Verification of Quantitative Analytical Methods for Routine Clinical Biochemistry Analytes on Alinity ci Series and Architect ci 8200 at the Mohammed VI University Hospital of Oujda (Morocco)
This study aimed to independently assess the analytical performance of 56 routine clinical biochemistry parameters on the ABBOTT Alinity ci Series and Architect ci 8200 automated systems, ensuring compliance with ISO 15189 standards. The verification followed Scope A criteria from the Medical Biology Method Verification/Validation Guide, focusing on repeatability and reproducibility. The coefficient of variation (CV) was compared to limits established by recognized learned societies such as the French Society of Clinical Biology (SFBC). Three concentration levels (low, medium, high) were analyzed for each parameter to assess precision. The results demonstrated satisfactory repeatability and reproducibility across all tested analytes, confirming the reliability of the automated systems. The obtained CV values were within acceptable limits, validating the precision of the analytical methods. This verification process ensures adherence to regulatory and normative requirements, reinforcing the laboratory’s commitment to quality assurance. By systematically evaluating analytical performance, the study contributes to the optimization of routine biochemical analysis, enhancing result reliability for clinical decision-making. Furthermore, these findings support the Central Laboratory Department’s ongoing efforts to implement robust quality management systems. The laboratory aims to be one of the first public hospital laboratories in the country to achieve ISO 15189 accreditation, demonstrating its dedication to mastering advanced analytical systems and ensuring high standards in patient care.
Cite this paper
Rahhab, O. , El-Moujtahide, D. , Sebbar, E. and Choukri, M. (2025). Verification of Quantitative Analytical Methods for Routine Clinical Biochemistry Analytes on Alinity ci Series and Architect ci 8200 at the Mohammed VI University Hospital of Oujda (Morocco). Open Access Library Journal, 12, e3040. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1113040.
McLawhon, R.W. (2011) Patient Safety and Clinical Effectiveness as Imperatives for Achieving Harmonization Inside and Outside the Clinical Laboratory. Clinical Chemistry, 57, 936-938. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2011.166041
Topic, E., Nikolac, N., Panteghini, M., Theodorsson, E., Salvagno, G.L., Miler, M., et al. (2015) How to Assess the Quality of Your Analytical Method? Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medi-cine (CCLM), 53, 1707-1718. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2015-0869
Muller, M.M. (2000) Implementation of Reference Systems in Laboratory Medicine. Clinical Chemistry, 46, 1907-1909. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/46.12.1907
Njoroge, S.W. and Nichols, J.H. (2014) Risk Management in the Clini-cal Laboratory. Annals of Laboratory Medicine, 34, 274-278. https://doi.org/10.3343/alm.2014.34.4.274
Ismail, A.A. (2017) When Laboratory Tests Can Mislead Even When They Appear Plausible. Clinical Medicine, 17, 329-332. https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.17-4-329
Epner, P.L., Gans, J.E. and Graber, M.L. (2013) When Diagnostic Testing Leads to Harm: A New Outcomes-Based Approach for Laboratory Medicine. BMJ Quality & Safety, 22, 6-10. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001621
Dalalah, D. and Diabat, A. (2015) Repeatability and Reproducibility in Med Labs: A Procedure to Measurement System Analysis. IET Science, Measurement & Technology, 9, 826-835. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-smt.2014.0363
Waugh, C. (2021) Factors Affecting Test Reproducibility among Labora-tories. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l’OIE, 40, 131-143. https://doi.org/10.20506/rst.40.1.3213
Roelofsen-de Beer, R., Wielders, J., Boursier, G., Vodnik, T., Vanstapel, F., Huisman, W., et al. (2019) Validation and Verification of Exami-nation Procedures in Medical Laboratories: Opinion of the EFLM Working Group Accreditation and ISO/CEN Standards (WG-A/ISO) on Dealing with ISO 15189: 2012 Demands for Method Verification and Validation. Clinical Chemistry and La-boratory Medicine (CCLM), 58, 361-367. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2019-1053
SH GTA 04 (2023). Guide tech-nique d’accréditation de vérification (portée A)/vali-dation (portée B) des méthodes de biologie médicale (Second version). https://tools.cofrac.fr/fr/documentation/index.php?fol_id=63
Vesper, H., Botelho, J. and Wang, Y. (2014) Challenges and Improve-ments in Testosterone and Estradiol Testing. Asian Journal of Andrology, 16, 178-184. https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682x.122338
Pfaehler, E., Zhovannik, I., Wei, L., Boellaard, R., Dekker, A., Mon-shouwer, R., et al. (2021) A Systematic Review and Quality of Reporting Checklist for Repeatability and Reproducibility of Radiomic Features. Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology, 20, 69-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2021.10.007
Algeciras-Schimnich, A., Bruns, D.E., Boyd, J.C., Bryant, S.C., La Fortune, K.A. and Grebe, S.K. (2013) Failure of Current Laboratory Protocols to Detect Lot-to-Lot Reagent Differences: Findings and Possible Solutions. Clinical Chemistry, 59, 1187-1194. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2013.205070
Sciacovelli, L., Secchiero, S., Padoan, A. and Plebani, M. (2018) External Quality Assessment Programs in the Context of ISO 15189 Accreditation. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM), 56, 1644-1654. https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2017-1179