Verification of the HbA1c method on the STANDARD F2400<sup>®</sup> analyzer in a Nigerian Laboratory
Main Article Content
Keywords
Method Verification, Imprecision, Bias, Sigma metric, POCT, HbA1C
Abstract
Background: For methods that report quantitatively, an assessment of their imprecision and bias should be assessed in the laboratory before their deployment into routine service. This study assessed these parameters of the HbA1C method on the STANDARD F2400® point of care analyzer. These parameters were further combined to generate sigma metrics for the method.
Methodology: An external quality assurance (EQA) material from the Randox International Quality Assessment Scheme (RIQAS) was analysed according to the EP15 protocol of the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute in SYNLAB Nigeria Laboratory Quality Assurance Department. Estimates of precision and an assessment of bias were determined from the data which consisted of 5 replicates per day for 5 consecutive days. Precision estimates were compared with manufacturer-provided information and estimates of bias were compared with the verification interval for the target value provided by RIQAS. Sigma metrics were determined for total allowable error (TAE) of 8% and 10%.
Results: The grand mean (standard deviation) for the study was 4.95 (0.15) %. The Within-run CV and within laboratory CV were 1.28% and 1.86%, respectively. These were within the manufacturer claims of 1.70% and 1.90%, also respectively. The target value by RIQAS was 5.04(0.24) % with a calculated verification interval of 4.95 - 5.13%. The sigma metrics for the method at TAE of 8% and 10% were 4.8/3.3 and 6.3/4.3 within the run/within laboratory estimates respectively.
Conclusion: The HbA1C method on the STANDARD F2400® Analyzer displayed performance characteristics that are consistent with manufacturer specifications and are above industry standard quality for a point-of-care device for HbA1C. These suggest that may be used to support routine monitoring of persons with diabetes mellitus in Nigeria.
References
2. Theodorsson E. Validation and Verification of Measurement Methods in Clinical Chemistry. Bioanalysis 2012;4(3):305–320.
3. Haeckel R. Verification, validation and evaluation of analytical procedures in laboratory medicine. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. 2004; 42(1):111-112
4. Berte LM. Quality management system: a model for laboratory services; approved guideline. 4th ed. Wayne (PA): Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2011.
5. Dybkaer R. Vocabulary for use in measurement procedures and description of reference materials in laboratory medicine. Eur J Clin Chem Clin Biochem 1997;35(2):141–73.
6. Menditto A, Patriarca M, Magnusson B. Understanding the meaning of accuracy, trueness and precision. Accred Qual Assur 2007;12(1):45–7.
7. Burnett D, Burnett L, Mackay M. Statistical methodologies in laboratory medicine. In: Rifai N, Horvath AR, Wittwer CT, Tietz NW, editors. Tietz textbook of clinical chemistry and molecular diagnostics. St. Louis (MO): Elsevier; 2018.
8. Carey RN. User verification of precision and estimation of bias: approved guideline. 3rd ed. Wayne (PA): Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2014.
9. NGSP. List of NGSP Certified Methods [Internet]. 2024; Available from: https://ngsp.org/certified.asp
10. US Department of Health and Human Services. Medicare, Medicaid and CLIA programs. Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (CLIA) proficiency testing regulations related to analytes and acceptable performance: final rule. Fed Regist. 2022;87(131):41194-41242.
11. European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. EFLM Biological Variation Database. [cited 2024 Sep 18]; Available from: https://biologicalvariation.eu/search?query=Haemoglobin%20A1c%20(IFCC)
12. Chakravarthy SN, Ramanathan S, Smitha S, Nallathambi T, Michael S. EP15A3 based precision and trueness verification of VITROS HbA1C immunoassay. Indian J Clin Biochem. 2019;34(1):89-94
13. Kumar SP, Kumari SJ Are peer comparison statistics obtained from Internal Quality Control and External Quality Assurance programs comparable? - An analytical study. RGUHS J. Allied Health Sci. 2023;3(1):6-10
14. 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 HbA1c: Biological Variation and Sigma-Metrics. Clin. Chem. 2015;61(5):752–759
15. Lenters-Westra E, Slingerland RJ. Six of Eight Hemoglobin A1c Point-of-Care Instruments Do Not Meet the General Accepted Analytical Performance Criteria. Clin. Chem. 2010;56(1):44–52.
16. Lenters-Westra E, Slingerland RJ. Three of 7 Hemoglobin A1c Point-of-Care Instruments Do Not Meet Generally Accepted Analytical Performance Criteria. Clin. Chem. 2014;60(8):1062–1072
17. Lenters-Westra E, English E. Evaluation of Four HbA1c Point-of-Care Devices Using International Quality Targets: Are They Fit for the
Purpose? J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. 2018;12(4):762–770.
18. Lenters-Westra E, English E. Are hemoglobin A1c point-of-care analyzers fit for purpose? The story continues. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. 2021;59(4):765-774
19. Westgard SA, Bayat H, Westgard JO. Selecting a Risk-Based SQC Procedure for a HbA1c Total QC Plan. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2018;12(4):780–785
20. Lincy Raj C, Poornima Rt, Malawadi Bn. Sigma metrics – a good quality control guide to assess analytical performance of a clinical chemistry laboratory. Asian J Med Sci 2024;15(7):45–50.
21. American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee, ElSayed NA, Aleppo G, Bannuru RR, Bruemmer D, Collins BS, et al. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2024. Diabetes Care 2024;47(Supplement_1):S20–S42.
22. Hobbs R. Near patient testing in primary care. BMJ 1996;312(7026):263–264.
23. Brown JB, Harris SB, Webster-Bogaert S, Porter S. Point-of-Care Testing in Diabetes Management: What Role Does It Play? Diabetes Spectr. 2004;17(4):244–248.
24. Maesa JE, Fern Aacute Ndez-Riejos P, S Aacute Nchez-Mora C, Toro-Crespo MI, Gonz Aacute Lez-Rodriguez CO. Application of Six Sigma Model to Evaluate the Analytical Quality of Four HbA1c Analyzers. Clin Lab. 2017 Jan 1;63(1):79-83.
25. Sacks DB, Kirkman MS, Little RR. Point-of-Care HbA1c in Clinical Practice: Caveats and Considerations for Optimal Use. Diabetes Care 2024;47(7):1104–10.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This is an open-access journal and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share-Alike License 4.0. This licence allows users to download and share, remix, tweak and build upon the article for non-commercial purposes, so long as the original authorship is acknowledged and the new creations are licensed under identical terms.
Jokotade Oluremilekun Adeleye, Department of Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan
Senior Lecturer, Department of Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria
Consultant Endocrinologist, University College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria