• Korean Journal of Clinical Laboratory Science
• /
• v.36 no.1
• /
• pp.13-18
• /
• 2004

This study was designed to establish working range for reoportable range in own laboratory in order to cover the upper and lower limits of the range in test method. We experimented ten times during 10 days for setting of reportable range with between run for method evaluation. It is generally assumed that the analytical method produces a linear response and that the test results between those upper and lower limits are then reportable. CLIA recommends that laboratories verify the reportable range of all moderate and high complexity tests. The Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments(CLIA) and Laboratory Accreditation Program of the Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine states reportable range is only required for "modified" moderately complex tests. Linearity requirements have been eliminated from the CLIA regulations and from others accreditation agencies, many inspectors continue to feel that linearity studies are a part of good lab practice and should be encouraged. It is important to assess the useful reportable range of a laboratory method, i.e., the lowest and highest test results that are reliable and can be reported. Manufacturers make claims for the reportable range of their methods by stating the upper and lower limits of the range. Instrument manufacturers state an operating range and a reportable range. The commercial linearity material can be used to verify this range, if it adequately covers the stated linear interval. CLIA requirements for quality control, must demonstrate that, prior to reporting patient test results, it can obtain the performance specifications for accuracy, precision, and reportable range of patient test results, comparable to those established by the manufacturer. If applicable, the laboratory must also verify the reportable range of patient test results. The reportable range of patient test results is the range of test result values over which the laboratory can establish or verify the accuracy of the instrument, kit or test system measurement response. We need to define the usable reportable range of the method so that the experiments can be properly planned and valid data can be collected. The reportable range is usually defined as the range where the analytical response of the method is linear with respect to the concentration of the analyte being measured. In conclusion, experimental results on reportable range using concentrated control sample and zero calibrators covering from highest to lowest range were salicylate $8.8{\mu}g/dL$, phenytoin $0.67{\mu}g/dL$, phenobarbital $1.53{\mu}g/dL$, primidone $0.16{\mu}g/dL$, theophylline $0.2{\mu}g/dL$, vancomycine $1.3{\mu}g/dL$, valproic acid $3.2{\mu}g/dL$, digitoxin 0.17ng/dL, carbamazepine $0.36{\mu}g/dL$ and acetaminophen $0.7{\mu}g/dL$ at minimum level and salicylate $969.9{\mu}g/dL$, phenytoin $38.1{\mu}g/dL$, phenobarbital $60.4{\mu}g/dL$, primidone $24.57{\mu}g/dL$, theophylline $39.2{\mu}g/dL$, vancomycine $83.65{\mu}g/dL$, valproic acid $147.96{\mu}g/dL$, digitoxin 5.04ng/dL, carbamazepine $19.76{\mu}g/dL$, acetaminophen $300.92{\mu}g/dL$ at maximum level.

• Korean Journal of Clinical Laboratory Science
• /
• v.39 no.1
• /
• pp.31-36
• /
• 2007

The purpose of the clinically reportable range (CRR) in clinical chemistry is to estimate linearity in working range. The reportable range includes all results that may be reliably reported, and embraces two types of ranges: the analytical measurement range (AMR) is the range of analyte values that a method can directly measure on the specimen without any dilution, concentration, or other pretreatment not part of the usual assay process. CAP and JCAHO require linearity on analyzers every six months. The clinically reportable range is the range of analyte values that a method can measure, allowing for specimen dilution, concentration, or other pretreatment used to extend the direct analytical measurement range. The AMR cannot exceed the manufacturer's limits. Establishing AMR is easily accomplished with Calibration Verification Assessment and experimental Linearity. For example: The manufacturer states that the limits of the AST on their instrument are 0-1100. The lowest level that could be verified is 2. The upper level is 1241. The verified AMR of the instrument is 2-1241. The lower limit of the range is 2, because that is the lowest level that could be verified by the laboratory. The laboratory could not use the manufacturer's lower limit of 2 because they have not proven that the instrument values below 2 are valid. The upper limit of the range is 1241, because although the lab has shown that the instrument is linear to 1241, the manufacturer does not make that claim. The laboratory needs to demonstrate the accuracy and precision of the analyzer, as well the validation of the patient AMR. Linearity requirements have been eliminated from the CLIA regulations and from the CAP inspection criteria, however, many inspectors continue to feel that linearity studies are a part of good lab practice and should be encouraged. If a lab chooses to continue linearity studies, these studies must fully comply with the calibration/calibration verification requirements of CLIA and/or CAP. The results of lower limit and upper limit of clinically reportable range were total protein (2.1 - 79.9), albumin (1.3 - 39), total bilirubin (0.2 - 106.2), alkaline phosphatase (13 - 6928.2), aspartate aminotransferase (24 - 7446), alanine aminotransferase (13 - 6724.2), gamma glutamyl transpeptidase (16.64 - 9904.2), creatine kinase (15.26 - 4723.8), lactate dehydrogenase (127.66 - 13231.8), creatinine (0.4 - 129.6), blood urea nitrogen (8.67 - 925.8), uric acid (1.6 - 151.2), total cholesterol (48.52 - 3162), triglycerides (36.91 - 3367.8), glucose (31 - 4218), amylase (21 - 6694.2), calcium (3.1 - 118.2), inorganic phosphorus (1.11 - 108), HDL (11.74 - 666), NA (58.3 - 1800), K (1.0 - 69.6), CL (38 - 1230).

• Korean Journal of Clinical Laboratory Science
• /
• v.36 no.2
• /
• pp.98-109
• /
• 2004

The lower limit of detection, precision, setting method of target value, reportable range determination, recovery, linearity, and comparison study with another equipment was evaluated for the Toshiba-120FR chemistry autoanalyzer which was newly introduced at the Daejeon Veteran Hospital in Dec. 2003. Nineteen kinds of test for AST, ALT, ALP, LDH, GGT, TP, ALB, GLU, T-cho, T-bil, TG, UA, CAL, IP, AMY, HDL-C, LDL-C, Cre and BUN were performed to evaluate the lower limit of detection, precision, setting method of target value, reportable range determination, recovery, linearity, and comparison study with other equipment according to the NCCLS guidelines(EP5-A, EP6-P, EP9-A). The Toshiba-120FR autochemical analyzer showed good precision for all tested items. The data concerning the lower limit of detection, precision(total CV 0.47%~3.65%), setting method of target value, reportable range determination, recovery(93%~111%), linearity($R^2=0.997{\sim}0.999$), and comparison study(r=0.977~0.999) with other equipment was acceptable for all tested items. The results of evaluation for the Toshiba-120FR autochemical analyzer showed that this equipment could be used as an alternative to other equipment.

• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.42-46
• /
• 2022

Purpose In the meantime, there have been not many samples that require dilution, and it has been difficult for the examiner to set an appropriate dilution multiple for RIA test item and report the results. Accordingly, it was judged that it was necessary to set the maximum dilution multiple for each test and to verify the upper limit of the clinical reportable range. Therefore, in this study, the maximum dilution multiple for each RIA test was set and the upper limit of the clinical reportable range was verified accordingly Materials and Methods Among all RIA tests conducted at Asan Medical Center, the study treated on 30 types of tests which also conduct the dilution test. Data from March to July 2021 were collected and analyzed. The study was conducted on samples subjected to serial dilutions such as X2, X4 or X10, X10², X10³, X10⁴, X10⁵. Results Among a total of 30 test types, 18 test types have more than 5 N values in the tolerance range of 80~120%. As a result of the verification of maximum dilution multiples, the test set to 10⁴ is 𝛼-fetoprotein and thyroglobulin, and the test set to 10³ is CA-125, CEA, and 𝛽-hCG, and the test set to 10² is Free PSA, PSA, CA15-3, SCC, Ferritin, PTH, Cortisol, and Calcitonin. Tests set to 10 include three categories: 𝛽2-Microglobulin, C-peptide, and Testosterone. Conclusion It is expected that it will contribute to improving the quality of nuclear medicine blood tests as the results of dilution experiments can be reported quickly and accurately through the verification of the clinical reportable range.