Background: The preanalytical phase is more vulnerable to errors. This study aimed to establish preanalytical quality indicators (QIs) suitable for Korean clinical laboratories and investigate the current status of preanalytical phase performance monitoring in Korea using these QIs. Methods: We reviewed previous studies investigating preanalytical QIs including the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) model of QIs, to establish a set of QIs for Korean clinical laboratories. An e-mail survey consisting of this QI set was sent to 90 clinical laboratories. The collected data were analyzed, and performance measures were evaluated according to the quality specifications defined by the IFCC and the sigmascale method. Results: A model consisting of 23 preanalytical phase QIs was established.Approximately 47% (42/90) of clinical laboratories responded to the survey.The average result submission rate for each QI was 56% (standard deviation, 26%). The QIs with the highest and lowest result submission rates were “rejected samples due to hemolysis” (95%) and “recollected sample due to errors caused outside the laboratory” (17%). The QIs with the highest and lowest error rates were “hemolyzed sample detected by hemolytic index” (median, 0.546%; sigma performance level, “good”) and “samples not received” (median, 0.001%; sigma performance level, “very good”), respectively. Conclusions This survey findings on preanalytical phase QIs could serve as a foundation for developing an external quality assessment program for clinical laboratories in Korea.

Background: The preanalytical phase is more vulnerable to errors. This study aimed to establish preanalytical quality indicators (QIs) suitable for Korean clinical laboratories and investigate the current status of preanalytical phase performance monitoring in Korea using these QIs. Methods: We reviewed previous studies investigating preanalytical QIs including the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) model of QIs, to establish a set of QIs for Korean clinical laboratories. An e-mail survey consisting of this QI set was sent to 90 clinical laboratories. The collected data were analyzed, and performance measures were evaluated according to the quality specifications defined by the IFCC and the sigmascale method. Results: A model consisting of 23 preanalytical phase QIs was established.Approximately 47% (42/90) of clinical laboratories responded to the survey.The average result submission rate for each QI was 56% (standard deviation, 26%). The QIs with the highest and lowest result submission rates were “rejected samples due to hemolysis” (95%) and “recollected sample due to errors caused outside the laboratory” (17%). The QIs with the highest and lowest error rates were “hemolyzed sample detected by hemolytic index” (median, 0.546%; sigma performance level, “good”) and “samples not received” (median, 0.001%; sigma performance level, “very good”), respectively. Conclusions This survey findings on preanalytical phase QIs could serve as a foundation for developing an external quality assessment program for clinical laboratories in Korea.

Background: The preanalytical phase is more vulnerable to errors. This study aimed to establish preanalytical quality indicators (QIs) suitable for Korean clinical laboratories and investigate the current status of preanalytical phase performance monitoring in Korea using these QIs. Methods: We reviewed previous studies investigating preanalytical QIs including the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) model of QIs, to establish a set of QIs for Korean clinical laboratories. An e-mail survey consisting of this QI set was sent to 90 clinical laboratories. The collected data were analyzed, and performance measures were evaluated according to the quality specifications defined by the IFCC and the sigmascale method. Results: A model consisting of 23 preanalytical phase QIs was established.Approximately 47% (42/90) of clinical laboratories responded to the survey.The average result submission rate for each QI was 56% (standard deviation, 26%). The QIs with the highest and lowest result submission rates were “rejected samples due to hemolysis” (95%) and “recollected sample due to errors caused outside the laboratory” (17%). The QIs with the highest and lowest error rates were “hemolyzed sample detected by hemolytic index” (median, 0.546%; sigma performance level, “good”) and “samples not received” (median, 0.001%; sigma performance level, “very good”), respectively. Conclusions This survey findings on preanalytical phase QIs could serve as a foundation for developing an external quality assessment program for clinical laboratories in Korea.

Background: The preanalytical phase is more vulnerable to errors. This study aimed to establish preanalytical quality indicators (QIs) suitable for Korean clinical laboratories and investigate the current status of preanalytical phase performance monitoring in Korea using these QIs. Methods: We reviewed previous studies investigating preanalytical QIs including the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) model of QIs, to establish a set of QIs for Korean clinical laboratories. An e-mail survey consisting of this QI set was sent to 90 clinical laboratories. The collected data were analyzed, and performance measures were evaluated according to the quality specifications defined by the IFCC and the sigmascale method. Results: A model consisting of 23 preanalytical phase QIs was established.Approximately 47% (42/90) of clinical laboratories responded to the survey.The average result submission rate for each QI was 56% (standard deviation, 26%). The QIs with the highest and lowest result submission rates were “rejected samples due to hemolysis” (95%) and “recollected sample due to errors caused outside the laboratory” (17%). The QIs with the highest and lowest error rates were “hemolyzed sample detected by hemolytic index” (median, 0.546%; sigma performance level, “good”) and “samples not received” (median, 0.001%; sigma performance level, “very good”), respectively. Conclusions This survey findings on preanalytical phase QIs could serve as a foundation for developing an external quality assessment program for clinical laboratories in Korea.

Background: The preanalytical phase is more vulnerable to errors. This study aimed to establish preanalytical quality indicators (QIs) suitable for Korean clinical laboratories and investigate the current status of preanalytical phase performance monitoring in Korea using these QIs. Methods: We reviewed previous studies investigating preanalytical QIs including the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry (IFCC) model of QIs, to establish a set of QIs for Korean clinical laboratories. An e-mail survey consisting of this QI set was sent to 90 clinical laboratories. The collected data were analyzed, and performance measures were evaluated according to the quality specifications defined by the IFCC and the sigmascale method. Results: A model consisting of 23 preanalytical phase QIs was established.Approximately 47% (42/90) of clinical laboratories responded to the survey.The average result submission rate for each QI was 56% (standard deviation, 26%). The QIs with the highest and lowest result submission rates were “rejected samples due to hemolysis” (95%) and “recollected sample due to errors caused outside the laboratory” (17%). The QIs with the highest and lowest error rates were “hemolyzed sample detected by hemolytic index” (median, 0.546%; sigma performance level, “good”) and “samples not received” (median, 0.001%; sigma performance level, “very good”), respectively. Conclusions This survey findings on preanalytical phase QIs could serve as a foundation for developing an external quality assessment program for clinical laboratories in Korea.

The Committee of Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Korean Diabetes Association (KDA) updated the previous clinical practice guidelines for Korean adults with diabetes and prediabetes and published the seventh edition in May 2021. We performed a comprehensive systematic review of recent clinical trials and evidence that could be applicable in real-world practice and suitable for the Korean population. The guideline is provided for all healthcare providers including physicians, diabetes experts, and certified diabetes educators across the country who manage patients with diabetes or the individuals at the risk of developing diabetes mellitus. The recommendations for screening diabetes and glucose-lowering agents have been revised and updated. New sections for continuous glucose monitoring, insulin pump use, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in patients with diabetes mellitus have been added. The KDA recommends active vaccination for coronavirus disease 2019 in patients with diabetes during the pandemic. An abridgement that contains practical information for patient education and systematic management in the clinic was published separately.

Background: Total cholesterol concentration measurement is important in the diagnosis of dyslipidemia and evaluation of cardiovascular disease risk factors. Measurement reliability for obtaining an accurate total cholesterol concentration requires procedure standardization. We evaluated the standardization status for total cholesterol concentration measurement through Korean external quality assessment (EQA) data analysis. Methods: This study involved 1,670 laboratories that participated in the EQA of total cholesterol concentration measurements in 2019 for 32 products from different manufacturers. The target concentrations of three quality control (QC) materials (samples A, B, and C) were measured using the reference method and compared with EQA data. The performance criteria for total cholesterol concentration measurement were based on the National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines, with ± 3% inaccuracy. Results: The target values and inaccuracies of the QC material based on the reference method measurements were 254.65 ± 7.64, 108.30 ± 3.25, and 256.29 ± 7.69 mg/dL (6.59 ± 0.20, 2.80 ± 0.08, and 6.63 ± 0.20 mmol/L) for samples A, B, and C, respectively.The performance criteria were not met in 42.7% laboratories for sample A, 68.4% of laboratories for sample B, and 38.0% laboratories for sample C. Conclusions Despite significant efforts to accurately measure total cholesterol concentrations, further actions are needed for measurement standardization. Manufacturers reporting values that differ from target values should check calibrator traceability; additional efforts to accurately measure total cholesterol concentrations are required for laboratories that use products from these manufacturers.

External quality assessment (EQA) is important for evaluating clinical laboratories and enhancing their testing quality. EQA schemes are variable; thus, it is crucial that the EQA organizers share their experiences to continuously improve the EQA scheme. The Korean Association of External Quality Assessment Service (KEQAS) has been the leading, authorized EQA institute for the standardization and quality management of laboratory testing in Korean medical institutions since 1976. The EQA scheme underwent a major change in 2016, and the number of EQA programs increased significantly since then. The key changes implemented in EQA scheme include a fully computerized assessment to accelerate feedback and unification of the testing and reporting methods. We provide an overview of the EQA schemes and performance evaluation criteria of the KEQAS and suggest directions for achieving the global harmonization of EQA.

Background: Liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) is increasingly used for immunosuppressive drug tests. However, most LC-MS/MS tests are laboratory-developed and their agreement is unknown in different Korean laboratories.This interlaboratory comparison study evaluated test reproducibility and identified potential error sources. Methods: Test samples containing three concentrations of tacrolimus, sirolimus, everolimus, cyclosporine, and mycophenolic acid were prepared by pooling surplus samples from patients undergoing routine therapeutic drug monitoring and tested in duplicate in the participating 10 clinical laboratories. Reconstitution and storage experiments were conducted for the commonly used commercial calibrator set. The robust estimators of reproducibility parameters were calculated. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (rho, ρ) was used to evaluate the correlation between drugs. Multiple linear regression was used to determine whether the experimental conditions alter the calibration curves. Results: The reproducibility coefficient of variation exceeded 10% only for sirolimus concentrations 1 and 2 (10.8% and 12.5%, respectively) and everolimus concentrations 1 and 2 (12.3% and 11.4%, respectively). The percent difference values showed weak correlations between sirolimus and everolimus (ρ = 0.334, P = 0.175). The everolimus calibration curve slope was significantly altered after reconstitution following prolonged 5°C storage (P = 0.015 for 14 days; P = 0.025 for 28 days); the expected differences at 6 ng/mL were 0.598% for 14 days and 0.384% for 28 days. Conclusions LC-MS/MS test reproducibility for immunosuppressive drugs seems to be good in the Korean clinical laboratories. Continuous efforts are required to achieve test standardization and harmonization, especially for sirolimus and everolimus.