Evaluation of performance of veterinary in-clinic hematology analyzers

BackgroundA previous study provided information regarding the quality of in-clinic veterinary biochemistry testing. However, no similar studies for in-clinic veterinary hematology testing have been conducted. ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the quality of hematology testing in veterinary in-clinic laboratories using results obtained from testing 3 levels of canine EDTA blood samples. MethodsClinicians prepared blood samples to achieve measurand concentrations within, below, and above their RIs and evaluated the samples in triplicate using their in-clinic analyzers. Quality was assessed by comparison of calculated total error with quality requirements, determination of sigma metrics, use of a quality goal index, and agreement between in-clinic and reference laboratory instruments. Suitability for statistical quality control was determined using adaptations from the computerized program, EZRules3. ResultsEvaluation of 10 veterinary in-clinic hematology analyzers showed that these instruments often fail to meet quality requirements. At least 60% of analyzers reasonably determined RBC, WBC, HCT, and HGB, when assessed by most quality goal criteria; platelets were less reliably measured, with 80% deemed suitable for low platelet counts, but only 30% for high platelet counts, and automated differential leukocyte counts were generally considered unsuitable for clinical use with fewer than 40% of analyzers meeting the least stringent quality goal requirements. Fewer than 50% of analyzers were able to meet requirements for statistical quality control for any measurand. ConclusionThese findings reflect the current status of in-clinic hematology analyzer performance and provide a basis for future evaluations of the quality of veterinary laboratory testing.