmes designed to control the analytical performance of clinical laboratories and to maintain inter-laboratory variability within acceptable limits. In such EQA programmes, participants are usually grouped by the type of assay technique/equipment they use. The coefficient of variation (CV) is a simple tool for comparing the inter-laboratory reproducibility of such techniques: the lower the CV, the better the analytical performance.Serum protein electrophoresis, a laboratory test profile consisting of five fractions (albumin, α 1 , α 2 , β and γ globulins) summing up to 100% of total proteins, can also be assayed in different ways depending on the media or the analytical principle. We propose a multivariate coefficient of variation for comparing the performance of electrophoretic techniques in EQA, thus extending the univariate CV concept. First, the compositional nature of electrophoretic data requires a one-to-one transformation from the 5-dimensional to the 4-dimensional space.Next, robust estimations of the mean and the covariance matrix are needed to avoid the effect of outliers. The new approach is illustrated on electrophoretic datasets from the French and Belgian national EQA programmes.