Annual Report on External Quality Assessment in Clinical Microbiology Laboratory in Korea (2002)

Kim, Eui Chong; Kang, Jung Ok; Kim, Myoung Sook; Kim, Mina; Kim, Min Joong; Shin, Chong Hee; Lee, Kyoung Won; Lee, Nam Yong; Lee, Do Hyun; Lee, Chang Kyu; Chang, Chul Hoon; Joo, Se Ik

Abstract

Three trials of external quality assessment for clinical microbiology laboratory were performed in 2002. A total of 19 specimens were distributed. Five specimens were distributed to 241 laboratories with 222 returns in Trial I, seven specimens to 241 laboratories with 232 returns in Trial II, and seven specimens to 245 laboratories with 220 returns in Trial III. The percentages of fully correct results of Plasmodium falciparum, P. malariae, P. vivax, gram-positive rods, group 5, S. aureus, E. faecium, Leuconostoc spp. Aeromonas hydrophila, Alternaria spp. S. aureus, E. coli, K. pneumoniae, E. faecalis, P. aeruginosa, E. coli, and K. pneumoniae were 38%, 66%, 68%, 85%, 68%, 94%, 76%, 51%, 86%, 76%, 100%, 99%, 93%, 79%, 86%, 95% and 96%, respectively. The acceptable percentages on disk-diffusion antibacterial susceptibility tests against oxacillin and vancomycin of S. aureus (M0206) were 99% and 94%, respectively. Those against vancomycin and teicoplanin of E. faecium (M0208) were 99% and 94%, respectively. Those against vancomycin, oxacillin, penicillin G, clindamycin, erythromycin, ciprofloxacin, gentamicin and teicoplanin of S. aureus (M0213) were 87%, 95%, 93%, 93%, 93%, 82%, 92%, 99%, and 95%, respectively. The acceptable percentages on disk diffusion test against ciprofloxacin, imipenem, ampicillin, cefotaxime, and cephalothin of E. coli (M0214) were 98%, 100%, 98%, 96%, and 87%, respectively. Those against ciprofloxacin, imipenem, ampicillin, cefotaxime, and cephalothin of K. pneumoniae (M0215) were 96%, 100%, 98%, 93% and 99%, respectively. Those against vancomycin, ciprofloxacin, ampicillin, penicillin G, erythromycin, and teicoplanin of E. faecalis (M0216) were 91%, 85%, 94%, 87%, 97%, and 100%, respectively. Those against ciprofloxacin, gentamicin, imipenem, ceftazidime, and piperacillin of P. aeruginosa (M0217) were 89%, 99%, 100%, 100%, and 100%, respectively. Those against amikacin, ciprofloxacin, gentamicin, imipenem, ampicillin, cefotaxime, and cephalothin of E. coli (M0218) were 98%, 98%, 98%, 100%, 98%, 100% and 90%, respectively. Those against amikacin, ciprofloxacin, gentamicin, imipenem, ampicillin, cefotaxime, and cephalothin of K. pneumoniae (M0219) were 97%, 97%, 98%, 100%, 99%, 99% and 99%, respectively. Twenty laboratories on Trial III had reported the both results of disk diffusion and MIC methods. The performance on the automated or E-test susceptibility tests was generally good, except in case of teicoplanin, showing the lower MIC in 63% of 51 participants. The susceptibility against teicoplanin should be confirmed by disk diffusion method in case of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus in the laboratories using automated MIC methods. In conclusion, it is necessary that the quality assurance of the individual laboratories should be improved in the identification of malaria and Enterococcus spp., and in susceptibility tests against vancomycin, erythromycin and ciprofloxacin of S. aureus, and cephalothin of E. coli in case of disk diffusion method, and teicoplanin of Enterococcus in the laboratories using automated MIC methods.