Abstract:Background: To diagnose diseases, track the effectiveness of treatments and make well-informed clinical decisions, doctors rely on results from laboratories. Accurate and precise results minimize the necessity for additional testing, saving time and money while enhancing patient satisfaction.. Internal quality control and an external quality assurance scheme(EQAS) are metrics used to evaluate a clinical laboratory's performance. One of the numerous quality indicators that can be used to gauge the amount of errors is sigma metrics. To calculate the sigma scores bias%, CV%, and Total Error Allowable (TEa) are needed. Total Error allowable(TEa) is a crucial benchmark that establishes allowed limits on the degree of deviation from the target value for a certain analyte. Nevertheless, a proper consensus for establishing a TEa goal has not been reached and the impact of this limiting factor in standard laboratory practice and sigma calculation has not been sufficiently established. Choosing the right Total Error allowable(TEa) goal is one of the greatest challenges when employing sigma metrics as depending on the source, several measurands of TEa values may exhibit alteration. Material and methods: Our study aims to determine the sigma scores of 20 routine chemistry parameters using six different TEa sources: Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment (CLIA 88'), CLIA(Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendment) 24, BDV (Biological Variation Desirable), RCPA(Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia), RiliBak(Guideline of the German Medical Association for Quality Assurance of Laboratory Medical Examinations), and EMC/Spain(Measurement and Control Scheme) over a 12-month period using the bias percent from the External Quality Assessment Scheme (EQAS) and coefficient of variation (CV) from the Internal Quality Control (IQC). Detection system was automated, multi-channel, selective analyzer, the Beckman Coulter AU680 which works on the principle of spectrophotometry. To compute the Sigma metrics, formula used was Sigma = (TEa - Bias%) / CV%. By comparing the sigma values from the different TEa sources, TEa variance on the evaluation of the sigma metric was ascertained after which an internal quality control plan and QGI(Quality Goal Index) for underperforming parameters were devised. Results: The study discovered that the sigma values of common chemical parameters varied significantly based on the TEa sources used. Maximum parameters in the above three-sigma zone were TBil, HDL, CK, ALP, amylase and uric acid in CLIA'88 while RCPA and Biological variation were determined to be the most severe, with the highest performing parameters falling below three sigma zones. Rilibaek was the most liberal, with only sodium in the lower three sigma zones along with CLIA'88. The findings indicate that there is the substantial influence of various Total Error Allowable (TEa) sources on the sigma metric evaluation. A quality control plan was devised depending on different sigma scores of the analytes using biorad unity 2.0 software(westgard sigma multirules). The origins of errors that resulted in low sigma ratings liked enhanced cleaning of electrodes, electrode replacement, ageing of reagents, instrument maintainence were pinpointed and addressed. Conclusion: The study highlights the necessity of harmonizing and standardizing sigma metrics, stressing the significance of choosing suitable total error allowable goals (TEa). The creation of worldwide standards and recommendations for total error allowable (TEa) can lead to its harmonization. Establishing a consensus on the acceptable levels of error for various laboratory tests would necessitate the cooperation of specialists from many nations and organizations in order to set such guidelines and standards.

Assessment of accuracy of laboratory testing results, relative to peer group consensus values in external quality control, by bivariate z-score analysis: the example of D-Dimer

D-dimer—An International Assessment of the Quality of Laboratory Testing: Implications for D-dimer Use in the Real World

The performance of quantitative D-dimer assays in Chinese clinical laboratories by analyzing data from National External quality Assessment Scheme

College of American Pathologists Quality Cross Check —Chemistry and Therapeutic Drug Monitoring as a tool for biannual instrument correlations

Variable Performance of D-dimer Testing by Hemostasis Laboratories: The Australasian/Asia-Pacific Experience

Benchmarking medical laboratory performance on a global scale

Evaluation of Quality Control in Clinical Chemistry and Hematology Using Sigma Metrics

Comparison of Thrombophilia Assay Results for the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Scientific and Standardization Committee Plasma Standard from Different External Quality Assessment Providers—for the External Quality Assurance in Thrombosis and Haemostasis Group

B-142 Using Big Data Analytics to Measure the Multi-year Consistency of Sigma metrics for Vitros Cardiac Assays

Evaluation of imprecision in the different detection methods of Zn based on 5 years of data from an external quality assessment program in China

B-143 Using Big Data Analytics to Measure the Multi-year Consistency of Sigma Metrics for Vitros Oncology Assays

Beta-binomial meta-analysis of individual differences based on sample means and standard deviations: Studying reliability of sum scores of binary items.

A-118 Sigma Metric Performance of Chemistry Assays on 4 Instrument Systems

Analysis of hematology quality control using six sigma metrics

B-108 Delta Check Performance Assessment by Using Real-WorldData at the Temple University Health System

Beyond the basics: Sigma scores in laboratory medicine with variable total allowable errors (TEa)

Critical appraisal of the CLSI guideline EP09c "measurement procedure comparison and bias estimation using patient samples"

Reporting standards for Bland–Altman agreement analysis in laboratory research: a cross-sectional survey of current practice

Verification of a novel point-of-care HbA1c device in real world clinical practice by comparison to three high performance liquid chromatography instruments.

Sharing reference intervals and monitoring patients across laboratories – findings from a likely commutable external quality assurance program

B-112 Regression Analysis Techniques for Assessing Calibration Reproducibility Within and Between Instruments. A Practical Example with Blood Ca2+ Assayed with Two cobas® b 221Analyzers