What's New on Westgard Web: June 2014

Posted by Sten Westgard, MS

IQCP: What does the P stand for?

As we approach the AACC/ASCLS conference in Chicago, the momentum behind Individualized Quality Control Plans (IQCPs) is building. There are workshops, online tutorials, webinars, new software programs, consulting services, and of course the guidelines and regulations. But the question of HOW to create an IQCP and HOW that actually determines you QC frequency is still unresolved. Perhaps the P doesn't stand for Plan...

From EQC to EP23 to IQCP, what's the path to Risk QC?
 

The Quality of HbA1c in 2014

In 2010, Lenters-Westra and Slingerland published a landmark study on HbA1c quality for POC devices. They found at that time that only 6 out of 8 devices met the generally accepted analytical performance criteria. There were even some manufacturers who asked for a "do-over" from that initial evaluation - but failed the do-over too. Now, four years later, Lenters-Westra and Slingerland are back, this time looking at 7 POC HbA1c devices, a few of the devices still the same since the last study, but some newcomers as well. Has the quality of HbA1c gotten "good enough"? It's all the more important now that guidelines are recommending a diagnosis of diabetes at  6.5% Hba1c.

How many devices you think passed out the field of 7? 2? 3? 4? or more?

 

 
Another look at Italian Error Rates, 2014

A new abstract from the IFCC WorldLab meeting in Istanbul has an update on the Italian error rates. Back in 1997, the entire focus of improvement efforts changed on the basis of the study of Italian lab error rates. In the nearly two decades since, has there been any improvement in the errors in Italian labs (and by transference, in labs around the world) ?

Are pre-analytical errors still predominant in Italian labs?