USING SIX SIGMA TO EVALUATE ANALYTICAL PERFORMANCE OF HEMATOLOGY ANALYZER

Robiul Fuadi

Abstract


Background: Many medical decisions  in hospital are based on hematology examination results. We must be aware about their method performance. Sigma-metric is an excellent way to evaluate analytical performance quality. We will display the performance of our laboratory hematology analyzer, Cell Dyne Ruby, by sigma-metric analysis.

Method: sigma analysis was calculated by a formula, sigma = (TEa – CV)/ Bias. Total Error Allowable  (TEa) was specified by the CLIA proficiency testing criteria. The coefficien of variant (CV) and bias data  were supplied from analyzer running three levels of control low (L), normal (N), and high (H) include following analytes: hemoglobin (Hb), Red Blood Cell count (RBC), Hematocrit (HCT), White Blood Cell count (WBC), and Platelet count (PLT).

Results : Sigma value as follows Hb(L:4,33 N:6,68 H:2,62), RBC(L:3,43 N:3,84 H:3,46), HCT(L:2,52 N:1,73 H:2,27), WBC (L:7,14 N:8,44 H:6,38),and PLT (L:2,46 N:8,75 H:7,84). Average sigma value for all parameters were 4,75. Minimum sigma value for any business or manufacturing process was 3. More than 6 sigma value was world class performance.

Conclusion: Hematology Analyzer Cell Dyne Ruby provides “Good” performance by sigma-metric.


Keywords


Sigma-metric, Cell Dyne Ruby, Total Error Allowable, Coefficient of Variant, Bias

Full Text:

PDF

References


Plebani M, Errors in Clinical Laboratories or Errors in Laboratory Medicine?, Clin Chem Lab Med 2006;44(6):750–759

Hammerling J, A Review of Medical Errors in Laboratory Diagnostics and Where We are Today, LABMEDICINE, Volume 43 Number 2, February/March 201

Tiwari E , Pallipady A ,Mishra S, Preanalytical,Analytical and Postanalytical Errors in Chemical Laboratory, International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), Volume 4 Issue 3, March 2015

Plebani M, The Detection and Prevention of error in Laboratory medicine, Review Article, Ann Clin Biochem 2010; 47: 101–110.

Sawalakhe P, Desmukh S, Lakhe R, Evaluating Performance of Testing Laboratory Using Six Sigma, International Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Science, Vol 1, No 1, 2016

Kalra J, Kopargaonkar A, Quality Improvement in Clinical Laboratories: A Six Sigma Concept, Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, 2016 :1 (1),11-20

Maksane S, Parikh R, Vaswani L, Quantitative Assesment of Analytical Phase Quality of Clinical Biochemistry Parameters Using Sigma Metrics, International Journal of Medical Laboratory 2017 ;4 (2); 81-90

Al Muhareb TM, Jones JG, Using Lean Six-Sigma in the Improvement of Service Quality at Aviation Industry: Case Study at the Departure Area in KKIA, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Environmental and Ecological Engineering Vol:8, No:1, 2014

L Turgeon M, Instrumentation in Hematology in Clinical Hematology Theory and Procedure, 5th edition, Chapter 27,p 526-571 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia USA,2012

Vajpayee N, Graham S, Bem S, Basic Examination of Blood and Bone Marrow, in Henry’s Clinical Diagnosis and Management by Laboratory method, 22nd Edition, Chapter 30, p.509-535, Elsevier Saunders Philadelphia USA, 2011

Westgard S, Six Sigma: Laboratory Quality Control in The Healthcare Ecosystem, Abbott Laboratories, 2016

Westgard S, Quantitating Quality: Best Practices for Estimating the Sigmametric, Abbott Laboratories, 2016

Westgard J & Westgard O, Selecting The Right SQC Procedure, Chapter 3 in Six Sigma Based Quality Control, Abbott Laboratories, 2016

World Health Organisation, Dengue: Guidelines for Diagnosis, Treatment, Prevention, and Control, WHO,2009.

Westgard J, “Westgard Rules” and multirules in “Westgard Rules” from website https://www.westgard.com




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24293/ijcpml.v25i2.1375

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.