Dergiler / International Journal of Medical Biochemistry / 2022 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 1

Tools for evaluating the performance of HbA1c analyzer: Sigma Metric and Quality Goal Index Ratio

Sayfa
71–75
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

However, when evaluated as a whole with Sigma values, the results of the devices were found reliable

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objectives: Sigma metric model is one of the most popular quality management system tools used for Six Sigma process improvement.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:This model provides three features that improve the results: low inaccuracy, less deviation, and correct performance of the analytical method.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:However, when evaluated as a whole with Sigma values, the results of the devices were found reliable
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Objectives: Sigma metric model is one of the most popular quality management system tools used for Six Sigma process improvement. This model provides three features that improve the results: low inaccuracy, less deviation, and correct performance of the analytical method. Internal quality control and external quality assessment programs are routinely carried out in all clinical laboratories to evaluate and continually improve the analytical quality. The Six Sigma model is a global quality management system that can also be applied in the determination of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). In recent years, this model has been supported by Quality Goal Index (QGI). In this study, we aimed to evaluate the analytical performances of Arkray HA8180V HbA1c analyzer according to internal and external quality Sigma metrics and QGI. Methods: The data have been evaluated according to two internal control materials (Bio-DPC and KBUDEK External Quality Program) to calculate Sigma levels [Sigma=(TEa%-bias%)/CV%] and quality target indexes (QGI=bias/1.5×CV), where TEa is the total analytical error and CV is the coefficient of variation. QGI is a metric that can distinguish between techniques to deal with sensitivity and accuracy issues as well as calibrator lot changes. Results: The mean Sigma levels for low and high quality control materials were found to be 5.17 and 2.51, respectively. QGI was found to be 0.8-1.2 for both levels. Conclusion: The performance of HA8180V HbA1c analyzers was found to be acceptable compared to Sigma metrics. The values of OGI between 0.8 and 1.2 indicate inaccurate and inconsistent result. However, when evaluated as a whole with Sigma values, the results of the devices were found reliable

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ERDOĞAN, H., DÖVENTAŞ, Y. E. (2022). Tools for evaluating the performance of HbA1c analyzer: Sigma Metric and Quality Goal Index Ratio. International Journal of Medical Biochemistry, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 1, 71–75. https://ajindex.com/articles/541400

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (16)

  1. Radin MS. Pitfalls in hemoglobin A1c measurement: When results may be misleading. J Gen Intern Med 2014;29:388–94
  2. Nasir NM, Thevarajah M, Yean CY. Hemoglobin variants detected by hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) analysis and the effects on HbA1c measurements. Int J Diabetes Dev Ctries 2010;30:86–90
  3. Sacks DB, ADA/EASD/IDF Working Group of the HbA1c Assay. Global harmonization of hemoglobin A1c. Clin Chem 2005;51:681–3
  4. Little RR, Rohlfing C, Sacks DB. The national glycohemoglobin standardization program: Over 20 years of improving hemoglobin a1c measurement. Clin Chem 2019;65:839–48
  5. Little RR, Rohlfing CL, Sacks DB. Status of hemoglobin A1c measurement and goals for improvement: From chaos to order for improving diabetes care. Clin Chem 2011;57:205–14
  6. Little RR, Rohlfing CL. The long and winding road to optimal HbA1c measurement. Clin Chim Acta 2013;418:63–71
  7. Burtis CA, Ashwood ER, Bruns DE. Tietz textbook of clinical chemistry and molecular diagnostic, 4th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 2006. p.879–84
  8. Genc S, Omer B, Aycan-Ustyol E, Ince N, Bal F, Gurdol F. Evaluation of turbidimetric inhibition immunoassay (TINIA) and HPLC methods for glycated haemoglobin determination. J Clin Lab Anal 2012;26:481–5
  9. Sherwani SI, Khan HA, Ekhzaimy A, Masood A, Sakharkar MK. Significance of HbA1c test in diagnosis and prognosis of diabetic patients. Biomark Insights 2016;11:95–104
  10. Weykamp C, John G, Gillery P, English E, Ji L, Lenters-Westra E, et al. Investigation of 2 models to set and evaluate quality targets for hb a1c: Biological variation and sigma-metrics. Clin Chem 2015;61:752–9
  11. Biswas SS, Bindra M, Jain V, Gokhale P. Evaluation of imprecision, bias and total error of clinical chemistry analysers. Indian J Clin Biochem 2015;30:104–8
  12. Varela B, Pacheco G. Comprehensive evaluation of the internal and external quality control to redefine analytical quality goals. Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2018;28:020710
  13. Westgard JO. Useful measures and models for analytical quality management in medical laboratories. Clin Chem Lab Med 2016;54:223–33
  14. Kumar BV, Mohan T. Sigma metrics as a tool for evaluating the performance of internal quality control in a clinical chemistry laboratory. J Lab Physicians 2018;10:194–9
  15. Weykamp C, Siebelder C. Evaluation of performance of laboratories and manufacturers within the framework of the IFCC model for quality targets of HbA1c. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2018;12:747–52
  16. Westgard JO, Westgard SA. The q