External Quality Assessment on CD4+ T-Cell Count Using in-House Proficiency Testing Panels for CD4 Count Laboratories in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
CD4 count
EQA program
External quality assessment
in-house proficiency testing panels
Journal
Ethiopian journal of health sciences
ISSN: 2413-7170
Titre abrégé: Ethiop J Health Sci
Pays: Ethiopia
ID NLM: 101224773
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2019
May 2019
Historique:
entrez:
27
8
2019
pubmed:
27
8
2019
medline:
1
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
CD4+ T-cell count External Quality Assessment program is important for the evaluation of performance of CD4 count laboratories. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of CD4count laboratory performance using in-house Proficiency testing panels that perform routine CD4 counts in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2013/14. Participating laboratories were 20, 23 and 25 in trials 1, 2 and 3, respectively. In-house prepared fresh whole blood samples both with "normal" and "low" CD4 values were sent to participating laboratories. Percentage and absolute counts of CD4+ T-lymphocytes were done using their routine procedures. Data were analyzed for each trial including trimmed mean, standard deviation (SD), percent coefficient of variation (%CV), residual, and standard deviation index (SDI) values for both absolute counts and percentages of CD4+ lymphocytes (%CD4). Most participating laboratories produced results that were within 2SD of the mean. Average inter-laboratory precision (trimmed %CV) was 10.87% and 5.14% for CD4 absolute counts and %CD4, respectively. For normal material, the trimmed mean %CV was 9.59% and3.23% for CD4 absolute counts and %CD4, respectively. For low material, the trimmed mean % CV was 12.15% and 7.05% for CD4 absolute counts and %CD4 respectively. BDFACSCount™ users showed the best accuracy and precision as evidenced by longitudinal analysis. This study was found to help facilities in early identifying their gaps with regard to their CD4 count performance and in avoiding the challenges encountered during participation in external EQA providers like the high cost, transportation problem, feedback delay and CD4laboratory coverage.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
CD4+ T-cell count External Quality Assessment program is important for the evaluation of performance of CD4 count laboratories. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of CD4count laboratory performance using in-house Proficiency testing panels that perform routine CD4 counts in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2013/14.
METHODS
METHODS
Participating laboratories were 20, 23 and 25 in trials 1, 2 and 3, respectively. In-house prepared fresh whole blood samples both with "normal" and "low" CD4 values were sent to participating laboratories. Percentage and absolute counts of CD4+ T-lymphocytes were done using their routine procedures. Data were analyzed for each trial including trimmed mean, standard deviation (SD), percent coefficient of variation (%CV), residual, and standard deviation index (SDI) values for both absolute counts and percentages of CD4+ lymphocytes (%CD4).
RESULTS
RESULTS
Most participating laboratories produced results that were within 2SD of the mean. Average inter-laboratory precision (trimmed %CV) was 10.87% and 5.14% for CD4 absolute counts and %CD4, respectively. For normal material, the trimmed mean %CV was 9.59% and3.23% for CD4 absolute counts and %CD4, respectively. For low material, the trimmed mean % CV was 12.15% and 7.05% for CD4 absolute counts and %CD4 respectively. BDFACSCount™ users showed the best accuracy and precision as evidenced by longitudinal analysis.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study was found to help facilities in early identifying their gaps with regard to their CD4 count performance and in avoiding the challenges encountered during participation in external EQA providers like the high cost, transportation problem, feedback delay and CD4laboratory coverage.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31447499
doi: 10.4314/ejhs.v29i3.3
pii: jEJHS.v29.i3.pg309
pmc: PMC6689725
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
309-320Références
Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 1999 May;6(3):410-4
pubmed: 10225845
Cytometry. 1999 Oct 15;38(5):231-7
pubmed: 10516609
Br J Haematol. 1999 Sep;106(4):1059-62
pubmed: 10520014
J Clin Pathol. 2001 Jul;54(7):508-11
pubmed: 11429420
Cytometry. 2002 Apr 15;50(2):102-10
pubmed: 12116352
Cytometry. 2002 Apr 15;50(2):111-6
pubmed: 12116353
Cytometry. 2002 Apr 15;50(2):117-26
pubmed: 12116354
Qual Assur. 2003 Apr-Jun;10(2):83-9
pubmed: 14660298
Clin Chem. 1992 Jun;38(6):895-903
pubmed: 1597015
Clin Chem. 1992 Jul;38(7):1254-9; discussion 1268-72
pubmed: 1623590
Cytometry B Clin Cytom. 2007 Jan 15;72(1):2-7
pubmed: 17177196
Cytometry B Clin Cytom. 2008;74 Suppl 1:S40-51
pubmed: 18228554
Cytometry B Clin Cytom. 2008;74 Suppl 1:S69-79
pubmed: 18228560
BMC Infect Dis. 2008 May 02;8:59
pubmed: 18454861
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2008 Nov;6(11 Suppl):S7-15
pubmed: 18923413
Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol. 2009 Dec;27(4):225-32
pubmed: 20232577
Am J Clin Pathol. 2010 Oct;134(4):556-67
pubmed: 20855636
Int J Epidemiol. 2010 Dec;39 Suppl 2:ii72-8
pubmed: 21113040
Indian J Med Res. 2011 Dec;134(6):779-86
pubmed: 22310813
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2008 Nov;6(11 Suppl):S29-38
pubmed: 22745957
Clin Chem. 1979 May;25(5):675-7
pubmed: 436232
Clin Immunol Immunopathol. 1993 Feb;66(2):150-62
pubmed: 7680972
Cytometry. 1993;14(3):294-306
pubmed: 8472606
Eur J Clin Chem Clin Biochem. 1996 Aug;34(8):665-78
pubmed: 8877346