Spanish Preanalytical Quality Monitoring Program (SEQC), an overview of 12 years' experience

Preanalytical variables, such as sample collection, handling and transport, may affect patient results. Preanalytical phase quality monitoring should be established in order to minimize laboratory errors and improve patient safety. A retrospective study (2001-2013) of the results obtained through the Spanish Society of Clinical Biochemistry and Molecular Pathology (SEQC) External quality assessment (preanalytical phase) was performed to summarize data regarding the main factors affecting preanalytical phase quality. Our aim was to compare data from 2006 to 2013 with a previously published manuscript assessing the 2001-2005 period. A significant decrease in rejection rates was observed both for blood and urine samples. For serum samples, the most frequent rejection causes in the first period were non-received samples (37.5%), hemolysis (29.3%) and clotted samples (14.4%). Conversely, in the second period, hemolysis was the main rejection cause (36.2%), followed by non-received samples (34.5%) and clotted samples (11.1%). For urine samples, the main rejection cause overall was a non-received sample (up to 86.1% of cases in the second period, and 81.6% in the first). For blood samples with anticoagulant, the number of rejections also decreased. While plasma-citrate-ESR still showed the highest percentages of rejections (0.980% vs. 1.473%, p<0.001), the lowest corresponded to whole-blood EDTA (0.296% vs. 0.381%, p<0.001). For the majority of sample types, a decrease in preanalytical errors was confirmed. Improvements in organization, implementation of standardized procedures in the preanalytical phase, and participation in a Spanish external quality assessment scheme may have notably contributed to error reduction in this phase

Corrigendum to: Preanalytical issues related to routine and diagnostic glucose tests: Results from a survey in Spain

This is a correction of Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2020;30(1):010704. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11613/ BM.2020.01070

Preanalytical issues related to routine and diagnostic glucose tests: Results from a survey in Spain

Introduction: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the most prevalent diseases worldwide. The objective of this study was to find out under what preanalytical conditions routine and diagnostic glucose tests are performed across Spanish laboratories; and also what criteria are used for DM diagnosis. Materials and methods: An online survey was performed by the Commission on Quality Assurance in the Extra-Analytical Phase of the Spanish Society of Laboratory Medicine (SEQC-ML). Access to the questionnaire was available on the home page of the SEQC-ML website during the period April-July 2018. Data analysis was conducted with the IBM SPSS© Statistics (version 20.0) program. Results: A total of 96 valid surveys were obtained. Most laboratories were in public ownership, serving hospital and primary care patients, with high and medium workloads, and a predominance of mixed routine-urgent glucose testing. Serum tubes were the most used for routine glucose analysis (92%) and DM diagnosis (54%); followed by lithium-heparin plasma tubes (62%), intended primarily for urgent glucose testing; point-of care testing devices were used by 37%; and plasma tubes with a glycolysis inhibitor, mainly sodium fluoride, by 19%. Laboratories used the cut-off values and criteria recognized worldwide for DM diagnosis in adults and glucose-impaired tolerance, but diverged in terms of fasting plasma glucose and gestational DM criteria. Conclusion: Preanalytical processing of routine and DM diagnostic glucose testing in Spain does not allow a significant, non-quantified influence of glycolysis on the results to be ruled out. Possible adverse consequences include a delay in diagnosis and possible under-treatment

Preanalytical issues related to routine and diagnostic glucose tests: Results from a survey in Spain

Introduction: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the most prevalent diseases worldwide. The objective of this study was to find out under what preanalytical conditions routine and diagnostic glucose tests are performed across Spanish laboratories; and also what criteria are used for DM diagnosis. Materials and methods: An online survey was performed by the Commission on Quality Assurance in the Extra-Analytical Phase of the Spanish Society of Laboratory Medicine (SEQC-ML). Access to the questionnaire was available on the home page of the SEQC-ML website during the period April-July 2018. Data analysis was conducted with the IBM SPSS© Statistics (version 20.0) program. Results: A total of 96 valid surveys were obtained. Most laboratories were in public ownership, serving hospital and primary care patients, with high and medium workloads, and a predominance of mixed routine-urgent glucose testing. Serum tubes were the most used for routine glucose analysis (92%) and DM diagnosis (54%); followed by lithium-heparin plasma tubes (62%), intended primarily for urgent glucose testing; point-ofcare testing devices were used by 37%; and plasma tubes with a glycolysis inhibitor, mainly sodium fluoride, by 19%. Laboratories used the cut-off values and criteria recognized worldwide for DM diagnosis in adults and glucose-impaired tolerance, but diverged in terms of fasting plasma glucose and gestational DM criteria. Conclusion: Preanalytical processing of routine and DM diagnostic glucose testing in Spain does not allow a significant, non-quantified influence of glycolysis on the results to be ruled out. Possible adverse consequences include a delay in diagnosis and possible under-treatmen

Corrigendum to: Preanalytical issues related to routine and diagnostic glucose tests: Results from a survey in Spain

This is a correction of Biochem Med (Zagreb) 2020;30(1):010704. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11613/ BM.2020.010704 Since the publication of the article, the authors have noticed an error in Table 3, Question 5. The correct Table is presented below. The authors apologize for any inconvenience caused to the readers

Preanalytical issues related to routine and diagnostic glucose tests: Results from a survey in Spain

Introduction: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the most prevalent diseases worldwide. The objective of this study was to find out under what preanalytical conditions routine and diagnostic glucose tests are performed across Spanish laboratories; and also what criteria are used for DM diagnosis. Materials and methods: An online survey was performed by the Commission on Quality Assurance in the Extra-Analytical Phase of the Spanish Society of Laboratory Medicine (SEQC-ML). Access to the questionnaire was available on the home page of the SEQC-ML website during the period April-July 2018. Data analysis was conducted with the IBM SPSS© Statistics (version 20.0) program. Results: A total of 96 valid surveys were obtained. Most laboratories were in public ownership, serving hospital and primary care patients, with high and medium workloads, and a predominance of mixed routine-urgent glucose testing. Serum tubes were the most used for routine glucose analysis (92%) and DM diagnosis (54%); followed by lithium-heparin plasma tubes (62%), intended primarily for urgent glucose testing; point-ofcare testing devices were used by 37%; and plasma tubes with a glycolysis inhibitor, mainly sodium fluoride, by 19%. Laboratories used the cut-off values and criteria recognized worldwide for DM diagnosis in adults and glucose-impaired tolerance, but diverged in terms of fasting plasma glucose and gestational DM criteria. Conclusion: Preanalytical processing of routine and DM diagnostic glucose testing in Spain does not allow a significant, non-quantified influence of glycolysis on the results to be ruled out. Possible adverse consequences include a delay in diagnosis and possible under-treatmen

Harmonized D-dimer levels upon admission for prognosis of COVID-19 severity: Results from a Spanish multicenter registry (BIOCOVID-Spain study).

Coagulopathy is a key feature of COVID-19 and D-dimer has been reported as a predictor of severity. However, because D-dimer test results vary considerably among assays, resolving harmonization issues is fundamental to translate findings into clinical practice. In this retrospective multicenter study (BIOCOVID study), we aimed to analyze the value of harmonized D-dimer levels upon admission for the prediction of in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients. All-cause in-hospital mortality was defined as endpoint. For harmonization of D-dimer levels, we designed a model based on the transformation of method-specific regression lines to a reference regression line. The ability of D-dimer for prediction of death was explored by receiver operating characteristic curves analysis and the association with the endpoint by Cox regression analysis. Study population included 2663 patients. In-hospital mortality rate was 14.3%. Harmonized D-dimer upon admission yielded an area under the curve of 0.66, with an optimal cut-off value of 0.945 mg/L FEU. Patients with harmonized D-dimer ≥ 0.945 mg/L FEU had a higher mortality rate (22.4% vs. 9.2%; p