ABO Antibody Titer Testing Harmonization in Korea: A 5-Year Analysis of External Quality Control Data
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Current ABO titration methods lack standardization and harmonization. We analyzed the consistency of ABO antibody titer testing among Korean laboratories and discussed future directions for standardization by analyzing external quality control data collected by the Ko- rean Association of External Quality Assessment Service over 5 yrs (2019–2023). The analysis included the number of participating institutions and methods, as well as the pro- portion of acceptable results. To compare column agglutination technology (CAT) and tube methods, we created a normalized variable: ([log2 titer of laboratory test result]–[mean of log2 titer for the peer group]). The number of participating institutions and methods in- creased over time. The use of CAT methods expanded, whereas that of tube methods de- clined. The proportion of acceptable results ranged from 84.0% to 100%, with no signifi- cant differences between CAT and tube methods. An F-test revealed no significant vari- ance differences among institutions using these methods. Tube methods demonstrated lower variance in anti-human globulin testing, and room temperature tube methods exhib- ited lower variance than that of CAT methods. Domestic laboratories demonstrated high- quality performance in ABO antibody titer testing, with no significant differences in accept- able result rates or variance across methods. Continuous efforts toward standardization remain essential.
Abstract
Current ABO titration methods lack standardization and harmonization. We analyzed the consistency of ABO antibody titer testing among Korean laboratories and discussed future directions for standardization by analyzing external quality control data collected by the Ko- rean Association of External Quality Assessment Service over 5 yrs (2019–2023). The analysis included the number of participating institutions and methods, as well as the pro- portion of acceptable results. To compare column agglutination technology (CAT) and tube methods, we created a normalized variable: ([log2 titer of laboratory test result]–[mean of log2 titer for the peer group]). The number of participating institutions and methods in- creased over time. The use of CAT methods expanded, whereas that of tube methods de- clined. The proportion of acceptable results ranged from 84.0% to 100%, with no signifi- cant differences between CAT and tube methods. An F-test revealed no significant vari- ance differences among institutions using these methods. Tube methods demonstrated lower variance in anti-human globulin testing, and room temperature tube methods exhib- ited lower variance than that of CAT methods. Domestic laboratories demonstrated high- quality performance in ABO antibody titer testing, with no significant differences in accept- able result rates or variance across methods. Continuous efforts toward standardization remain essential.