Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2017 Feb 15;27(1):81-85.
doi: 10.11613/BM.2017.010.

Essential aspects of external quality assurance for point-of-care testing

Affiliations
Review

Essential aspects of external quality assurance for point-of-care testing

Anne Stavelin et al. Biochem Med (Zagreb). .

Abstract

External quality assurance (EQA) or proficiency testing for point-of-care (POC) testing is in principle similar to EQA for larger hospital laboratories, but the participants are different. The participants are usually health care personnel with little or no knowledge of laboratory medicine. The implication of this is that the EQA provider has to a) convince the participants that participation in EQA schemes are important, b) be able to circulate materials with reasonable time intervals, c) produce feedback reports that are understandable, and d) offer help and guidance to the participants when needed. It is also important that EQA for POC testing e) address the pre-examination, the examination and the post-examination processes, and f) that schemes for measurement procedures using interval or ordinal scale are offered. The aim of the present paper is to highlight important issues of these essential aspects of EQA for POC testing.

Keywords: health care; health personnel; laboratory proficiency testing; point-of-care testing; quality assurance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None declared.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Miller WG, Jones GR, Horowitz GL, Weykamp C. Proficiency testing/external quality assessment: current challenges and future directions. Clin Chem. 2011;57:1670–80. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2011.168641 10.1373/clinchem.2011.168641 - DOI - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kristensen GB, Christensen NG, Thue G, Sandberg S. Between-lot variation in external quality assessment of glucose: clinical importance and effect on participant performance evaluation. Clin Chem. 2005;51:1632–6. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2005.049080 10.1373/clinchem.2005.049080 - DOI - DOI - PubMed
    1. Miller WG. Time to Pay Attention to Reagent and Calibrator Lots for Proficiency Testing. Clin Chem. 2016;62:666–7. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2016.255802 10.1373/clinchem.2016.255802 - DOI - DOI - PubMed
    1. Stavelin A, Meijer P, Kitchen D, Sandberg S. External quality assessment of point-of-care International Normalized Ratio (INR) testing in Europe. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2011;50:81–8. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm.2011.719 10.1515/cclm.2011.719 - DOI - DOI - PubMed
    1. Stavelin A, Petersen PH, Solvik UO, Sandberg S. External quality assessment of point-of-care methods: model for combined assessment of method bias and single-participant performance by the use of native patient samples and non commutable control materials. Clin Chem. 2013;59:363–71. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2012.191957 10.1373/clinchem.2012.191957 - DOI - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources