Skip to main content
Log in

Measurement Uncertainty of Chromatographic Analyses: A Comparative Study on the Role of Reference Materials

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
MAPAN Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The chromatographic techniques play a crucial role in analyzing materials in pharmaceutical, biochemical, chemical, biomedical, and forensic sectors. High purity and quality reference standards are inevitable for the precise and accurate estimation of analytes from the sample matrices. Here, the influence of reference material on the chromatographic estimation of a highly volatile analyte, ethylene oxide (EO), was studied using three batches of certified reference materials (CRMs). The relative uncertainties in the reference standards prepared with these CRMs are estimated as 0.036, 0.044, and 0.072 pu, respectively. The studies revealed that more than 98 % of the standard preparation uncertainty (USP) comes from the CRM concentration uncertainty. It also shows that more than 95 % of the combined uncertainty (UC) was contributed by USP. Thus, the study highlights the necessity of good-quality CRMs and precise preparation methods for the accurate chromatographic analyses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. M. Zilli, A practical guide to the calculation of uncertainty of measurement. Open Toxicol. J., 6 (2013) 20–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Guidelines for Estimation and Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, NABL 141, National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration Laboratories (NABL), (2016) 1–48.

  3. The Expression of Uncertainty and Confidence in Measurement, United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS), M3003, (2012) 1–82.

  4. Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement, EURACHEM/CITAC Guide CG4, (2000) 1–120.

  5. V.J. Barwick, Sources of uncertainty in gas chromatography and high-performance liquid chromatography. J. Chromatogr. A., 849 (1999) 13–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9673(99)00537-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. G.N.W. Leung, E.N.M. Ho, W.H. Kwok, D.K.K. Leung, F.P.W. Tang, T.S.M. Wan, A.S.Y. Wong, C.H.F. Wong, J.K.Y. Wong and N.H. Yu, A bottom-up approach in estimating the measurement uncertainty and other important considerations for quantitative analyses in drug testing for horses. J. Chromatogr. A., 1163 (2007) 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2007.06.035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. R.G. Gullberg, Estimating the measurement uncertainty in forensic blood alcohol analysis. J. Anal. Toxicol., 36 (2012) 153–161. https://doi.org/10.1093/jat/bks012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. J.H. Sklerov and F.J. Couper, Calculation and verification of blood ethanol measurement uncertainty for headspace gas chromatography. J. Anal. Toxicol., 35 (2011) 402–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. J. Kristiansen and H.W. Petersen, An uncertainty budget for the measurement of ethanol in blood by headspace gas chromatography. J. Anal. Toxicol., 28 (2004) 456–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. E. Beceiro-Gonzalez, E. Concha-Grana, A. Guimaraes, C. Goncalves, S. Muniategui-Lorenzo and M.F. Alpendurada, Optimisation and validation of a solid-phase microextraction method for simultaneous determination of different types of pesticides in water by gas chromatography – mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A., 1141 (2007) 165–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2006.12.042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. E. Beceiro-gonzalez, A. Guimaraes and M.F. Alpendurada, Optimisation of a headspace-solid-phase micro-extraction method for simultaneous determination of organometallic compounds of mercury, lead and tin in water by gas chromatography – tandem mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A., 1216 (2009) 5563–5569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2009.05.056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. O.P. Jimenez and R.M.P. Pastor, Estimation of measurement uncertainty of pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls and polyaromatic hydrocarbons in sediments by using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Anal. Chim. Acta., 724 (2012) 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2012.02.050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. K. Gates, N. Chang, I. Dilek, H. Jian, S. Pogue and U. Sreenivasan, The uncertainty of reference standards - A guide to understanding factors impacting uncertainty, uncertainty calculations, and vendor certifications. J. Anal. Toxicol., 33 (2009) 532–539. https://doi.org/10.1093/jat/33.8.532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. L.S. Sreejith and R. Sasi, Residual ethylene oxide in medical devices: Effects and estimation methods, an overview, Trends Biomater. Artif. Organs., 34 (2020) 7–12.

    Google Scholar 

  15. B. Bhattacharya, Estimation of Uncertainty in engineering and chemical measurements-A simplified approach, (2021).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Director, SCTIMST, and the Head, BMT wing, SCTIMST, for providing the facilities to carry out this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Renjith Sasi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sasi, R., Nimi, N., Sasikala, T.S. et al. Measurement Uncertainty of Chromatographic Analyses: A Comparative Study on the Role of Reference Materials. MAPAN 37, 625–629 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12647-022-00595-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12647-022-00595-w

Keywords

Navigation