Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background:

The aim of this study was to use Six Sigma^SM (Motorola Trademark Holdings, Libertyville, IL) techniques to analyze the quality of point-of-care (POC) glucose testing measurements quantitatively and to provide suggestions for improvement.

Materials and Methods:

In total, 151 laboratories in China were included in this investigation in 2014. Bias and coefficient of variation were collected from an external quality assessment and an internal quality control program, respectively, for POC glucose testing organized by the National Center for Clinical Laboratories. The σ values and the Quality Goal Index were used to evaluate the performance of POC glucose meters.

Results:

There were 27, 30, 57, and 37 participants in the groups using Optium Xceed™ (Abbott Diabetes Care, Alameda, CA), Accu-Chek^® Performa (Roche, Basel, Switzerland), One Touch Ultra^® (Johnson & Johnson), and “other” meters, respectively. The median of the absolute value of percentage difference varied among different lots and different groups. Among all the groups, the Johnson & Johnson One Touch Ultra group had the smallest median of absolute value of percentage difference except for lot 201411, whereas the “other” group had the largest median in all five lots. More than 85% of participate laboratories satisfied the total allowable error (TEa) requirement in International Organization for Standardization standard 15197:2013, and 85.43% (129/151) of laboratories obtained intralaboratory coefficient of variations less than 1/3TEa. However, Six Sigma techniques suggested that 41.72% (63/151) to 65.56% (99/151) of the laboratories needed to improve their POC glucose testing performance, in either precision, trueness, or both.

Conclusions:

Laboratories should pay more attention on the practice of POC glucose testing and take actions to improve their performance. Only in this way can POC glucose testing really function well in clinical practice.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Kavsak

, Zielinski

, Li

, McNamara

, Adeli

: Challenges of implementing point of care testing (POCT) glucose meters in a pediatric acute care setting. Clin Biochem, 2004; 37:811–817.

Karon

, Boyd

, Klee

: Glucose meter performance criteria for tight glycemic control estimated by simulation modeling. Clin Chem, 2010; 56:1091–1097.

Steil

, Langer

, Jaeger

, Alexander

, Gales

, Agus

MSD

: Value of continuous glucose monitoring for minimizing severe hypoglycemia during tight glycemic control. Pediatr Crit Care Med, 2011; 12:643–648.

Sacks

, ed.: National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry (NACB) Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines: Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus. Washington, DC: American Association for Clinical Chemistry and the American Diabetes Association, 2011.

Aslan

, Stemp

, Yip

, Munro

: Method precision and frequent causes of errors observed in point-of-care glucose testing. Am J Clin Pathol, 2014; 142:857–863.

Harry

: Six Sigma: a breakthrough strategy for profitability. Qual Progress, 1998; 31:60–64.

Westgard

: The Six Sigma Calculators. www.westgard.com/six-sigma-calculators.htm (accessed November 28, 2014 ).

Westgard

: Six Sigma Quality Design & Control: Desirable Precision and Requisite QC for Laboratory Measurement Processes, 2 ^nd ed. Madison, WI: Westgard QC, 2006:41.

Nevalainen

, Berte

, Kraft

, Leigh

, Picaso

, Morgan

: Evaluating laboratory performance on quality indicators with the six sigma scale. Arch Pathol Lab Med, 2000; 124:516–519.

10.

International Organization for Standardization: ISO 13528:2005. Statistical Methods for Use in Proficiency Testing by Interlaboratory Comparisons. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization, 2005.

11.

International Organization for Standardization: ISO 15197:2013(E). In Vitro Diagnostic Test Systems—Requirements for Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems for Self-Testing in Managing Diabetes Mellitus. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization, 2013.

12.

Parry

: Quality Goal Index. www.westgard.com/guest34.htm (accessed November 28, 2014 ).

13.

Ding

, Xu

, Zhang

, Ni

: Comparison and analysis of point-of-care glucose meter and biochemical analyzer for blood glucose measurement. Chin J Lab Med, 2007; 30:1374–1375.

14.

Westgard

, Klee

: Quality management. In: Burtis

, Ashwood

, Bruns

, eds. Tietz Textbook of Clinical Chemistry and Molecular Diagnostics, 5 ^th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders, 2012:182–183.

15.

Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Point-of-Care Blood Glucose Testing in Acute and Chronic Care Facilities; Archived Guideline, 2 ^nd ed. CLSI Document C30-A2. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2002.

16.

Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Point-of-Care Blood Glucose Testing in Acute and Chronic Care Facilities; Approved Guideline, 3 ^rd ed. CLSI Document POCT 12-A3. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2013.

17.

International Organization for Standardization: ISO 15197:2003. In Vitro Diagnostic Test Systems—Requirements for Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems for Self-Testing in Managing Diabetes Mellitus. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization, 2003.

18.

Hens

, Berth

, Armbruster

, Westgard

: Sigma metrics used to assess analytical quality of clinical chemistry assays: importance of the allowable total error (TEa) target. Clin Chem Lab Med, 2014; 52:973–980.

19.

Gras

, Philippe

: Application of the Six Sigma concept in clinical laboratories: a review. Clin Chem Lab Med, 2007; 45:789–796.

20.

Zhang

: The importance of training for the correct use of the POCT glucosemeter. Lab Med, 2004; 19:327–329.

Evaluating Laboratory Performance on Point-of-Care Glucose Testing with Six Sigma Metric for 151 Institutions in China

Abstract

Background:

Materials and Methods:

Results:

Conclusions:

Get full access to this article

References