External quality assessment of urine analysis in Europe

Guder, W. G.; Boisson, Renée-Claude; Fogazzi, Giovanni B.; Galimany, R.; Kouri, Timo; Malakhov, V. N.; Plebani, Mario

doi:10.1016/s0009-8981(00)00253-9

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Failing laboratories must analyse the reasons for the failure, report the results, and initiate corrective action. Over the years, there has been a progressive decline in the number of errors, demonstrating that education and regulatory oversight are major contributors to improved EQAP performance and, by extension, patient care ( 14 , 15 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survey on reporting of epithelial cells in urine sediment as part of external quality assessment programs in Brazilian laboratories

Poloni¹,

Vieira

Santos³

et al. 2021

Biochem. med. (Online)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Epithelial cells (ECs) are structures regularly observed during urine microscopy analysis. The correct identification of EC subtypes can be useful since renal tubular epithelial cells (RTECs) are clinically relevant. We investigate the urinary ECs report and the judgement of its clinical importance by Brazilian laboratories. Materials and methods A survey with four questions was made available to participants of the Urinalysis External Quality Assessment Program (EQAP) from Controllab. Laboratories composed 3 groups: (1) differentiating ECs subtypes: “squamous”, “transitional” and “RTECs”; (2) differentiating ECs subtypes: “squamous” or “non-squamous” cells; (3) without ECs subtype identification. Participants did not necessarily answer to all questions and the answers were evaluated both within the same laboratory’s category and within different categories of laboratories. Results A total of 1336 (94%) laboratories answered the survey; Group 1, 119/140 (85%) reported that ECs differentiation is important to the physician and 62% want to be evaluated by EQAP, while in Group 3, 455/1110 (41%) reported it is useful to them, however only 25% want be evaluated by EQAP. Group 2 laboratories 37/51 (73%) reported that the information is important, but only 13/52 (25%) are interested in an EQAP with differentiation of the 3 ECs subtypes. Conclusion Most of the laboratories do not differentiate ECs in the three subtypes, despite the clinical importance of RTECs. Education of laboratory staff about the clinical significance of urinary particles should be considered a key priority.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%