BACKGROUND: Reference procedures are required for evaluating the accuracy of routine analytical systems for uric acid (UA). External quality assessment (EQA) for UA has only been conducted with quality controls in China, and the results have not been published. This study was designed to investigate both the trueness and inter-laboratory precision of UA measurements among routine analytical systems using a candidate reference method. METHODS: We performed the HPLC method recommended by the Japan Society of Clinical Chemistry (JSCC). Next, we evaluated its analytical performance and validated its trueness. The performance of 4 routine analytical systems (5 instruments per system, n=20) for UA was assessed by using 4 frozen pooled serum samples measured by the HPLC method according to biologically relevant quality goals. RESULTS: Within-run, between-run, inter-day, and total CV of the method were less than 0.3%, 0.4%, 1.8%, and 2.6%, respectively. The UA measurements were consistent with the target values of standard reference material (SRM) 909b, the sixth ring trial for Reference Laboratories (RELA-2008) specimen, and national primary reference materials. The 4 frozen pooled serum samples were homogeneous, stable, and commutable. All routine systems achieved the desirable performance goal (total error <11.9%). CONCLUSIONS: We successfully reproduced the JSCC's HPLC method, which was simple, specific, precise, and accurate. We recommend this method as a reference method for UA measurement in human serum. Four routine analytical systems for UA measurement had acceptable traceability, and their UA results showed good concordance.
Calibration ; *Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid/standards ; Freezing ; Humans ; Japan ; Laboratories/standards ; Reference Standards ; Societies, Medical ; Uric Acid/*blood/standards

BACKGROUND: Preanalytical variability, including biological variability and patient preparation, is an important source of variability in laboratory testing. In this study, we assessed whether a regular light meal might bias the results of routine clinical chemistry testing. METHODS: We studied 17 healthy volunteers who consumed light meals containing a standardized amount of carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. We collected blood for routine clinical chemistry tests before the meal and 1, 2, and 4 hr thereafter. RESULTS: One hour after the meal, triglycerides (TG), albumin (ALB), uric acid (UA), phosphatase (ALP), Ca, Fe, and Na levels significantly increased, whereas blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and P levels decreased. TG, ALB, Ca, Na, P, and total protein (TP) levels varied significantly. Two hours after the meal, TG, ALB, Ca, Fe, and Na levels remained significantly high, whereas BUN, P, UA, and total bilirubin (BT) levels decreased. Clinically significant variations were recorded for TG, ALB, ALT, Ca, Fe, Na, P, BT, and direct bilirubin (BD) levels. Four hours after the meal, TG, ALB, Ca, Fe, Na, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), P, Mg, and K levels significantly increased, whereas UA and BT levels decreased. Clinically significant variations were observed for TG, ALB, ALT, Ca, Na, Mg, K, C-reactive protein (CRP), AST, UA, and BT levels. CONCLUSIONS: A significant variation in the clinical chemistry parameters after a regular meal shows that fasting time needs to be carefully considered when performing tests to prevent spurious results and reduce laboratory errors, especially in an emergency setting.
Adult ; Alkaline Phosphatase/blood ; *Blood Chemical Analysis ; Blood Urea Nitrogen ; C-Reactive Protein/analysis ; Diagnostic Errors/prevention & control ; Diet/*standards ; Fasting ; Female ; Humans ; Lipids/blood ; Male ; Metals/blood ; Serum Albumin/analysis ; Triglycerides/blood ; Uric Acid/blood

BACKGROUND: Many laboratories use 4 delta check methods: delta difference, delta percent change, rate difference, and rate percent change. However, guidelines regarding decision criteria for selecting delta check methods have not yet been provided. We present new decision criteria for selecting delta check methods for each clinical chemistry test item. METHODS: We collected 811,920 and 669,750 paired (present and previous) test results for 27 clinical chemistry test items from inpatients and outpatients, respectively. We devised new decision criteria for the selection of delta check methods based on the ratio of the delta difference to the width of the reference range (DD/RR). Delta check methods based on these criteria were compared with those based on the CV% of the absolute delta difference (ADD) as well as those reported in 2 previous studies. RESULTS: The delta check methods suggested by new decision criteria based on the DD/RR ratio corresponded well with those based on the CV% of the ADD except for only 2 items each in inpatients and outpatients. Delta check methods based on the DD/RR ratio also corresponded with those suggested in the 2 previous studies, except for 1 and 7 items in inpatients and outpatients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The DD/RR method appears to yield more feasible and intuitive selection criteria and can easily explain changes in the results by reflecting both the biological variation of the test item and the clinical characteristics of patients in each laboratory. We suggest this as a measure to determine delta check methods.
Alanine Transaminase/blood ; Alkaline Phosphatase/blood ; Aspartate Aminotransferases/blood ; Bilirubin/blood ; Blood Urea Nitrogen ; Chemoembolization, Therapeutic ; Clinical Chemistry Tests/methods/*standards ; Creatine/blood ; *Decision Trees ; Humans ; Reference Values ; Renal Dialysis ; Uric Acid/blood

BACKGROUND: Many laboratories use 4 delta check methods: delta difference, delta percent change, rate difference, and rate percent change. However, guidelines regarding decision criteria for selecting delta check methods have not yet been provided. We present new decision criteria for selecting delta check methods for each clinical chemistry test item. METHODS: We collected 811,920 and 669,750 paired (present and previous) test results for 27 clinical chemistry test items from inpatients and outpatients, respectively. We devised new decision criteria for the selection of delta check methods based on the ratio of the delta difference to the width of the reference range (DD/RR). Delta check methods based on these criteria were compared with those based on the CV% of the absolute delta difference (ADD) as well as those reported in 2 previous studies. RESULTS: The delta check methods suggested by new decision criteria based on the DD/RR ratio corresponded well with those based on the CV% of the ADD except for only 2 items each in inpatients and outpatients. Delta check methods based on the DD/RR ratio also corresponded with those suggested in the 2 previous studies, except for 1 and 7 items in inpatients and outpatients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The DD/RR method appears to yield more feasible and intuitive selection criteria and can easily explain changes in the results by reflecting both the biological variation of the test item and the clinical characteristics of patients in each laboratory. We suggest this as a measure to determine delta check methods.
Alanine Transaminase/blood ; Alkaline Phosphatase/blood ; Aspartate Aminotransferases/blood ; Bilirubin/blood ; Blood Urea Nitrogen ; Chemoembolization, Therapeutic ; Clinical Chemistry Tests/methods/*standards ; Creatine/blood ; *Decision Trees ; Humans ; Reference Values ; Renal Dialysis ; Uric Acid/blood