Annual Report on External Quality Assessment of Clinical Microbiology Laboratory in Korea (2003).
- Author:
Eui Chong KIM
1
;
Myoung Sook KIM
;
Bong Chul KIM
;
Shin Moo KIM
;
Jae Suk KIM
;
Dong Eun YONG
;
Nam Yong LEE
;
Do Hyun LEE
;
Mi Ae LEE
;
Wee Gyo LEE
;
Jang Ho LEE
;
In Ho CHANG
;
Ji Hyun CHO
;
Se Ik JOO
Author Information
1. Clinical Microbiology Subcommittee, The Korean Association of Quality Assurance for Clinical Laboratory, Seoul, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
External quality assurance;
Clinical microbiology;
Proficiency
- MeSH:
Ampicillin;
Candida albicans;
Candida tropicalis;
Cefotaxime;
Ceftazidime;
Cephalothin;
Ciprofloxacin;
Clindamycin;
Diffusion;
Education;
Enterococcus;
Erythromycin;
Gentamicins;
Imipenem;
Korea*;
Oxacillin;
Penicillin G;
Piperacillin;
Pneumonia;
Teicoplanin;
Vancomycin
- From:Journal of Laboratory Medicine and Quality Assurance
2004;26(1):11-28
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
Three trials of external quality assessment for clinical microbiology laboratory and two workshops were performed in 2003. A total of 19 specimens were distributed. Six specimens were distributed to 241 laboratories with 231 returns in Trial I, Five specimens to 241 laboratories with 225 returns in Trial II, and seven specimens to 245 laboratories with 220 returns in Trial III. The percentages of fully correct results of E. coli, E. faecalis, S. aureus, P. aeruginosa, K. pneumoniae, Candida albicans, P. aeruginosa, S. aureus, E. faecalis, K. pneumoniae, E. coli, and Candida tropicalis were 99%, 83%, 99%, 89%, 97%, 92%, 90%, 98%, 83%, 90%, 99%, and 63%, respectively. The standard deviation (SD) of inhibition zone diameter against each antibiotic was calculated. The within-one-SD percentages on disk diffusion test against ciprofloxacin, imipenem, ampicillin, cefotaxime, and cephalothin of E. coli (M0301) were 86%, 78%, 86%, 91%, and 76%, respectively. Those against vancomycin and teicoplanin of E. faecalis (M0302) were 77% and 95%, respectively. Those against vancomycin, oxacillin, penicillin G, clindamycin, erythromycin, ciprofloxacin, gentamicin and teicoplanin of S. aureus (M0303) were 82%, 80%, 81%, 81%, 79%, 80%, 88%, and 90%, respectively. Those against ciprofloxacin, gentamicin, imipenem, ceftazidime, and piperacillin of P. aeruginosa (M0304) were 73%, 88%, 85%, 83%, and 78%, respectively. Those against ciprofloxacin, imipenem, ampicillin, cefotaxime, and cephalothin of K. pneumoniae (M0305) were 89%, 89%, 87%, 81% and 86%, respectively. Thirty-five laboratories on Trial I and Trial II had reported the both results of disk diffusion and MIC methods. Seven laboratories use disk diffusion method or MIC method according to the bacterial species. The performance on the automated or E-test susceptibility tests was generally good. In conclusion, it is necessary that the quality assurance of the individual laboratories should be improved in the identification of Candida tropicalis and Enterococcus spp., and in susceptibility tests against oxacillin, erythromycin and ciprofloxacin of S. aureus, and cephalothin and imipenem of E. coli and vancomycin of E. faecalis in case of disk diffusion method.
