Search

High quality laboratory results are critical for patient management. However, poor sample quality can impact these results and patient safety. To ensure reliable and accurate results laboratories must be aware of each analyte's stability under various storage conditions and matrices to guarantee correct and dependable outcomes. This knowledge allows laboratories to define the allowable delay between sample collection and centrifugation/analysis for all analytes to guarantee appropriate results quality and interpretation. The EFLM Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) therefore established a 4-step plan to tackle this issue, aiming to standardize and harmonize stability studies for improved comparison and meta-analysis. The plan included the development of checklists and how-to guides for performing and reporting stability studies as well as a central resource of stability data. This manuscript deals with the issue of evaluating publications and incorporating them into a central resource. To evaluate stability studies, the CRESS checklist was used to structure 20 sections used to judge the quality of studies. Each section has 4 levels of quality, with scores converted to numerical values and weighted based on expert opinion. Based on this, a final score ranging from A to D was determined. The procedure was then tested on six manuscripts and checked for agreement between expert judgements. The results demonstrated that the proposed evaluation process is a useful tool to distinguish between best in class manuscripts and those of lower quality. The EFLM WG-PRE strongly believes that the provided recommendations and checklists will help improving stability studies both in quality and standardisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Blood Sampling Guidelines have been developed to target European emergency medicine-related professionals involved in the blood sampling process (e.g. physicians, nurses, phlebotomists working in the ED), as well as laboratory physicians and other related professionals. The guidelines population focus on adult patients. The development of these blood sampling guidelines for the ED setting is based on the collaboration of three European scientific societies that have a role to play in the preanalytical phase process: EuSEN, EFLM, and EUSEM. The elaboration of the questions was done using the PICO procedure, literature search and appraisal was based on the GRADE methodology. The final recommendations were reviewed by an international multidisciplinary external review group. The document includes the elaborated recommendations for the selected sixteen questions. Three in pre-sampling, eight regarding sampling, three post-sampling, and two focus on quality assurance. In general, the quality of the evidence is very low, and the strength of the recommendation in all the questions has been rated as weak. The working group in four questions elaborate the recommendations, based mainly on group experience, rating as good practice. The multidisciplinary working group was considered one of the major contributors to this guideline. The lack of quality information highlights the need for research in this area of the patient care process. The peculiarities of the emergency medical areas need specific considerations to minimise the possibility of errors in the preanalytical phase. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Knowledge of the stability of analytes in clinical specimens is a prerequisite for proper transport and preservation of samples to avoid laboratory errors. The new version of ISO 15189:2022 and the European directive 2017/746 increase the requirements on this topic for manufacturers and laboratories. Within the project to generate a stability database of European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE), the need to standardise and improve the quality of published stability studies has been detected, being a manifest deficit the absence of international guidelines for the performance of stability studies on clinical specimens. These recommendations have been developed and summarised by consensus of the WG-PRE and are intended primarily to improve the quality of sample stability claims included in information for users provided by assay supplier companies, according to the requirements of the new European regulations and standards for accreditation. This document provides general recommendations for the performance of stability studies, oriented to the estimation of instability equations in the usual working conditions, allowing flexible adaptation of the maximum permissible error specifications to obtain stability limits adapted to the intended use. We present this recommendation based on the opinions of the EFLM WG-PRE group for the standardisation and improvement of stability studies, with the intention to improve the quality of the studies and the transferability of their results to laboratories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical decision-making in emergency medicine is under constant pressure from demand and performance requirements, with blood tests being a fundamental part of this. However, the preanalytical process has received little attention. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the quality of preanalytical phase processes in European emergency departments (EDs) from the perspectives of the three main providers: clinicians, nurses, and laboratory specialists. This online survey, distributed among European EDs and laboratories, was supported by the European Society for Emergency Nursing (EUSEN), European Society for Emergency Medicine (EuSEM), and the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM). The size of the centres, the European region, the responder's profession and the country's economic condition were used as co-variables. We included 376 responses from all ED-related professions from 306 European centres. In 66.9% of all ED visits, at least one blood test was performed. Tests were requested mostly by nurses (44.6%) using electronic Order/Entry systems (65.4%). Only a minority (19%) reported not using laboratory quality indicators (QIs). Most responders defined the TAT starting point "when the laboratory receives the sample" (66.1%), defining the goal to be "less than 60 min" (69.9%), but only 42.4% of the centres estimated achieving this goal. Our survey illustrates the current situation on preanalytical blood sample processing in European EDs from the clinical and laboratory perspectives. The results emphasise the importance of the IT infrastructure and QI usage in this process and highlight some differences between European regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although laboratory result presentation may lead to information overload and subsequent missed or delayed diagnosis, little has been done in the past to improve this post-analytical issue. We aimed to investigate the efficiency, efficacy and user satisfaction of alternative report formats. We redesigned cumulative (sparkline format) and single reports (improved tabular and z-log format) and tested these on 46 physicians, nurses and medical students in comparison to the classical tabular formats, by asking standardized questions on general items on the reports as well as on suspected diagnosis and follow-up treatment or diagnostics. Efficacy remained at a very high level both in the new formats as well as in the classical formats. We found no significant difference in any of the groups. Efficiency improved in all groups when using the sparkline cumulative format and marginally when showing the improved tabular format. When asking medical questions, efficiency and efficacy remained similar between report formats and groups. All alternative reports were subjectively more attractive to the majority of participants. Showing cumulative reports as a graphical display led to faster detection of general information on the report with the same level of correctness. Considering the familiarity bias of the classical single report formats, the borderline-significant improvement of the alternative tabular format and the non-inferiority of the z-log format, suggests that single reports might benefit from some improvements derived from basic information design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the beginning of laboratory medicine, the main focus was to provide high quality analytics. Over time the importance of the extra-analytical phases and their contribution to the overall quality became evident. However, as the initial preanalytical processes take place outside of the laboratory and mostly without its supervision, all professions participating in these process steps, from test selection to sample collection and transport, need to engage accordingly. Focusing solely on intra-laboratory processes will not be sufficient to achieve the best possible preanalytical quality. The Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) has provided several recommendations, opinion papers and scientific evidence over the past years, aiming to standardize the preanalytical phase across Europe. One of its strategies to reach this goal are educational efforts. As such, the WG-PRE has organized five conferences in the past decade with the sole focus on preanalytical quality. This year's conference mainly aims to depict the views of different professions on preanalytical processes in order to acquire common ground as basis for further improvements. This article summarizes the content of this 6th preanalytical conference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: demand management; postanalytics; preanalytics EN demand management postanalytics preanalytics e313 e316 4 07/01/21 20210801 NES 210801 To the Editor, Laboratory sample transportation using pneumatic tube systems (PTS) has become widespread in many hospitals. Graph: Figure 2: Cumulative vibration measured in PTS transport with different types of inserts inside the PTS carrier as well as manual transportation, compared to transportation without any insert (in %). [Extracted from the article]

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15189:2012 standard aims to improve quality in medical laboratories through standardization of all key elements in the total testing process, including the pre-analytical phase. It is hence essential that accreditation bodies, assessing laboratories against ISO15189:2012, pay sufficient attention to auditing pre-analytical activities. However, there are significant differences in how technical auditors interpret the pre-analytical requirements described in ISO15189:2012. In this consensus document, the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Pre-analytical Phase (WG-PRE) sets out to review pre-analytical requirements contained in ISO15189:2012 and provide guidance for laboratories on how to meet these requirements. The target audience for this consensus document is laboratory professionals who wish to improve the quality of the pre-analytical phase in their laboratory. For each of the ISO requirements described in ISO15189:2012, members of EFLM WG-PRE agreed by consensus on minimal recommendations and best-in-class solutions. The minimal consensus recommendation was defined as the minimal specification which laboratories should implement in their quality management system to adequately address the pre-analytical requirement described in ISO15189:2012. The best-in-class solution describes the current state-of-the-art in fulfilling a particular pre-analytical requirement in ISO15189:2012. We fully acknowledge that not every laboratory has the means to implement these best-in-class solutions, but we hope to challenge laboratories in critically evaluating and improving their current procedures by providing this expanded guidance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biotin >20 ng/mL may interfere with the Elecsys® Troponin T-high sensitive assay (cTnT-hs; Roche Diagnostics International Ltd). We evaluated the performance of an updated assay, cTnT-hs*, which was designed to reduce biotin interference. cTnT-hs* assay performance was assessed using up to two applications (18 min/9 min) on three analyzers (cobas e 411/cobas e 601/cobas e 801). Biotin interference was determined by measuring recovery in an 11-sample series dilution with biotin ranging from 0–3600 ng/mL. Repeatability/reproducibility were evaluated in five serum sample pools (n=75 each). Method comparisons tested: cTnT-hs* vs. cTnT-hs (18 min/cobas e 601); cTnT-hs* assay 18 vs. 9 min (cobas e 601); cTnT-hs* (18 min) on cobas e 601 vs. cobas e 411 and cobas e 601 vs. cobas e 801. Concordance at the 99th percentile decision limit between cTnT-hs* and cTnT-hs (9 min/cobas e 601) was calculated using 300 lithium-heparin plasma samples and a 14 ng/L assay cutoff. cTnT-hs* assay (18 min/cobas e 601) recovery was ≥96% for biotin ≤1250 ng/mL. Across all applications/analyzers, coefficients of variation for repeatability/reproducibility with the cTnT-hs* assay were <5% in most serum sample pools (mean cardiac troponin T: 8.528–9484 ng/L). High correlation (Pearson's r=1.000) was demonstrated for all method comparisons. Concordance at the 99th percentile decision limit was high between the cTnT-hs* and cTnT-hs assays. The updated cTnT-hs* assay may provide greater tolerance to biotin interference, and shows good analytical and clinical agreement/concordance with the previous cTnT-hs assay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: An accurate knowledge of blood collection times is crucial for verifying the stability of laboratory analytes. We therefore aimed to (i) assess if and how this information is collected throughout Europe and (ii) provide a list of potentially available solutions. Methods: A survey was issued by the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group on Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) in 2017, aiming to collect data on preanalytical process management, including sampling time documentation, in European laboratories. A preceding pilot survey was disseminated in Austria in 2016. Additionally, preanalytical experts were surveyed on their local setting on this topic. Finally, the current scientific literature was reviewed on established possibilities of sampling time collection. Results: A total number of 85 responses was collected from the pilot survey, whilst 1347 responses from 37 European countries were obtained from the final survey. A minority (i.e. ~13%) of responders to the latter declared they are unaware of the exact sampling time. The corresponding rate in Austria was ~70% in the pilot and ~30% in the final survey, respectively. Answers from 17 preanalytical experts from 16 countries revealed that sampling time collection seems to be better documented for out- than for in-patients. Eight different solutions for sample time documentation are presented. Conclusions: The sample collection time seems to be documented very heterogeneously across Europe, or not at all. Here we provide some solutions to this issue and believe that laboratories should urgently aim to implement one of these. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the importance of guaranteeing a high level of preanalytical quality in routine diagnostic testing has already been largely acknowledged over the past decades, minor emphasis is currently being placed on the fact that accurate performance and standardization of many preanalytical activities are also necessary prerogatives of clinical trials. Reliable evidence exists that clear indications on how to manage the different preanalytical steps are currently lacking in many clinical trials protocols, nor have detailed authoritative documents been published or endorsed on this matter to the best of our knowledge. To fill this gap, the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) will provide here a specific checklist for preventing preanalytical diagnostic errors in clinical trials (PREDICT), especially focused on covering the most important preanalytical aspects of blood sample management in clinical studies, and thus encompassing test selection, patient preparation, sample collection, management and storage, sample transportation, as well as specimen retrieval before testing. The WG-PRE members sincerely hope that these recommendations will provide a useful contribution for increasing the success rate in clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Published evidence on the risk of additive carryover during phlebotomy remains elusive. We aimed to assess potential carryover of citrated and heparinized blood and the relative volume needed to bias clinical chemistry and coagulation tests. Methods: We simulated standardized phlebotomies to quantify the risk of carryover of citrate and heparin additives in distilled water, using sodium and lithium as surrogates. We also investigated the effects of contamination of heparinized blood samples with increasing volumes of citrated blood and pure citrate on measurements of sodium, potassium, chloride, magnesium, total and ionized calcium and phosphate. Likewise, we studied the effects of contamination of citrated blood samples with increasing volumes of heparinized blood on heparin (anti-Xa) activity, lithium, activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), prothrombin time (PT) and thrombin time (TT). We interpreted these results based on measurement deviations beyond analytical, biological and clinical significance. Results: Standardized phlebotomy simulations revealed no significant differences in concentration of surrogate markers. Clinically significant alterations were observed after contamination of heparinized blood samples with volumes of citrated blood beyond 5–50 μL for ionized calcium and beyond 100–1000 μL for sodium, chloride and total calcium. Investigations of pure citrate carryover revealed similar results at somewhat lower volumes. Heparinized blood carryover showed clinically significant interference of coagulation testing at volumes beyond 5–100 μL. Conclusions: Our results suggest that during a standardized phlebotomy, heparin or citrate contamination is highly unlikely. However, smaller volumes are sufficient to severely alter test results when deviating from phlebotomy guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) was originally established in 2013, with the main aims of (i) promoting the importance of quality in the preanalytical phase of the testing process, (ii) establishing best practices and providing guidance for critical activities in the preanalytical phase, (iii) developing and disseminating European surveys for exploring practices concerning preanalytical issues, (iv) organizing meetings, workshops, webinars or specific training courses on preanalytical issues. As education is a core activity of the WG-PRE, a series of European conferences have been organized every second year across Europe. This collective article summarizes the leading concepts expressed during the lectures of the fifth EFLM Preanalytical Conference "Preanalytical Challenges – Time for solutions", held in Zagreb, 22–23 March, 2019. The topics covered include sample stability, preanalytical challenges in hematology testing, feces analysis, bio-banking, liquid profiling, mass spectrometry, next generation sequencing, laboratory automation, the importance of knowing and measuring the exact sampling time, technology aids in managing inappropriate utilization of laboratory resources, management of hemolyzed samples and preanalytical quality indicators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document provides a joint recommendation for venous blood sampling of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM) Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE) and Latin American Working Group for Preanalytical Phase (WG-PRE-LATAM) of the Latin America Confederation of Clinical Biochemistry (COLABIOCLI). It offers guidance on the requirements for ensuring that blood collection is a safe and patient-centered procedure and provides practical guidance on how to successfully overcome potential barriers and obstacles to its widespread implementation. The target audience for this recommendation are healthcare staff members directly involved in blood collection. This recommendation applies to the use of a closed blood collection system and does not provide guidance for the blood collection with an open needle and syringe and catheter collections. Moreover, this document neither addresses patient consent, test ordering, sample handling and transport nor collection from children and unconscious patients. The recommended procedure is based on the best available evidence. Each step was graded using a system that scores the quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendation. The process of grading was done at several face-to-face meetings involving the same mixture of stakeholders stated previously. The main parts of this recommendation are: 1) Pre-sampling procedures, 2) Sampling procedure, 3) Post-sampling procedures and 4) Implementation. A first draft of the recommendation was circulated to EFLM members for public consultation. WG-PRE-LATAM was also invited to comment the document. A revised version has been sent for voting on to all EFLM and COLABIOCLI members and has been officially endorsed by 33/40 EFLM and 21/21 COLABIOCLI members. We encourage professionals throughout Europe and Latin America to adopt and implement this recommendation to improve the quality of blood collection practices and increase patient and workers safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We suggest here a pragmatic approach for managing results of clinical chemistry testing in hemolyzed samples collected from adults/older children, attempting to balance the need to produce quality laboratory data with clinical urgency of releasing test results. Automatic measurement of the hemolysis index (H-index) in serum or plasma is highly advisable, whilst low-quality assessment of this test remains less good than a visual inspection. Regarding its practical use, when the H-index value does not generate an analytically significant bias, results can be released, whilst when the value is associated with analyte variation in a range between analytically and clinically significant bias (i.e. variation does not exceed the reference change value [RCV]), results of hemolysis-sensitive tests can be released in association with a comment describing the direction in which data are potentially altered, suggesting the need to collect another sample. When the H-index is associated with analyte variation exceeding clinically significant bias (i.e. variation exceeds the RCV), results of hemolysis-sensitive tests should be suppressed and replaced with a comment that biased results cannot be released because the sample is preanalytically compromised and advising the recollection of another sample. If H-index values reach an even higher critical cut-off (i.e. H-index corresponding to a cell-free hemoglobin concentration ≥10 g/L), all laboratory data may be unreliable and should hence be suppressed and replaced with a comment that all data cannot be released because the sample is grossly hemolyzed, also suggesting the recollection of another sample. Due to inaccuracy and imprecision, the use of corrective formulas for adjusting data of hemolysis-sensitive tests is discouraged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hemolytic samples are one of the most challenging preanalytical issues in laboratory medicine. Even causes leading to hemolytic specimen are various, including phlebotomy practices. Respective educational interventions as well as the reduction of the number of people involved in blood collections are claimed to influence the sample quality for the better. In our hospital 70 junior doctors were in charge of routine phlebotomy until 2012, when this task was shifted to 874 nurses, including a preceding training in phlebotomy and preanalytics. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of this training effect and the increase of people involved on sample quality. Methods: The hemolysis index (HI) of 43,875 samples was measured before (n = 21,512) and after (n = 22,363) the switch of blood collection responsibilities. Differences in overall hemolysis rates and the amount of plasma samples with a concentration of free hemoglobin (fHb) above 0.5 g/L and 1 g/L were calculated. Results: Overall HI as well as the percentage of samples with an fHb concentration > 0.5 g/L decreased after the responsibility for phlebotomy changed. The rate of samples with an fHb concentration > 1 g/L remained unchanged. Conclusions: Hemolysis rates were reduced upon passing phlebotomy tasks from untrained physicians on to a trained nursing staff. We therefore conclude that the number of people performing phlebotomy seems to play a minor role, compared to the effect of a standardized training. However, whether a reduction in the number of people involved in blood collection could lead to further improvement of sample quality, remains to be investigated in future studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the analytical characteristics of the ARK methotrexate (MTX) immunoassay for the quantitative examination of MTX in human plasma on automated clinical chemistry analyzers. Topics discussed include the purpose of the antifolate MTX, results of the accuracy evaluation of the immunoassay and functional sensitivity and linearity of the ARK MTX immunoassay. Also discussed is the potential of the ARK Assay as an alternative to fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA).

To ensure that clinical laboratories produce results that are both accurate and of clinical utility it is essential that only samples of adequate quality are analysed. Although various studies and databases assessing the stability of analytes in different settings do exist, guidance on how to perform and report stability studies is lacking. This results in studies that often do not report essential information, thus compromising transferability of the data. The aim of this manuscript is to describe the Checklist for Reporting Stability Studies (CRESS) against which future studies should be reported to ensure standardisation of reporting and easy assessment of transferability of studies to other healthcare settings. The EFLM WG-PRE (European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine Working Group for the Preanalytical Phase) produced the CRESS checklist following a detailed literature review and extensive discussions resulting in consensus agreement. The checklist consists of 20 items covering all the aspects that should be considered when producing a report on a stability study including details of what should be included for each item and a rationale as to why. Adherence to the CRESS checklist will ensure that studies are reported in a transparent and replicable way. This will allow other laboratories to assess whether published data meet the stability criteria required in their own particular healthcare scenario. The EFLM WG-PRE encourage researchers and authors to use the CRESS checklist as a guide to planning stability studies and to produce standardised reporting of future stability studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]