Editor-in-chief
Maria Stella Graziani

Deputy Director
Martina Zaninotto

Associate Editors
Ferruccio Ceriotti
Davide Giavarina
Bruna Lo Sasso
Giampaolo Merlini
Martina Montagnana
Andrea Mosca
Paola Pezzati
Rossella Tomaiuolo
Matteo Vidali

International Advisory Board Khosrow Adeli Canada
Sergio Bernardini Italy
Marcello Ciaccio Italy
Eleftherios Diamandis Canada
Philippe Gillery France
Kjell Grankvist Sweden
Hans Jacobs The Netherlands
Eric Kilpatrick UK
Magdalena Krintus Poland
Giuseppe Lippi Italy
☩Howard Morris Australia
Mario Plebani Italy
Sverre Sandberg Norway
Ana-Maria Simundic Croatia
☩Jill Tate Australia
Tommaso Trenti Italy
Cas Weykamp The Netherlands
Maria Willrich USA
Paul Yip Canada


Publisher
Biomedia srl
Via L. Temolo 4, 20126 Milano

Responsible Editor
Giuseppe Agosta

Editorial Secretary
Arianna Lucini Paioni
Biomedia srl
Via L. Temolo 4, 20126 Milano
Tel. 0245498282
email: biochimica.clinica@sibioc.it



Area soci
Non possiedi o non ricordi la password!
Clicca qui

BC: Articoli scritti da G. Antonelli

Garantire la comparabilità dei risultati nel rispetto dei requisiti di qualità e delle esigenze organizzative: l’esempio di una procedura operativa
How to guarantee the comparability of test results in compliance with the quality requirements andorganizational needs: the example of an operative procedure
<p>Medical laboratories are responsible for the qualityof test results, also when the same patient sample is evaluated using different analytical systems within the same lab.Indeed, as stated by ISO 15189:2012, laboratories should define means to compare procedures for evaluating thecomparability of patients&rsquo; samples results within the same healthcare system. In this study we report the approachused to define a procedure for assessing results comparability, developed in our laboratory before the ISO15189:2012 accreditation in 2016. Firstly, the approach was focused on the identification of all the different situationsthat may potentially require alignment of test results within the laboratory. Therefore, after evaluating guidelines anddocuments available in the literature, we defined a workflow applicable both to quantitative and qualitative methods.For quantitative methods, bias was estimated by means of statistical analyses such as Bland Altman and PassingBablok. For qualitative methods, results comparability was assessed by concordance. Criteria for defining theacceptability of systematic errors were also included in the procedure.</p>
Biochimica Clinica ; 43(2) 135-142
Contributi Scientifici - Scientific Papers