Accreditation and Quality Assurance

, Volume 22, Issue 3, pp 119–123

Organisation of proficiency schemes by testing and calibration laboratories

  • Rodrigo Leão Mianes
  • Carla Schwengber ten Caten
Practitioner's Report
  • 160 Downloads

Abstract

Each year, an increasing demand for proficiency testing is seen in the world. Participating in this type of activity has been adopted by testing and calibration laboratories, accredited under the ISO/IEC 17025 standard (General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories), as a means to meet normative and regulatory requirements. Nevertheless, the availability of proficiency testing schemes organised by providers accredited under the ISO/IEC 17043 standard (Conformity assessment—General requirements for proficiency testing) has been insufficient, which poses challenges to laboratories. Considering the similarities between requirements present in both standards, which would allow for their coexistence in a management system, this paper presents an analysis of potential conflicts of interest within an organisation operating simultaneously as proficiency testing provider and testing and calibration laboratory. Aspects of confidentiality, impartiality and undue internal pressures are discussed, and a procedure is proposed to mitigate such conflicts through a web application that codifies the relationship between laboratories and results with no human interaction. In order to minimise possible subjective aspects, the study was validated by a group of metrology specialists. It was concluded that the proposed simultaneous operation is possible and can effectively contribute to reduce shortage in the availability of such a service.

Keywords

Proficiency testing Interlaboratory comparison ISO/IEC 17043 ISO/IEC 17025 

References

  1. 1.
    ISO/IEC 17025 (2005) General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    ILAC (2015) ILAC MRA Annual Report 2015. International laboratory accreditation cooperation. http://ilac.org/?ddownload=119853. Accessed 27 July 2016
  3. 3.
    ILAC B6 (2011) Benefits for laboratories participating in proficiency testing programs. International laboratory accreditation cooperation. http://ilac.org/?ddownload=892. Accessed 27 July 2016
  4. 4.
    Analytical Method Committee, The Royal Society of Chemistry (2010) The role of proficiency testing in method validation. Accred Qual Assur 15:73–79. doi:10.1007/s00769-009-0560-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Emons H (2013) Exploiting interlaboratory comparisons. Accred Qual Assur 18:267–268. doi:10.1007/s00769-013-0998-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    ILAC P9 (2014) ILAC policy for participation in proficiency testing activities. International laboratory accreditation cooperation. http://ilac.org/?ddownload=3259. Accessed 27 July 2016
  7. 7.
    ISO/IEC 17011 (2004) Conformity assessment—general requirements for accreditation bodies accrediting conformity assessment bodies. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    ISO/IEC 17043 (2010) Conformity assessment—General requirements for proficiency testing. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tsimillis K (2015) Training needs to understand quality assurance. Accred Qual Assur 20(1):53–59. doi:10.1007/s00769-014-1092-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lehmann C (2012) Accrediting PT/EQA providers to ISO/IEC 17043. Accred Qual Assur 17:371–374. doi:10.1007/s00769-012-0892-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    European Proficiency Testing Information System (EPTIS) PT database. https://www.eptis.bam.de/eptis/WebSearch/. Accessed 27 July 2016
  12. 12.
    Tholen D (2009) Update on ISO/IEC 17043: the new international standard for proficiency testing. Accred Qual Assur 14:635–637. doi:10.1007/s00769-009-0600-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yuvamoto P (2015) Microbiology proficiency testing of Brazilian accredited laboratories. Accred Qual Assur 20:319–323. doi:10.1007/s00769-015-1126-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mbwambo K, Koch M (2012) Establishing PT schemes in developing countries: examples from Africa. Accred Qual Assur 17:379–382. doi:10.1007/s00769-012-0893-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    de Albano F, ten Caten C (2014) Proficiency tests for laboratories: a systematic review. Accred Qual Assur 19(4):245–257. doi:10.1007/s00769-014-1061-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    ISO/IEC 17021–1 (2015) Conformity assessment—requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems—Part 1: requirements. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    ISO 13528 (2015) Statistical methods for use in proficiency testing by interlaboratory comparison. International Organization for Standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rodrigo Leão Mianes
    • 1
  • Carla Schwengber ten Caten
    • 1
  1. 1.Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)Porto AlegreBrazil

Personalised recommendations