Post on 05-Nov-2021
Troubleshooting Failed QC
Dr Douglas ChesherClinical Biochemistry, NSW Health Pathology, Royal
North Shore HospitalNorthern Clinical, School University of Sydney
Outline
• Types of errors• Approach to troubleshooting• Problem fixed, now what?• Lot number changes
Experimental Errors
• Systematic Error• Random Error• Blunders
Systematic Errors
• Due to identified causes and can, in principle, beeliminated. Errors of this type result in measuredvalues that are consistently too high orconsistently too low.
• Types– Instrumental– Observational. For example, parallax in reading a
meter scale.– Environmental– Theoretical. Due to simplification of the model system
or approximations in the equations describing it.
http://www.physics.nmsu.edu/research/lab110g/html/ERRORS.html
Random Errors
• Random errors are positive and negativefluctuations that cause about one-half of themeasurements to be too high and one-half to betoo low.– Sources of random errors cannot always be identified.
• Types of random error– Observational. For example, errors in judgment of an
observer when reading the scale of a measuringdevice to the smallest division.
– Environmental. For example, unpredictablefluctuations in line voltage, temperature, ormechanical vibrations of equipment.
http://www.physics.nmsu.edu/research/lab110g/html/ERRORS.html
Blunders
• An outright mistake.• Should stick out like sore thumbs if we
make multiple measurements or if oneperson checks the work of another.
http://www.physics.nmsu.edu/research/lab110g/html/ERRORS.html
“My QC Failed”
Response to a failed QC
• Stop• Do not just rerun the QC
– Unless part of your rule (eg. 1 2s rerun ‘once’)– Regression towards the mean
Response to failed QC
• Do not just recalibrate as a routine.– Calibrations add noise and increase
imprecision.
120
125
130
135
140
145
150
1 3 5 7 9 11131517192123252729313335373941434547495153555759
126128130132134136138140142144146148
1 3 5 7 9 11131517192123252729313335373941434547495153555759
Points of failure• Instrument Failure:
– Check for error messages (printed or displayed). Refer to thetroubleshooting section of the instrument manual.
• Reagent, Quality Control Materials, Calibrators:– In correct reconstitution, i.e. wrong or contaminated diluent or
use of the wrong volume of diluent.– In correct storage, e.g. left at room temperature for excessive
amount of time.– Prepare fresh (allow enough time to dissolve)– NOTE: Bulk liquid reagents may be contaminated.
• Human:– Reread the method - Check whether the correct sample volumes
or reagents were used. Make sure that a step in the procedurewas not missed.
– Were the correct parameters entered?
Have other tests also failed?
• Blunders– Swapped QC levels
• Short sampled
Are there any instrument flags?
What rule has failed?
• Systematic error– 1 3s, 2 2s, 4 1s, 10x etc
• Random error– 1 3s, R4s
Review your QC Chart
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
Serum X
-3SD
-2SD
-1SD
Mean
1SD
2SD
3SD
Systematicerror
Systematicerror
Has anything changed?
• Just calibrated• New bottle of reagent• New lot of reagent
New reagent lotNew reagent lotQuarterlymaintenance
Quarterlymaintenance
Review points of failure
• Reagents– Correct reagent?, sufficient volume, shelf expiry
date, on-board expiry date• Quality Control Material
– Material, lot no. & assigned value, preparation,shelf expiry date, in-use expiry date, storageconditions.
• Calibrators– Correct material, lot no. & assigned values,
preparation, storage, expiry date. Inspectcalibration trace of last calibration.
Review points of failure
• Instrument– Is maintenance up to date?– Recheck flags, probes, lamps, cuvettes, water
bath.
Correctiveaction
requiredimmediately
?
Correctiveaction
requiredimmediately
?
Instrumentflags?
Instrumentflags?
Maintenance up todate?
Maintenance up todate?
ReagentsOK?
ReagentsOK?
QC OKQC OK
CalibratorsOK?
CalibratorsOK?
QC FailureQC Failure
InstrumentOK?
InstrumentOK?
Monitor QC performanceand correct non-urgentfaults as appropriate
Monitor QC performanceand correct non-urgentfaults as appropriate
Correct instrument faultCorrect instrument fault
Perform all outstandingmaintenance
Perform all outstandingmaintenance
Correct reagent faultCorrect reagent fault
Make up and run correctQC
Make up and run correctQC
Make-up and run correctcalibrator
Make-up and run correctcalibrator
Fix identified instrumentfault
Fix identified instrumentfault
Rerun QC to confirmproblem fixed
Rerun QC to confirmproblem fixedCall for Help!Call for Help!
Y
N
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
N
Problem Solved!
Problem solved, now what?
• Run QC for evidence that problem has beensolved.
• Document what you have done.Troubleshooting logs, QC annotation.
• Address patient results from previous goodQC to when QC failure occurred.– Repeat testing
• Exclude / Inactivate failed QC from dataanalysis if cause of the outlier is clearlyidentified.
Reagent lot changes
• CLSI EP26-A User Evaluation of Between-Reagent Lot Variation; Approved Guideline.
• “The protocol attempts to balance the need toreliably detect clinically significant change inreagent performance that may affect patientresults with the recognition that reagent lotverification is a relatively frequent task thatputs demands on the laboratory’s limitedresource”
QC material is not alwayscommutable• Shift in QC may not reflect a similar shift in
patient results• Just because QC does not show a shift, does
not mean the patients will not show a shift.
• Verify all new lots before they are put intouse.– Need only perform once for group of labs if using
same lot QC and reagent.
Test patient samples withcurrent and candidate
reagent lots
Test patient samples withcurrent and candidate
reagent lots
Estimate averagedifference between lots
Estimate averagedifference between lots
Averagediff < CD?Average
diff < CD?
Was QCacceptable with new
lot?
Was QCacceptable with new
lot?
Investigate lot difference.Do not report patientresults with this lot
Investigate lot difference.Do not report patientresults with this lot
Update QCtargets
Update QCtargets
Candidate lot acceptablefor patient testing
Candidate lot acceptablefor patient testing
YesYes
NoNo
CD: Critical Difference
Defining the critical difference
• Evaluation of comparability based on clinicaloutcomes.
• Evaluation of comparability based on clinical decisions– derived from either biological variation or– from data based on clinicians’ opinions.
• Published professional recommendations.• Performance goals set by regulatory bodies or
organizers of External Quality Assessment Schemes.• Goals based on the current state of the art as
demonstrated by data from EQA or from currentpublications on methodology.
Determine the statisticalpower
Determine the statisticalpower
Determine the number ofsamples to be tested and
the rejection limit
Determine the number ofsamples to be tested and
the rejection limit
Determine the number ofreplicates per sample
Determine the number ofreplicates per sample
Determine the number oftarget concentrations
Determine the number oftarget concentrations
• Alpha (Type I error, false positive)• Probability of detecting an error
when there is no error.• Typically set at 0.05
• Beta (Type II error, false negative)• Probability of not detecting a
difference when there is adifference
• Typically set at 0.20 to 0.05• Statistical Power = 1 – Beta.
Generally measure at clinical decisionpoints, often similar to the QC levels.
Statistical tables may suggest that only onepatient is required but it is recommendedthat at least three samples are used toavoid random errors.If difficult to get sufficient samples,replicate analysis may provide thenecessary additional statistical power.However, under normal circumstancesmeasure in singlicate
Conclusions
• Do not automatically re-run QC or recalibratean assay.
• Type of QC failure and Quality Control Chartsmay give a clue to the nature of the problem.
• Have a structured approach totroubleshooting.
• Have a process for managing your patientresults
• Prevention is better than cure– Manage introduction of new lots to the laboratory