Variability between laboratories performing coagulation tests with identical platforms: a nationwide evaluation study

Abstract

BackgroundWhile the assessment of analytical precision within medical laboratories has received much attention in scientific enquiry, the degree of as well as the sources causing variation between them remains incompletely understood. In this study, we quantified the variance components when performing coagulation tests with identical analytical platforms in different laboratories and computed intraclass correlations coefficients (ICC) for each coagulation test.MethodsData from eight laboratories measuring fibrinogen twice in twenty healthy subjects with one out of 3 different platforms and single measurements of prothrombin time (PT), and coagulation factors II, V, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI and XIII were analysed. By platform, the variance components of (i) the subjects, (ii) the laboratory and the technician and (iii) the total variance were obtained for fibrinogen as well as (i) and (iii) for the remaining factors using ANOVA.ResultsThe variability for fibrinogen measurements within a laboratory ranged from 0.02 to 0.04, the variability between laboratories ranged from 0.006 to 0.097. The ICC for fibrinogen ranged from 0.37 to 0.66 and from 0.19 to 0.80 for PT between the platforms. For the remaining factors the ICC’s ranged from 0.04 (FII) to 0.93 (FVIII).ConclusionsVariance components that could be attributed to technicians or laboratory procedures were substantial, led to disappointingly low intraclass correlation coefficients for several factors and were pronounced for some of the platforms. Our findings call for sustained efforts to raise the level of standardization of structures and procedures involved in the quantification of coagulation factors.

The frequency of joint hemorrhages and procedures in nonsevere hemophilia A vs B

“…The great variability described between laboratories that perform specific FA assays may be related to differences in reagents as well as to patient-related variables; this has been observed even when the same testing platforms are used. 28 Because this variability affects both FVIII and FIX activity testing, 29 it is unlikely to result in consistent biases in any direction that would invalidate our findings.…”

Measurement of rivaroxaban and apixaban in serum samples of patients

“…If clinically indicated, current practice is to use factor Xa-specific chromogenic substrate assays to determine the drugs. For determination of rivaroxaban [8][9][10][11][12][13], and apixaban [14,15] activities, blood needs to be anticoagulated by sodium citrate during withdrawal to avoid clotting in vitro. However, determination of rivaroxaban or apixaban concentrations in blood may be required even if such pretest conditions are not met, for example, if serum is the only available test material.…”

Critical values in Hematology

“…The question that remains is ‘Can universal critical value lists be developed or should it remain the responsibility of laboratory directors and healthcare administrators to making these decisions?’ Medical decision points (MDPs) are generally based on reference intervals and recommendations from guidelines based on clinical evidence from studies or from expert clinical opinions . However, laboratory test results have been shown to have variability in both intralaboratory and interlaboratory comparisons through external quality assurance (EQA) programs . These issues highlight some of the problems for standardization and implementing universal MDP for critical values in hematology.…”