Effect of Participating in a Quality Improvement System over Time for Point-of-Care C-Reactive Protein, Glucose, and Hemoglobin Testing

Analytical performance and user-friendliness of four commercially available point-of-care devices for C-reactive protein

INTRODUCTION

Proper implementation of Point-of-Care testing (POCT) for C-reactive protein (CRP) in primary care can decrease the inappropriate use of antibiotics, thereby tackling the problem of growing antimicrobial resistance.

OBJECTIVE

The analytical performance and user-friendliness of four POCT-CRP assays were evaluated: QuikRead go easy, LumiraDx, cobas b 101 and Afinion 2.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Imprecision was evaluated using plasma pools in addition to manufacturer-specific control material. Trueness was assessed by verification of traceability to ERM-DA474/IFCC in parallel to method comparison towards the central laboratory CRP method (cobas c 503) using i) retrospectively selected plasma samples (n = 100) and ii) prospectively collected capillary whole blood samples (n = 50). User-friendliness was examined using a questionnaire.

RESULTS

Between-day imprecision on plasma pools varied from 4.5 % (LumiraDx) to 11.5 % (QuikRead). Traceability verification revealed no significant difference between cobas c 503 CRP results and the ERM-DA474/IFCC certified value. cobas b 101 and Afinion achieved the best agreement with the central laboratory method. LumiraDx and QuikRead revealed a negative mean difference, with LumiraDx violating the criterion of > 95 % of POCT-CRP-results within ± 20 % of the comparison method. Regarding user-friendliness, Afinion obtained the highest Likert-scores.

CONCLUSION

The analytical performance and user-friendliness of POCT-CRP devices varies among manufacturers, emphasizing the need for quality assurance supervised by a central laboratory.

Analytical performance specifications and quality assurance of point-of-care testing in primary healthcare

Point-of-care testing (POCT) is the fastest-growing segment of laboratory medicine. This review focuses on the essential aspects of setting analytical performance specifications (APS) and performing quality assurance for POCT in primary healthcare. In-vitro diagnostic medical devices for POCT are typically small and easy to operate. Users often have little to no laboratory experience and may not necessarily see the value of conducting quality assurance on their devices. Therefore, training, guidance, and motivation should be integral parts of the total quality management system, as they are vital for managing errors and ensuring reliable results. It is common to believe that the analytical quality of POCT should be comparable to that of laboratory testing, and as a result, APS should be the same. This paper challenges this concept. The APS for POCT can often be less stringent compared to those used in a central laboratory because the requester is closer to both the analytical and clinical situation. Point-of-care instruments should be selected based on clinical needs, the required analytical quality and user-friendliness in the intended usage setting.Quality assurance should include both internal quality control (IQC) and external quality assessment (EQA). It is recommended that IQC protocols should be dependent on the complexity of the POCT device. A scoring system to determine how frequent IQC should be analyzed in primary healthcare on different types of POCT devices has been suggested. The main challenge in EQA for POCT involves using suitable control materials that reflect instrument performance on patient samples. Obtaining commutable control materials for POCT is difficult since the matrix often is whole blood. An essential aspect of EQA for POCT is that feedback reports should be easily interpretable. Users should receive advice from the EQA organizer regarding the root causes of deviating results. Quality assurance for POCT is not an easy task and presents numerous challenges. However, there is evidence that quality assurance improves the quality of POCT measurements and, consequently, can enhance patient outcomes.

Point-of-care testing performed by healthcare professionals outside the hospital setting: consensus based recommendations from the IFCC Committee on Point-of-Care Testing (IFCC C-POCT)

The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC) Committee on Point-of-Care Testing (C-POCT) supports the use of point-of-care testing (POCT) outside of the hospital setting performed by healthcare professionals without formal laboratory education because of its numerous benefits. However, these benefits are associated with risks that must be managed, to ensure the provision of reliable test results and minimize harm to the patient. Healthcare professionals, local regulatory bodies, accredited laboratories as well as manufacturers should actively be engaged in education, oversight and advice to ensure that the healthcare professional selects the appropriate equipment and is able to analyze, troubleshoot and correctly interpret the point-of-care (POC) test results.

Using three external quality assurance schemes to achieve equivalent international normalized ratio results in primary and secondary healthcare

OBJECTIVES

Accurate prothrombin time international normalized ratio (INR) results are essential for safe anticoagulation treatment. Patients are treated both in primary and secondary healthcare, therefore equivalence of INR results from point-of-care (POC) and hospital measurement procedures (MPs) are important. It is not possible to evaluate this equivalence in traditional external quality assessment (EQA). The aim of this paper is to describe a special quality assurance system consisting of three different EQA schemes to monitor the harmonization of INR results in Norway.

METHODS

The EQA scheme for hospital laboratories uses commutable control materials and evaluates participant performance and the equivalence of hospital MPs. The EQA scheme for primary healthcare laboratories uses non-commutable control materials and evaluates participant performance. A third EQA scheme for selected primary healthcare laboratories uses native patient split samples and evaluates the equivalence between POC and hospital MPs.

RESULTS

The relationship between the three EQA schemes is presented. The split sample EQA scheme provides a link between the hospital scheme and the scheme for primary healthcare. Results from 2017 to 2022 are presented for all three schemes. When aberrant EQA results occur Noklus takes actions to be able to have a sustainable equivalence between INR results.

CONCLUSIONS

All three EQA schemes are important for monitoring the harmonization of INR results in Norway. This quality assurance system, including help and guidance of the participants, will reduce the risk of harm to patients due to non-equivalence of results from different MPs.

Cardiac troponin measurement at the point of care: educational recommendations on analytical and clinical aspects by the IFCC Committee on Clinical Applications of Cardiac Bio-Markers (IFCC C-CB)

The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboarator Medicine (IFCC) Committee on Clinical Applications of Cardiac Bio-Markers (C-CB) has provided evidence-based educational resources to aid and improve the understanding of important analytical and clinical aspects of cardiac biomarkers. The present IFCC C-CB educational report focuses on recommendations for appropriate use, analytical performance, and gaps in clinical studies related to the use of cardiac troponin (cTn) by point of care (POC) measurement, often referred to as a point of care testing (POCT). The use of high-sensitivity (hs)-cTn POC devices in accelerated diagnostic protocols used in emergency departments or outpatient clinics investigating acute coronary syndrome has the potential for improved efficacy, reduction of length of stay and reduced costs in the health care system. POCT workflow integration includes location of the instrument, assignment of collection and testing responsibility to (non-lab) staff, instrument maintenance, in-service and recurrent training, quality control, proficiency assessments, discrepant result trapping, and troubleshooting and inventory management.

Point-of-care testing in primary healthcare: a scoring system to determine the frequency of performing internal quality control

OBJECTIVES

Internal quality control (IQC) plays an important role in quality assurance in laboratory medicine. However, there is no universal consensus or guideline on when and how IQC should be analyzed on point-of-care testing (POCT) devices. The aim of this study was to develop a scoring system to determine how often IQC should be analyzed in primary healthcare on the various POCT devices.

METHODS

Based on a systematic literature review and a thorough process involving the whole Noklus, a nationwide POC organization, a scoring system for when to analyze IQC was developed. Four factors were considered to significantly impact IQC frequency: The importance of the analyte in diagnosing and monitoring patients, type of POCT device, user-friendliness, and number of patient samples. For each POCT device, the first three factors were given a score, and the sum of the scores determined the general recommended IQC frequency. The number of patient samples determined whether and how to adjust these frequencies in each individual general practice.

RESULTS

The scoring system was applied to 17 analytes and 134 different POCT devices (153 analyte-device combinations). Most of the devices analyzing high-risk analytes (71 out of 74) obtained daily or weekly IQC frequency. For example, all blood-cell counters and all glucose meters should undergo IQC daily and weekly, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents a consensus-based scoring system for differentiated and device-specific recommendations for IQC frequency on POCT devices in primary healthcare. The scoring system can easily be adopted to other local environments and is easy to use.

Organisation and quality monitoring for point-of-care testing (POCT) in Belgium: proposal for an expansion of the legal framework for POCT into primary health care

BACKGROUND

There is a trend towards decentralisation of laboratory tests by means of Point-of-Care testing (POCT). Within hospitals, Belgian law requires a POCT policy, coordinated by the clinical laboratory. There is however no legal framework for POCT performed outside the hospital: no reimbursement, no compulsory quality monitoring and no limits nor control on the prices charged to the patient. Uncontrolled use of POCT can have negative consequences for individual and public health.

PROPOSAL

We propose that POCT outside hospitals would only be reimbursed for tests carried out within a legal framework, requiring evidence-based testing and collaboration with a clinical laboratory, because clinical laboratories have procedures for test validation and quality monitoring, are equipped for electronic data transfer, are familiar with logistical processes, can provide support when technical issues arise and can organise and certify training. Under these conditions the government investment will be offset by health benefits, e.g. fall in antibiotic consumption with POCT for CRP in primary care, quick response to SARS-CoV2-positive cases in COVID-19 triage centres.

PRIORITIES

1° extension of the Belgian decree on certification of clinical laboratories to decentralised tests in primary care; 2° introduction of a separate reimbursement category for POCT; 3° introduction of reimbursement for a limited number of specified POCT; 4° setup of a Multidisciplinary POCT Advisory Council, the purpose of which is to draw up a model for reimbursement of POCT, to select tests eligible for reimbursement and to make proposals to the National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance (RIZIV/INAMI).

Handling of hemolyzed serum samples in clinical chemistry laboratories: the Nordic hemolysis project

Background Some clinical chemistry measurement methods are vulnerable to interference if hemolyzed serum samples are used. The aims of this study were: (1) to obtain updated information about how hemolysis affects clinical chemistry test results on different instrument platforms used in Nordic laboratories, and (2) to obtain data on how test results from hemolyzed samples are reported in Nordic laboratories. Methods Four identical samples containing different degrees of hemolysis were prepared and distributed to 145 laboratories in the Nordic countries. The laboratories were asked to measure the concentration of cell-free hemoglobin (Hb), together with 15 clinical chemistry analytes. In addition, the laboratories completed a questionnaire about how hemolyzed samples are handled and reported. Results Automated detection of hemolysis in all routine patient samples was used by 63% of laboratories, and 88% had written procedures on how to handle hemolyzed samples. The different instrument platforms measured comparable mean Hb concentrations in the four samples. For most analytes, hemolysis caused a homogenous degree of interference regardless of the instrument platform used, except for alkaline phosphatase (ALP), bilirubin (total) and creatine kinase (CK). The recommended cut-off points for rejection of a result varied substantially between the manufacturers. The laboratories differed in how they reported test results, even when they used the same type of instrument. Conclusions Most of the analytes were homogeneously affected by hemolysis, regardless of the instrument used. There is large variation, however, between the laboratories on how they report test results from hemolyzed samples, even when they use the same type of instrument.

Performance of Afinion HbA1c measurements in general practice as judged by external quality assurance data

Background It has been debated whether point-of care (POC) glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) measurements methods can be used for diagnosing persons with diabetes mellitus. The aim of this study was to evaluate the analytical performance of the POC Afinion HbA1c system in the hands of the users, and to investigate which predictors that were associated with good participant performance. Methods External quality assurance (EQA) data from seven surveys in 2017-2018 with a total of 5809 Afinion participants from a POC total quality system in Norway were included in this study (response rate 90%). The control materials were freshly drawn pooled EDTA whole blood. Each participant was evaluated against the analytical performance specification of ±6% from the target value, while the Afinion system was evaluated against the pooled within-laboratory CV <2%, the between-laboratory CV <3.5%, and bias <0.3%HbA1c. Logistic regression analyses were used to investigate which factors were associated with good participant performance. Results The participant pass rates for each survey varied from 98.2% to 99.7%. The pooled within-laboratory CV varied from 1.3% to 1.5%, the between-laboratory CV varied from 1.5% to 2.1%, and bias varied between -0.17 and -0.01 %HbA1c in all surveys. Reagent lot was the only independent factor to predict good participant performance. Conclusions Afinion HbA1c fulfilled the analytical performance specifications and is robust in the hands of the users. It can therefore be used both in diagnosing and monitoring persons with diabetes mellitus, given that the instrument is monitored by an EQA system.

Availability and analytical quality of hemoglobin A1c point-of-care testing in general practitioners’ offices are associated with better glycemic control in type 2 diabetes

Background

It is not clear if point-of-care (POC) testing for hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is associated with glycemic control in type 2 diabetes.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, we linked general practitioner (GP) data on 22,778 Norwegian type 2 diabetes patients to data from the Norwegian Organization for Quality Improvement of Laboratory Examinations. We used general and generalized linear mixed models to investigate if GP offices’ availability (yes/no) and analytical quality of HbA1c POC testing (average yearly “trueness score”, 0–4), as well as frequency of participation in HbA1c external quality assurance (EQA) surveys, were associated with patients’ HbA1c levels during 2014–2017.

Results

Twenty-eight out of 393 GP offices (7%) did not perform HbA1c POC testing. After adjusting for confounders, their patients had on average 0.15% higher HbA1c levels (95% confidence interval (0.04–0.27) (1.7 mmol/mol [0.5–2.9]). GP offices participating in one or two yearly HbA1c EQA surveys, rather than the maximum of four, had patients with on average 0.17% higher HbA1c levels (0.06, 0.28) (1.8 mmol/mol [0.6, 3.1]). For each unit increase in the GP offices’ HbA1c POC analytical trueness score, the patients’ HbA1c levels were lower by 0.04% HbA1c (−0.09, −0.001) (−0.5 mmol/mol [−1.0, −0.01]).

Conclusions

Novel use of validated patient data in combination with laboratory EQA data showed that patients consulting GPs in offices that perform HbA1c POC testing, participate in HbA1c EQA surveys, and maintain good analytical quality have lower HbA1c levels. Accurate HbA1c POC results, available during consultations, may improve diabetes care.

External quality assessment schemes for glucose measurements in Germany: factors for successful participation, analytical performance and medical impact

Background:

Determination of blood glucose concentration is one of the most important measurements in clinical chemistry worldwide. Analyzers in central laboratories (CL) and point-of-care tests (POCT) are both frequently used. In Germany, regular participation in external quality assessment (EQA) schemes is mandatory for laboratories performing glucose testing.

Methods:

Glucose testing data from the two German EQAs “Reference Institute for Bioanalytics” (RfB) and “INSTAND – Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Qualitätssicherung in medizinischen Laboratorien” (Instand) were analyzed from 2012 to 2016. Multivariable odds ratios (OR) for the probability to reach a “good” result were calculated. Imprecision and bias were determined and clinical risk of measurement errors estimated.

Results:

The device employed was the most important variable required for a “good” performance in all EQAs. Additional participation in an EQA for CL automated analyzers improved performance in POCT EQAs. The reciprocal effect was less pronounced. New participants performed worse than experienced participants especially in CL EQAs. Imprecision was generally smaller for CL, but some POCT devices reached a comparable performance. Large lot-to-lot differences occurred in over 10% of analyzed cases. We propose the “bias budget” as a new metric to express the maximum allowable bias that still carries acceptable medical risk. Bias budgets were smallest and clinical risks of errors greatest in the low range of measurement 60–115 mg/dL (3.3–6.4 mmol/L) for most devices.

Conclusions:

EQAs help to maintain high analytical performances. They generate important data that serve as the foundation for learning and improvement in the laboratory healthcare system.

Improving the quality of point-of-care testing

BACKGROUND

It is suggested that new models of primary care should have better access to test results through the use of point-of-care testing (POCT).

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether quality management of POCT leads to better results.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the literature on quality management of POCT in primary care, where the impact of participation in quality management programmes had been investigated with relevant outcome measures.

RESULTS

Three databases were systematically searched using key words relevant to POCT and quality management, covering from 1945 to January 2017. Titles and abstracts were reviewed for relevance and papers selected for review and data extraction. Five observational studies were found in which the performance of POCT for specific analytes in external quality assurance (EQA) programmes was used to assess improvement over a period of time, varying from 3.5 to 15 years. The tests monitored were HbA1c, urine albumin, C-reactive protein, glucose and haemoglobin. In each case, the performance of the test against defined analytical criteria was used to judge improvement in performance. Different summary performance criteria were used, including the imprecision of results over a period of time (two studies) and meeting defined target values for bias and imprecision of measurement (three studies). Performance improved with time and was associated with regular participation in EQA schemes and with the use of internal quality control (IQC) procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate that adoption of quality management for POCT, including participation in IQC and EQA, with the support of laboratory medicine professionals, will improve the quality of the results 'produced'.

Quality Control of Norwegian Pharmacy HbA1c Testing: A Modest Beginning

BACKGROUND

Many pharmacy services involve laboratory testing using point-of-care (POC) instruments. Our aim was to describe the implementation of quality control of the HbA1c POC instruments and investigate the performance in internal quality control (IQC) and external quality control (EQA) for HbA1c POC instruments in Norwegian community pharmacies.

METHODS

Two project pharmacists from each of 11 pharmacies participated in a training program covering capillary blood sampling, how to use the POC HbA1c instrument (DCA Vantage) and IQC and EQA. The pharmacies were enrolled in an EQA program for HbA1c, and their performance was compared with that of general practitioners' (GP) offices.

RESULTS

Two of 89 (2.2%) IQC measurements were outside the acceptance interval. Seven out of 11 pharmacies sent in results in EQA in all the three surveys during six months. Two pharmacies did not analyze the control material in any of the surveys, one pharmacy analyzed the control material in one of the surveys, and one pharmacy analyzed two of the surveys. Of these pharmacies, 56-100% obtained "very good" evaluation for trueness and 71-100% obtained "very good" evaluation for precision. The corresponding numbers for GP offices were 75-87% for trueness and 84-94% for precision. No pharmacies obtained a "poor" evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Norwegian community pharmacies can perform IQC and EQA on a HbA1c POC instrument, and the performance is comparable with that of GP offices. The compliance in the EQA surveys was modest, but the duration of the study and participation in the EQA program was probably too short to implement all the new procedures for all pharmacies.

Harmonization activities of Noklus – a quality improvement organization for point-of-care laboratory examinations

Noklus is a non-profit quality improvement organization that focuses to improve all elements in the total testing process. The aim is to ensure that all medical laboratory examinations are ordered, performed and interpreted correctly and in accordance with the patients’ needs for investigation, treatment and follow-up. For 25 years, Noklus has focused on point-of-care (POC) testing in primary healthcare laboratories and has more than 3100 voluntary participants. The Noklus quality system uses different tools to obtain harmonization and improvement: (1) external quality assessment for the pre-examination, examination and postexamination phase to monitor the harmonization process and to identify areas that need improvement and harmonization, (2) manufacturer-independent evaluations of the analytical quality and user-friendliness of POC instruments and (3) close interactions and follow-up of the participants through site visits, courses, training and guidance. Noklus also recommends which tests that should be performed in the different facilities like general practitioner offices, nursing homes, home care, etc. About 400 courses with more than 6000 delegates are organized annually. In 2017, more than 21,000 e-learning programs were completed.

Essential aspects of external quality assurance for point-of-care testing

External quality assurance (EQA) or proficiency testing for point-of-care (POC) testing is in principle similar to EQA for larger hospital laboratories, but the participants are different. The participants are usually health care personnel with little or no knowledge of laboratory medicine. The implication of this is that the EQA provider has to a) convince the participants that participation in EQA schemes are important, b) be able to circulate materials with reasonable time intervals, c) produce feedback reports that are understandable, and d) offer help and guidance to the participants when needed. It is also important that EQA for POC testing e) address the pre-examination, the examination and the post-examination processes, and f) that schemes for measurement procedures using interval or ordinal scale are offered. The aim of the present paper is to highlight important issues of these essential aspects of EQA for POC testing.

Interpretation of EQA results and EQA-based trouble shooting

Important objectives of External Quality Assessment (EQA) is to detect analytical errors and make corrective actions. The aim of this paper is to describe knowledge required to interpret EQA results and present a structured approach on how to handle deviating EQA results. The value of EQA and how the EQA result should be interpreted depends on five key points: the control material, the target value, the number of replicates, the acceptance limits and between lot variations in reagents used in measurement procedures. This will also affect the process of finding the sources of errors when they appear. The ideal EQA sample has two important properties: it behaves as a native patient sample in all methods (is commutable) and has a target value established with a reference method. If either of these two criteria is not entirely fulfilled, results not related to the performance of the laboratory may arise. To help and guide the laboratories in handling a deviating EQA result, the Norwegian Clinical Chemistry EQA Program (NKK) has developed a flowchart with additional comments that could be used by the laboratories e.g. in their quality system, to document action against deviations in EQA. This EQA-based trouble-shooting tool has been developed further in cooperation with the External quality Control for Assays and Tests (ECAT) Foundation. This flowchart will become available in a public domain, i.e. the website of the European organisation for External Quality Assurance Providers in Laboratory Medicine (EQALM).

Intensive educational efforts combined with external quality assessment improve the preanalytical phase in general practitioner offices and nursing homes

Background:

Errors in the preanalytical phase in clinical laboratories affect patient safety. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of intensive educational efforts together with external quality assessment (EQA) of the preanalytical phase from 2013 to 2015 to improve patient identification in primary health care in Norway. In addition, routines for venous and capillary blood sampling were investigated.

Methods:

A preanalytical EQA was circulated in 2013 by the Norwegian Quality Improvement of Laboratory Examinations (Noklus) to general practitioner offices and nursing homes (n=2000) to obtain information about important issues to focus on before launching an intensive educational program with courses, posters and visits in 2013–2015. Preanalytical EQA surveys were further circulated in 2014 and 2015.

Results:

The response rate varied between 42% and 55%. The percentages of participants asking for the patients’ name and the Norwegian identification number increased from about 8% in 2013 to about 35% in 2015. The increase was similar for those participating in only one EQA survey and for those who participated in EQA surveys both in 2013 and 2015. Guidelines for venous and capillary blood sampling were not always followed.

Conclusions:

Educational efforts more than the preanalytical EQA influenced the actions and resulted in an increase in the percentages of participants that followed the guidelines for patient identification. Some aspects of blood sampling routines need improvement.