Retrospective Analysis of Quality Control Data Using Pooled Blood to Compare Agreement within Two Models of Blood Gas Analyzers

Abstract

Abstract Background Two previous reports from the same group concluded that the analytical reliability of Instrumentation Laboratory GEM4000 analyzers (GEM4K) deteriorated during a 24-hour period, based on results between samples from the same patient but collected at different times. Our routine blood gas Between-Laboratory Survey is done every 2 weeks using a freshly pooled heparinized blood sample taken to each analyzer location to verify comparability among our GEM4K and Radiometer ABL90 (Rad90) blood gas analyzers. Because another report found a few very large differences in glucose results between the GEM4K and central laboratory analyzers, we reviewed the glucose results on plasma from our Chemistry Between-Laboratory Surveys that includes comparisons between our central laboratory analyzers (Beckman DxC800; DxC800) and our GEM4K and Rad90 blood gas analyzers. Method Using data from our Blood Gas and Chemistry Surveys over a 55-week period, we calculated the mean, standard deviation (SD), and concentration intervals of the 27 sets of results by the GEM4K or Rad90 analyzers. Agreement in plasma glucose between DxC800 and blood gas analyzers was evaluated by the limits of agreement and intraclass correlation coefficient analysis. Results For each analyte, the Rad90 had lower average SD than the GEM4K for the 55-week period, although both brands of analyzers showed acceptable performance. For plasma glucose results on our Chemistry Survey, the GEM4K results agreed more closely with the DxC800 results than the Rad90 results. Conclusions Based on both our Blood Gas and Chemistry Surveys, we conclude that both brands of analyzers performed within analytically and clinically acceptable limits throughout the year, with no evidence for the type of errors reported previously.