Living with multiple standards – QA in a multidisciplinary laboratory

 The paper describes the experiences of a medium-sized analytical laboratory in implementing and developing a quality system compliant with several standards. The effect of the laboratory's changing role and work pattern on the quality system are considered. The laboratory costs are explored. The laboratory's particular experiences are shown to be consistent with recent market research in the United Kingdom. Some of the factors a laboratory needs to consider in formulating a quality strategy are described, including the possibility of joint assessments. Also, possible courses of development of the standards themselves are suggested. These developments could simplify the existing situation where laboratories are forced into a quality approach based on multiple standards and assessment. Received: 1 October 1998 · Accepted: 26 January 1999     

The impact of LIMS design and functionality on laboratory quality achievements

 A laboratory information management system (LIMS) can make a major contribution to the quality and therefore to the efficiency and competitiveness of a laboratory. Since it can impact all aspects of a laboratory's organization it must be the key if not the principal player of the laboratory's quality system. It should support the laboratory in establishing, maintaining and applying quality procedures thereby enabling the laboratory to achieve its quality goals. As a tool, LIMS permits the laboratory to input and use its own know-how and experience to optimize the total organization (internal and external) and workflow of generated information. However, perceived "quality" in the context of an LIMS, can be viewed as being made up of different facets such as the security, reliability and accessibility of information as well as its turn around time and production cost. This paper reviews the role of a LIMS in the laboratory and the contribution that both system design and functionality can have on "building quality ". Received: 5 October 1998 · Accepted: 20 October 1998     

Quality issues in proficiency testing

 Proficiency testing is a means of assessing the ability of laboratories to competently perform specific tests and/or measurements. It supplements a laboratory's own internal quality control procedure by providing an additional external audit of their testing capability and provides laboratories with a sound basis for continuous improvement. It is also a means towards achieving comparability of measurement between laboratories. Participation is one of the few ways in which a laboratory can compare its performance with that of other laboratories. Good performance in proficiency testing schemes provides independent evidence and hence reassurance to the laboratory and its clients that its procedures, test methods and other laboratory operations are under control. For test results to have any credibility, they must be traceable to a standard of measurement, preferably in terms of SI units, and must be accompanied by a statement of uncertainty. Analytical chemists are coming to realise that this is just as true in their field as it is for physical measurements, and applies equally to proficiency testing results and laboratory test reports. Recent approaches toward ensuring the quality and comparability of proficiency testing schemes and the means of evaluating proficiency test results are described. These have led to the drafting of guidelines and subsequently to the development of international requirements for the competence of scheme providers. Received: 2 January 1999 · Accepted: 7 April 1999     

Quality in point-of-care testing: taking POC to the next level

Point-of-care testing (POCT) is a complex system with many opportunities for error. Delivering quality POCT requires multidisciplinary coordination and an understanding of the preanalytic, analytic, and postanalytic processes that are necessary to deliver a test result and take clinical action. Most errors in laboratory testing occur in the pre and postanalytical phases and many mistakes that are referred to as lab error are actually due to poor communication, actions by others involved in the testing process, or poorly designed processes outside the laboratory's control. POCT requires significant operator interaction with analysis and documentation of calibration and quality control, unlike other medical devices. Clinicians often interpret POCT as equivalent to core laboratory testing, only faster, and mistakenly utilize the results interchangeably despite the differences in test methodologies. Taking quality of POCT to the next level involves looking beyond the analytical phase and integration of POCT into the entire pathway of patient care to understand how POCT relates to medical decision-making at specific points during the patient's care. A systematic review of the literature by the National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry is currently being conducted to draft guidelines for best practice that link the use of POCT to improved patient outcomes.Presented at the 10th Conference Quality in the Spotlight, March 2005, Antwerp, Belgium.     

Implementation of ISO/IEC 17025 standard in a nuclear analytical laboratory: The KAERI experience

The practical experience on the implementation of ISO/IEC 17025 compliant quality system in a nuclear analytical laboratory of the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) is described. This paper summarizes the need for a quality system and accreditation, the process of a quality system implementation, the quality system structures, and the formal accreditation of our laboratory by the Korean Laboratory Accreditation Scheme (KOLAS). Also, the improvements in the management, technical and service quality which resulted from implementation of this system are briefly reported.     

Interlaboratory system to ensure and improve the quality of glassware calibration and use in a large laboratory

This paper describes the implementation and methodology of an interlaboratory system that ensures the quality of glassware calibration and use in a large laboratory. The interlaboratory system involves periodic comparisons between laboratories with evaluations and improvements made over time. Two similar items are calibrated in each exercise according to a detailed calibration procedure. The reference value is traceable to the international system supplied by a metrology laboratory. The results are evaluated as normalized errors and analyzed by Youden graphs. The calibration procedure is presented. An interlaboratory experiment is described in which 7 participating laboratories performed calibrations of 2 volumetric flasks. The reported results, the interlaboratory evaluation, and the actions taken are presented.     

Laboratory accreditation: The operation of an established scheme

NAMAS, the National Measurement Accreditation Service, was formed in 1985 and has currently accredited some 1050 testing and calibration laboratories in the United Kingdom. NAMAS is managed by an Executive of 60 staff which is based at the National Physical Laboratory, one the UK's largest Government Research Establishments. Laboratories seeking accreditation are assessed by fully trained technical experts contracted by NAMAS, against the criteria set out in the NAMAS Accreditation Standard M10; the criteria contained in this document are fully consistent with the international standards for laboratory accreditation EN 45001 and ISO Guide 25. NAMAS has recently published a document which provides guidance on the interpretation of the NAMAS Accreditation Standard for analytical laboratories. Assessment involves a consultative preassessment visit which is followed by a thorough on-site assessment of a laboratory's quality system and testing activities by a team of expert assessors. Following the correction of any noncompliances found at the assessment, the laboratory receives a certificate of accreditation and a schedule which defines those tests and analyses for which the laboratory is accredited. NAMAS has negotiated a number of mutual recognition agreements with similar accreditation bodies in other countries and negotiations with other schemes are underway. The imminent approach of the European Single Market has highlighted the need for independent third party assurance of testing and calibration and this should ensure the continued growth of NAMAS and similar schemes elsewhere in Europe.     

The preparation and utilization of performance evaluation soils for evaluating radioassay laboratories engaged in site remediation work

Site remediation projects dealing with uranium, thorium or radium require the services of a radioassay laboratory during the site characterization, remediation and final site survey/verification phases. In the U.S., regulatory agencies and industry guidelines recommend that the remediation contractor conduct an external laboratory QC program to ensure the quality of the analytical results. The commercial availability of certified natural soil matrices is extremely limited not only by nuclide and nuclide concentration but also by soil type. In most cases, the applicability of these materials for an external QC program is questionable since the chemical constituents of the certified soil may not be representative of the remediation soil type. Also, such materials are typically only suitable as single blind performance evaluation (PE) samples. The Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory (YAEL) has characterized soil materials from several uranium mining and milling sites for use in two laboratory PE programs. The site specific PE materials were prepared in accordance with their intended use and quality performance requirements. One PE material was dried, pulverized to a particle size of approximately 10 microns and homogeneously blended. The second PE material (total of 1,024 kg) was methodically field blended and aliquoted to produce 1,000 separate homogeneous 1 kg samples. Both PE materials were characterized for radionuclide concentration and heterogeneity or sample distribution. A summary of the characterization studies of the different PE materials as well as the quality performance criteria developed for evaluating the laboratory's performance and the advantages and disadvantages of using each PE material will be discussed and summarized.     

Quality system implementation in a Brazilian university laboratory

The introduction of quality systems in laboratories at universities is a difficult task. Test services for external customers are provided to generate additional budget, and there may be a clear awareness about the need for systematic QA/QC actions. However, offering services is not of the highest priority within most university environments. The staff performance is commonly evaluated on basis of published papers and teaching activities, giving little or no weight for the test services. Therefore, implementation of a quality system is often pushed back to a lower priority leading to postponement. The efforts for creating a quality system in a laboratory from a Brazilian university are described in this paper, along with the results produced.     

Establishment of a quality system at the Nuclear Analytical Laboratories of the Atomic Energy Authority, Sri Lanka

A quality system according to the requirements of ISO/IEC guidelines has been introduced at the Nuclear Analytical Laboratories of the Atomic Energy Authority, which has received appreciation from International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspection evaluation reports (RAS/2/010) showing a positive indication to accreditation. The quality system has achieved the “analytical quality” through technical competence by non-conformance management. The experience in the progression towards achieving a quality system is described with examples from zero level to a positive index. This nuclear analytical service laboratory shows long-term stability of performance and enhances its credibility to customers, through the quality system.     

Dynamic rather than static performance measures are needed to improve patient safety

Selected performance measures have been proposed to reduce clinical laboratory errors as a means of reducing medical errors. Yet, whereas this static list of measures are all quality-related, they are not all patient-safety related. For example, the specimen rejection rate is actually measuring a laboratory's ability to detect errors, which is a good thing. Moreover, a static list does not account for new errors or an improved error rate for items on the list. A dynamic list of patient-safety errors, informed by a FRACAS (Failure Review and Corrective Action System) overcomes these objections, since the list of performance measures is periodically refreshed by error data from the clinical laboratory. While new to clinical laboratories, FRACAS has been successfully used in the medical device industry.     

Quality assurance in immunogenetics and histocompatibility: experience with EFI Accreditation

 The European Federation for Immunogenetics (EFI) has its own standards for histocompatibility testing. Compared with EN 45001 and ISO Standards, EFI Standards are more detailed, actually stating "what to do" in the laboratory. The decision of Eurotransplant that all its organ transplantation programmes must be EFI-accredited by the year 2000, illustrates the importance of the these standards. It took us 11 months to prepare the EFI questionnaire, describing the main features of our laboratory and how they complied with EFI Standards. After approval of this file, inspection was performed by a team of two peers who routinely worked in an EFI-accredited tissue typing laboratory. The pre-analytical, analytical and post-analytical phases were inspected during a one day visit. Furthermore, a checklist was reviewed against the laboratory's documentation system. Within 1 month of reception of the inspection report, we were expected to send a reply listing the corrective actions taken. Upon acknowledgement of the latter, EFI Accreditation was granted, for 1 year. We feel that detailed standards, specifically designed for a certain type of laboratory, offer many advantages. Received: 15 April 2000 · Accepted: 15 April 2000     

Implementation of a quality system in a clinical laboratory

The effects of a quality system are measured with the aid of quality indicators, which can be used for both decision-making by the management of the laboratory and for process control. The need for economic appraisal is stressed since the development of a quality system is very time- and labour-consuming. The aspects of both the customer and the personnel involved should be considered to evaluate the quality system. It is also important to define practical means to build up and maintain a quality system especially in smaller laboratories. For instance, simple tools to evaluate uncertainty of measurement and availability of inexpensive national reference materials are needed.     

Radioanalytical data quality objectives and measurement quality objectives during a Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center response

During the early and intermediate phases of a nuclear or radiological incident, the Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center (FRMAC) collects environmental samples that are analyzed by organizations with radioanalytical capability. Resources dedicated to quality assurance (QA) activities must be sufficient to assure that appropriate radioanalytical measurement quality objectives (MQOs) and assessment data quality objectives (DQOs) are met. As the emergency stabilizes, QA activities will evolve commensurate with the need to reach appropriate DQOs. The MQOs represent a compromise between precise analytical determinations and the timeliness necessary for emergency response activities. Minimum detectable concentration (MDC), lower limit of detection, and critical level tests can all serve as measurements reflecting the MQOs. The relationship among protective action guides (PAGs), derived response levels (DRLs), and laboratory detection limits is described. The rationale used to determine the appropriate laboratory detection limit is described.     

ISO 17025: practical benefits of implementing a quality system

As a laboratory certified to ISO 9001:2000 and accredited to ISO 17025, rtech laboratories has incorporated an overall system for technical and quality management, which results in benefits observed in daily laboratory practices. Technical requirements were updated to include the addition of formal personnel training plans and detailed records, method development and validation procedures, measurement of method uncertainty, and a defined equipment calibration and maintenance program. In addition, a stronger definition of the sample preparation process was documented to maintain consistency in sampling, and a more rigorous quality control monitoring program was implemented for chemistry and microbiology. Management quality improvements focused on document control to maintain consistent analytical processes, improved monitoring of supplier performance, a contract review process for documenting customer requirements, and a system for handling customer comments and complaints, with continuous improvement through corrective and preventive action procedures and audits. Quarterly management review of corrective actions, nonconforming testing, and proficiency testing aid in determining long-term trending. The practical benefits of these technical and management quality improvements are seen on a daily basis in the laboratory. Faster identification and resolution of issues regarding methods, personnel or equipment, improved customer satisfaction, meeting quality requirements of specialized customers, and overall increased laboratory business are all the result of implementing an effective quality system.     

Quality assurance in the view of a commercial analytical laboratory

 The necessity for analytical quality assurance is primarily a feature of the analytical process itself. With the full establishment of the EU domestic market, it is also becoming a legal necessity for an increasing number of analytical laboratories. The requirements which laboratories will need to fulfil are stipulated in DIN EN 45 001. Accredited testing laboratories must in fact provide evidence that they work solely in accordance with this standard. National and EU commissions, which are legislative authorities, tend therefore to specify analytical methods, e.g. in the form of regulations or appendices thereto, intended to ensure that results from different laboratories will be comparable and hence will stand up in a court of law. The analytical quality assurance system (AQS), introduced by the Baden-Württemberg Ministry for the Environment in 1984, obliges laboratories to regularly participate in collaborative studies and thereby demonstrate their ability to provide suitably accurate analyses. This alone, however, does not sufficiently demonstrate the competence of a laboratory. Only personal appraisal of the laboratory by an auditor, together with the successful analysis of a sample provided by the same and performed under his observation, can provide proof of the competence of the laboratory. From an analytical point of view, the competence of a laboratory must be regarded as the decisive factor. Competence can only be attained through analytical quality assurance, which thus must be demanded of all laboratories. Received: 4 October 1996 Accepted: 15 January 1997     

Statistical treatment of proficiency testing data

 There are three stages to evaluating a laboratory's results in an interlaboratory proficiency test: establishing the correct result for the test item, determining an evaluation statistic for the particular result, and establishing an acceptable range. There are a wide variety of procedures for accomplishing these three stages and a correspondingly wide variety of statistical techniques in use. Currently in North America the largest number of laboratory proficiency test programs are in the clinical laboratory field, followed by programs for environmental laboratories that test drinking water and waste water. Proficiency testing in both of these fields is under the jurisdiction of the federal government and other regulatory and accreditation agencies. Many of the statistical procedures are specified in the regulations, to assure comparability of different programs and a fair evaluation of performance. In this article statistical procedures recommended in International Organization for Standardization Guide 43, Part 1, are discussed and compared with current practices in North America. Received: 22 April 1998 · Accepted: 12 May 1998     

Development of an automated in situ fracture stage for a ToF‐SIMS system

The design philosophy and implementation of an ultra high vacuum (UHV), PC controlled, automated in situ fracture stage for a surface analysis system is described. ToF‐SIMS spectra are shown to illustrate the improvement in spectral quality obtained from micro‐compact tension (CT) tests of polymer matrix fracture surfaces produced using the fracture stage in UHV compared to those obtained from a sample tested at air. This system is flexible in that by changing the capacity of the load cell it is possible to reduce or increase maximum loads as the specimen type and material demands. The stage has been designed with instrumental flexibility in mind, utilising commercial SEM‐stub type sample mounts, and can thus be used for AES/SAM and XPS investigations, as well as ToF‐SIMS analysis, in the authors' laboratory. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.