Sigma Matrix of Ureum and Creatinine in Some Laboratories: Overview Gambaran Matrik Sigma Pemeriksaan Ureum dan Kreatinin pada Beberapa Laboratorium

Main Article Content

Ainun Salsabella
Titin Aryani


In clinical diagnosis, 80% is based on laboratory examination, however, laboratory examination still often cause errors, so it is necessary to apply a sigma matrix to evaluation. This study goes on to explain the results of previous studies on the sigma urea and creatinine matrix results in various laboratories. A literature review strategy was used in the research. A variety of databases, including Pubmed, Proquest, and Willey Library Online, were used to choose the literature. Ten publications were selected as literature sources and were quantitatively analyzed descriptively. The lowest urea sigma matrix value was 1.3, and creatinine was -2.33, according to data from numerous publications, while the highest urea sigma matrix value was 5.81, and creatinine was 19.02. In the urea sigma matrix, the most widely distributed sigma matrix values was in the range <2 with the interpretation of the results was not acceptable. In the urea matrix, the highest distribution of sigma matrix values was in in the range 6 with world-class quality interpretation. It was concluded that in 15 research data from various journals there were 8 urea sigma matrix data that met the requirements, namely the sigma matrix value. 3 In 27 research data from various journals, there were 23 creatinine sigma matrix data that meet the requirements.

Article Details

How to Cite
Salsabella, A., & Aryani, T. (2022). Sigma Matrix of Ureum and Creatinine in Some Laboratories: Overview. Medicra (Journal of Medical Laboratory Science/Technology), 5(1), 40-46.


Adiga, Preethika, A., & Swathi, K. (2015). Sigma metrics in clinical chemistry laboratory – A guide to quality control. Al Ameen J Med Sci, 8(4): 281-287. Retrieved from
Kumar, B. V., & Mohan, T. (2018). Sigma metrics as a tool for evaluating the performance of internal quality control in a clinical chemistry laboratory. J Lab Physicians, 10 (2), 194-9. doi: 10.4103/JLP.JLP_102_17
Li, R., Wang, T., Gong, L., Peng, P., Yang, S., Zhao, H., & Xiong, P., (2019). Comparative Analysis of Calculating Sigma Metrics by a Trueness Verification Pro ficiency Testing‐Based Approach and an Internal Quality Control Data Inter‐Laboratory Comparison‐Based Approach. J Clin Lab Anal, 33(9), 1 – 9. doi: 10.1002/jcla.22989
Mao, X., Shao, J., Bingchang, Z., & Yong, W. (2018). Evaluating analytical quality in clinical biochemistry laboratory using Six Sigma. Biochem Med (Zagreb), 28(2), 1- 4. doi: 10.11613/BM.2018 .020904
Nanda, S., & Ray, L. (2013). Quantitative Application of Sigma Metrics in Medical Biochemistry. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 7(12), 2689-2691. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2013/7292.3700
Peng, S., Zhang, J., Zhou, W., Mao, W., & Han, Z. (2020). Practical application of Westgard Sigma rules with run size in analytical biochemistry processes in clinical settings. J Clin Lab Anal, 1- 5. doi: 10.1002/jcla.23665
Riset Kesehatan Dasar (Riskesdas). (2018). Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Kesehatan Kementerian RI tahun 2018. Retrieved from
Sciacovelli, L., O'Kane, M., Skaik, Y. A., Caciagli, P., Pellegrini, C., Da Rin, G., Ivanov, A., Ghys, T., Plebani, M.; IFCC WG-LEPS. (2011). Quality indicators in laboratory medicine: from theory to practice. Preliminary data from the IFCC working group project Laboratory Errors and Patient Safety. Clin Chem Lab Med, 49 (5), 835–844. doi: 10.1515/CCLM.2011.128
Singh, B., Goswami, B., Gipto, K., Chawla, R., & Malika, V. (2011). Application of Sigma Metrics for the Assessment of Quality Assurance in Clinical Biochemistry Laboratory in India: A Pilot Study. Ind J Clin Biochem. 26(2), 131–135. doi: 10.1007/ s12291-010-0083-1
Teshome, M., Worede, A., & Asmelash D. (2021). Total Clinical Chemistry Laboratory Errors and Evaluation of the Analytical Quality Control Using Sigma Metric for Routine Clinical Chemistry Tests. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 14, 125 – 136. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S286679
Verdiansyah. (2016). Pemeriksaan Fungsi Ginjal. CDK-237, 43 (2), 148 – 154. doi: 10.55175/cdk.v43i2.25
Verma, M., Dahiya, K., Ghalaut, V.S., & Dhupper, V. (2018). Assessment of quality control system by sigma metrics and quality goal index ratio: A roadmap towards preparation for NABL. World J Methodol, 8 (3), 44-50. doi: 10.5662/wjm.v8.i3.44
Xia, J., Chen, S., Xu, F., & Zou, Y. (2018). Quality specifications of routine clinical chemistry methods based on sigma metrics in performance evaluation. J Clin Lab Anal, 1- 5. doi: 10.1002/jcla.22284
Zhou, B., Wu, Y., He, H., Li, C., Tan, L., & Cao, Y. (2020). Practical application of Six Sigma management in analytical biochemistry processes in clinical settings. J Clin Lab Anal, 1 – 10. doi: 10.li1002/jcla.2