AACC guidance document on management of point-of-care testing
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Expected laboratory analytical variation is ±0.1-0.2 mmol/L for K+ and ±1-2 mmol/L for Na+ according to CLIA and manufacturer standards.
“According to Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) and manufacturer standards, the expected laboratory analytical variation is ±0.1-0.2 mmol/L for K⁺ and ±1-2 mmol/L for Na⁺ [10].”
POCT often underestimates sodium concentrations by 1-4 mmol/L due to methodological differences in ion-selective electrodes.
“Na⁺ measurement discrepancies are also well documented, with several researchers noting that POCT often underestimates Na⁺ concentrations by 1-4 mmol/L due to methodological differences in ion-selective electrodes [9,10].”
Clinically acceptable bias thresholds are ≤0.3 mmol/L for K+ and ≤3 mmol/L for Na+ according to AACC and CLSI.
“In accordance with guidelines from the American Association for Clinical Chemistry (AACC) and the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI), clinically acceptable bias was defined as: ≤ 0.3 mmol/L for K⁺; ≤ 3 mmol/L for Na⁺ [10].”
Cites
Impact of point-of-care testing on patients' length of stay in a large emergency department
Parvin, C. A., Lo, S. F., Deuser, S. M., Weaver, L. G., Lewis, L. M., & Scott, M. G. (1996) · Clinical Chemistry · doi:10.1093/clinchem/42.5.711 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Li, L., Georgiou, A., Vecellio, E., Eigenstetter, A., Toouli, G., Wilson, R., & Westbrook, J. I. (2015) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1111/acem.12565 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Hirst, J. A., McLellan, J. H., Price, C. P., English, E., Feakins, B. G., Stevens, R. J., & Farmer, A. J. (2017) · Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM) · doi:10.1515/cclm-2016-0303 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Does POCT reduce the risk of error in laboratory testing?
Plebani, M. (2009) · Clinica Chimica Acta · doi:10.1016/j.cca.2009.03.014 · Cited by 97 · see citing works
Goodacre, S., Bradburn, M., Fitzgerald, P., Cross, E., Collinson, P., Gray, A., & Hall, A. (2011) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta15230 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lasfer, C., Lahib, A., Soliman, K., & Gouda, S. (2025) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.89106
“According to Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) and manufacturer standards, the expected laboratory analytical variation is ±0.1-0.2 mmol/L for K ⁺ and ±1-2 mmol/L for Na ⁺ [10].”
Influential
- Authors
- Nichols, J. H., Alter, D., Chen, Y., Isbell, T. S., Jacobs, E., Moore, N., & Shajani-Yi, Z.
- Affiliations
- Vanderbilt University (US)
- Emory University (US)
- Dr. Everett Chalmers Regional Hospital (CA)
- Saint Louis University (US)
- EJ Clinical Consulting, Teaneck, NJ
- Abbott Diagnostics, Scarborough, ME
- Corresponding author
- Nichols, James H
- Venue
- The Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2020-04-08
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 762-787
- ISSN
- 2475-7241 (ISSN-L)
- 2576-9456
- OpenAlex
- W3029812983
- Cited by
- 63
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 4.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- The Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare cost, quality, practices
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Clinical Biochemistry › Bacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
- Keywords
- point-of-care testing, laboratory management, quality assurance, clinical laboratory practice
- MeSH terms
- Point-of-Care Testing, Chemistry, Clinical, Humans, Societies, Scientific, United States, Evidence-Based Practice, Clinical Laboratory Services
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
