SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Medical Biochemistry / 2021 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2

Assessment of analytical process performance using the Six Sigma method: A comparison of two biochemistry analyzers

Saniye BAŞAK OKTAY
Sema Nur AYYILDIZ
Pages
97–103
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Quality control measures should be implemented for parameters with low sigma values.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: Six Sigma is a method of quality management analysis that integrates accuracy and precision of mea surement, error identification, and process improvement.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The aim of this study was to evaluate the analytical process performance of routine biochemical tests performed with 2 biochemistry analyzers in our laboratory according to Six Sigma methodology and compare the findings.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Quality control measures should be implemented for parameters with low sigma values.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objectives: Six Sigma is a method of quality management analysis that integrates accuracy and precision of mea surement, error identification, and process improvement. The aim of this study was to evaluate the analytical process performance of routine biochemical tests performed with 2 biochemistry analyzers in our laboratory according to Six Sigma methodology and compare the findings. Methods: Internal quality control (IQC) data of routine biochemical analytes used for 3 months in 2 Abbott Architect c16000 analyzers (Abbott Diagnostics Inc., Lake Forest, IL, USA) were extracted and the mean, SD, coefficient of varia tion %, bias % and sigma values were calculated. The performance of the analytes was classified according to the sigma level: 6 indicated good performance. Results: For both analyzers, 2 levels IQC sigma values of chloride and sodium were 6; and the sigma values of total bilirubin, phosphorus, glucose, high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, total cho lesterol, calcium, creatinine, and total protein were determined to be within the acceptable range of 3-6. Amylase and creatine kinase were the best performers on both analyzers, while sodium had the lowest sigma values. Conclusion: Six Sigma is a good method to evaluate the analytical process performance of a clinical laboratory. Quality control measures should be implemented for parameters with low sigma values.

🔖

Cite This Article

OKTAY, S. B., AYYILDIZ, S. N. (2021). Assessment of analytical process performance using the Six Sigma method: A comparison of two biochemistry analyzers. International Journal of Medical Biochemistry, Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2, 97–103. https://ajindex.com/articles/413640

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Mao X, Shao J, Zhang B, Wang Y. Evaluating analytical quality in clinical biochemistry laboratory using Six Sigma. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2018;28(2):020904
  2. Llopis MA, Trujillo G, Llovet MI, Tarrés E, Ibarz M, Biosca C, et al. Quality indicators and specifications for key analytical-extranalytical processes in the clinical laboratory. Five years' experience using the Six Sigma concept. Clin Chem Lab Med 2011;49(3):463–70
  3. Westgard JO, Klee GG. Quality management. In: Burtis CA, Ashwood ER, Bruns DE, editors. Tietz textbook of clinical chemistry and molecular diagnostics. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Saunders; 2006. p. 485–529
  4. RiliBÄK (Richtlinien der Bundesärztekammer) - guidelines of the German medical association for the quality assurance of laboratory medical examinations. Available at: http://www. westgard.com/rilibak.htm. Accessed Oct 30, 2017
  5. CLIA proficiency testing criteria. Available at: http://www. westgard.com/clia.htm. Accessed Oct 30, 2017
  6. Berte LM. Laboratory quality management: a roadmap. Clin Lab Med 2007;27(4):771–90, vi
  7. Emekli Dİ. Tıbbi laboratuvar akreditasyonunda toplam test süreci performansının değerlendirilmesi: altı sigma metodolojisi; 2012. Available at: http://acikerisim.pau.edu.tr:8080/ xmlui/handle/11499/2349. Accessed Mar 16, 2021
  8. Cano EL, Moguerza JM, Redchuk A. Six Sigma with R: statistical engineering for process ımprovement. New York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media; 2012
  9. Aslan D, Demir S. Laboratuvar tıbbında altı sigma kalite yönetimi. Turk J Biochem 2005;30:272–78
  10. Nanda SK, Ray L. Quantitative application of sigma metrics in medical biochemistry. J Clin Diagn Res 2013;7(12):2689–91
  11. Ganji SB, Revupalli S. Evaluation of quality assurance in a new clinical chemistry laboratory by six sigma metrics. J Clin Diagn Res 2019;13(3):BC04–BC07
  12. Medina PA, Matibag J, Datay-Lim SJ, Arcellana-Nuqui E. A Pilot Study on the Evaluation of Clinical Chemistry Laboratory Test Performance using Six Sigma Metrics. PJP 2019;4(2):31– 36
  13. Zhou B, Wu Y, He H, Li C, Tan L, Cao Y. Practical application of six sigma management in analytical biochemistry processes in clinical settings. J Clin Lab Anal 2020;34(1):e23126
  14. Singh B, Goswami B, Gupta VK, Chawla R, Mallika V. Application of sigma metrics for the assessment of quality assurance in clinical biochemistry laboratory in India: a pilot study. Indian J Clin Biochem 2011;26(2):131–35
  15. Kumar BV, Mohan T. Sigma metrics as a tool for evaluatin