70 likes | 181 Views
Introduction to Group Work 1. Quality Assurance Programmes. Group Work 1. Plenary - Feedback at 09:45. Current WHO EQAP for detection of influenza A by PCR. Strengths? Helps labs to correct mistakes, learn from mistakes Can have several staff run the panel
E N D
Introduction to Group Work 1 Quality Assurance Programmes
Current WHO EQAP for detection of influenza A by PCR Strengths? • Helps labs to correct mistakes, learn from mistakes • Can have several staff run the panel • Panel sent directly to lab (not stuck in customs), condition good Weaknesses? • Paper reports and lots of printing • Doesn’t have unsubtypeable influenza A virus Areas to improve? • Web-based data entry although may not be ideal for all countries • Consider including a low path H9 (some labs could identify)
Other programmes: do you participate in the following? List the labs participating in the following programmes Fee-paying: • QCMD (Indonesia paid for by Welcome Trust) • NEQAS • CAP Free: • CDC pilot (Thailand yes, Indonesia yes, Sri Lanka not yet, in discussions with Myanmar) Strengths and Weaknesses of the above programmes - Do we need to participate in more than one? - CDC panel requires extraction on all specimens; can test limit of detection; may be available beyond NICs
Scope of EQAP: Needs to be expanded? • Virus culture – • Can do - Myanmar, Thailand, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Australia • This should be expanded first (priority, maybe WHO should support) • Antivirals (phenotypic or genotypic) – • Can do – Australia (both), Thailand (both), Indonesia (sequencing), Myanmar sends to Japan • Less important for EQAP • Sequencing • Can do – Thailand, Indonesia, Australia • EQAP – Australia developing one with CDC • Serology • Can do – Australia, Indonesia, Thailand, Sri Lanka (can do but don’t any more)
Preferred features of EQAP? • Number of samples • Type of samples • Include more inactivated viruses • Frequency • Time to reporting • Format of reports • Web-based reporting (but not for all countries)