This program is preliminary and subject to change.
|
FRIDAY MAY 31 |
||||||
|
1300-1730 |
CACB Oral Exams |
|||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
SATURDAY JUNE 1 |
||||||
|
0800-1415 |
CACB Oral Exams |
|||||
|
0900-1700 |
CSCC 2018-2019 Council Meeting |
|||||
|
1400-1700 |
CACB 2018-2019 Board of Directors Meeting |
|||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
SUNDAY JUNE 2 |
||||||
|
0800-1415 |
CACB Oral Exams |
|||||
|
0800-0930 |
||||||
|
0930-1100 |
||||||
|
1100-1300 |
||||||
|
1300-1430 |
||||||
|
1430-1600 |
||||||
|
1600-1730 |
Special Interest Group and Committee Meetings
|
|||||
|
1730-1830 |
New Member Reception |
|||||
|
1830-1930 |
Opening Keynote: Infectious Diseases & Substance Use Disorders; Converging Public Health Crises |
|||||
|
1930-2200 |
Opening Reception at The New Brunswick Museum Hall of Great Whales |
|||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
MONDAY JUNE 3 |
||||||
|
0730-0830 |
Clinical Biochemistry Editorial Board
|
|||||
|
0845-1200 |
||||||
|
1200-1900 |
Lunch, Exhibit and Poster Viewing |
|||||
|
1400-1500 |
|
|||||
|
1500-1600 |
Oral ePoster Presentations Monitor 1
Monitor 2
|
|||||
|
1600-1700 |
University of Toronto Reception – Postdoctoral Training Program 50th Anniversary Reception |
|||||
|
1700-1900 |
Wine & Cheese Reception with Exhibitors |
|||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
TUESDAY JUNE 4 |
||||||
|
0730-0830 |
|
|||||
|
0900-1200 |
||||||
|
1200-1330 |
Lunch and Exhibit Viewing |
|||||
|
1300-1330 |
CSCC Council/Vendor Meeting |
|||||
|
1330-1630 |
||||||
|
1630-1730 |
CSCC Annual General Meeting CSCC “Town Hall” |
|||||
|
1730-1815 |
CACB Annual General Meeting |
|||||
|
1830-2230 |
President’s Reception and Awards Banquet at Cornerstone Performance & Event Venue |
|||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
WEDNESDAY JUNE 5 |
||||||
|
0730-0830 |
|
|||||
|
0900-1200 |
||||||
|
1200-1600 |
Committee Meetings & Special Interest Group Meetings
|
|||||
|
1600-1700 |
CSCC 2019-2020 Council Meeting CACB 2019-2020 Board of Directors Meeting |
|||||
Opening Keynote: Infectious Diseases & Substance Use Disorders; Converging Public Health Crises
Sunday June 2, 1830-1930
Duncan Webster, Division of Infectious Disease, Department of Medicine, Horizon Health Network, Saint John
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Participate collaboratively with harm reduction programs, effectively combatting blood-borne infections and the rising rates of endocarditis observed in the context of the current opioid crisis.
- Engage with other healthcare teams as a partner in the current HCV elimination strategy.
- Engage as a partner in the movement to bring an end to the AIDS epidemic.
Healthcare teams managing infectious diseases and substance use disorders have important overlapping and synergistic roles in addressing converging public health crises. There is a medical model for delivering efficient and effective care to individuals positive and at-risk for hepatitis C and HIV, and associated infectious diseases, notably those with opioid use disorder who are so often left under-serviced by our over-burdened Canadian healthcare system. This session will be of value to: Clinical Chemists, Trainees, and other healthcare professionals.
Symposium 1: Forensics in Laboratory Medicine
Monday June 3, 0900-1200
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Gain an appreciation for the role of the laboratory in forensic testing.
- Understand the differences in quality assurance between clinical and forensic laboratories.
- Gain insight into the nuances of expert witness testimony.
0900-0950
An Idiot’s Guide To Forensics From the Perspective of a True Idiot
Frederick Strathmann, Vice President of Quality Assurance, Director of New Technology & Innovation, Assistant Laboratory Director, NMS Labs, Willow Grove, Pennsylvania
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- List the major regulatory bodies and guidance documents applicable to forensic testing.
- Summarize the important differences and similarities with effective testimony in clinical and forensic contexts.
- Assess the needed approach to effective innovation in the area of forensic science.
This presentation will provide an introduction to forensics from the perspective of a trained clinical chemist. Topics will include a brief introduction to the world of forensics for those with little to no training in forensics, an overview of key similarities and differences in quality assurance between forensic and clinical labs, and the challenges with innovation. This session will be of value to all clinical laboratory staff that may find themselves unexpectedly involved on the forensic side of laboratory testing.
0950-1020
Refreshment Break
1020-1110
Mock Trial
Matthew Bowes, Chief Medical Examiner, Nova Scotia
The Honorable Lucie Mathurin, Provincial Court Judge, New Brunswick
Patrick Wilbur, Crown prosecutor, New Brunswick
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Understand what is required from experts when testifying in a criminal proceeding.
- Understand the Mohan requirements for qualifying someone as an expert in a given field.
This session will focus on a recent court case in Saint John that involved a drug-related death of a teenage boy who had consumed the novel psychedelic 25I NBOMe. It will begin with an overview of the case provided by The Honourable Lucie Mathurin (lead prosecutor at the time) followed by expert witness testimony by Dr. Bowes. In this case, the crown was successful in obtaining a conviction against the drug dealer for criminal negligence.
1100-1200
Roundtable Panel Discussion
Panelists:
Matthew Bowes, Chief Medical Examiner, Nova Scotia
The Honorable Lucie Mathurin, Provincial Court Judge, New Brunswick
Curtis Oleschuk, St. Boniface Hospital, Winnipeg
Frederick Strathmann, Vice President of Quality Assurance, Director of New Technology & Innovation, Assistant Laboratory Director, NMS Labs, Willow Grove, Pennsylvania
Patrick Wilbur, Crown Prosecutor, New Brunswick
The panel discussion will cover important topics such as testimonial bias, the limitations associated with toxicology and autopsy evidence, and preparing expert witnesses for court. It will also provide ample time for the audience to ask questions of these experts.
Symposium 2: When One Size Fits All Doesn’t Fit
Tuesday June 4, 0900-1200
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Identify the limitations of applying standard adult reference intervals to non-reference population groups.
- Describe the considerations necessary to appropriately defining health in an aging/elderly individual.
- Recognize the challenges of addressing infertility and the role of the laboratory in fertility treatment.
0900-0950
Rethinking Reference Intervals for Older Adults: Data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA)
Cynthia Balion, St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Recognize the need for age- and sex-specific reference intervals for older adults.
- Describe a methodological approach to determine physiologically appropriate reference intervals.
- Consider providing interpretive test information for older adults in laboratory reports.
Currently, almost all adult reference intervals (RIs) are derived from healthy reference groups of young to middle-aged adults. Older adults exhibit substantially more heterogeneity in physiological and health states compared to younger adults. Application of younger adult RIs on older adults for decision making may result in misdiagnosis and inappropriate use of health care resources. Data from the CLSA on 30,000 Canadians aged 45 and 85 were used to determine physiologically based RIs for hematology analytes.
0950-1020
Refreshment Break
1020-1110
Laboratory Assessment of Gametes for Fertility Treatment
Sharon Mortimer, Oozoa Biomedical; Grace Fertility Centre, Vancouver
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Describe the functional basis for gamete assessment methods in the ART (assisted reproductive technologies) laboratory.
- Describe the predictive value of oocyte morphology on embryo developmental potential.
- Describe the limitations of a basic (WHO-type) semen analysis in predicting fertility.
Laboratory assessment of gametes for fertility treatment: Oocytes and spermatozoa for fertility treatment are unusual specimens in a laboratory, as they must remain functional after the assessment has been completed. This presentation will discuss the methods for oocyte and sperm evaluation and how these evaluations can be used to predict outcomes and to direct treatment type. This session will be of value to Clinical Chemists, trainees, and other healthcare professionals who have an interest in the fertility laboratory.
1110-1200
Lightening Talks
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Discuss key special considerations for laboratory testing in neonate / pediatric, transgender, and ethnic / minority populations.
- Outline an algorithm for providing constructive feedback on the content and organization of an oral presentation.
- Apply the observed communication strategies to enhance audience engagement during oral presentations.
Presentations include:
- Neonates or Pediatrics
Lawrence de Koning, University of Calgary; Alberta Public Laboratories
Heather Paul, - Transgender Individuals
Loralie Langman, Mayo Laboratories, Minneapolis
Zahraa Mohamed-Ali, - Ethnicity / Minority Populations
Stephen Hill, McMaster University
Josko Ivica, McMaster University
Symposium 3: Artificial Intelligence
Tuesday June 4, 1330-1630
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Identify the basic principles of Artificial Intelligence and current applications, limits and potential pitfalls.
- Recognize the current and future use of Artificial Intelligence in laboratory medicine and its potential for disruptive innovations.
- Identify the ethical, data privacy and intellectual property aspects of the use of Artificial Intelligence in healthcare.
1330-1430
Introduction to Artificial Intelligence
Johan Saba, Seed AI, Montreal
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Identify the role of domain/sector translation in the context of data science and artificial intelligence.
- Develop a strong understanding of data science and machine learning with concrete examples.
- List the limitations of linear models and how deep learning solves them.
This training is aimed at experts of any domain that want to build a strong understanding of what data science and machine learning are in order to assess how they could apply them in their practices.
1430-1510
Using Analytics and Machine Learning to Enhance Clinical Laboratory Diagnosis
Jason Baron, Harvard Medical School; Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Describe key fundamentals of machine learning.
- Identify opportunities to apply analytics and machine learning to improve clinical laboratory diagnosis.
- Evaluate emerging strategies for clinical decision support.
Not only do clinical laboratory data underlie many clinical decisions, these data also hold a treasure trove of information that pathologists, clinicians, clinical chemists, informaticians and researchers can mine to optimize patient diagnosis and management and to discover new clinical knowledge. This presentation will discuss applications of machine learning and analytics to aspects of laboratory testing including utilization management, error detection, clinical decision support and enhanced test result reporting. The talk will illustrate key concepts and strategies using examples from the presenter’s clinical practice and research. This session is intended for pathologists, clinical chemists, clinicians, technologists, researchers and trainees with a range of experience levels in clinical informatics and analytics, including beginners.
1510-1540
Refreshment Break
1540-1630
Ethical and Legal Issues of Artificial Intelligence: The Curious Case of Mobile Health Apps
Ma’n H. Zawati, Executive Director, Centre for Genomics & Policy, McGill University
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Identify the ethical issues of privacy in relation to implementation of AI in Healthcare.
- Recognize the liability issues in relation to implementation of AI using mhealth applications.
- Evaluate the ethical and policy issues surrounding the implementation of AI in mhealth applications.
Wearable and mobile devices that record and organize personal health information are becoming increasingly ubiquitous. Many of us own devices capable of tracking our activities, counting our steps, estimating our caloric intake, measuring the quality of our sleep, and even recording our heart rate. And while this kind of information promises to empower consumers, enabling them to better understand their health and fitness, such technologies also raise certain legal and ethical questions about data management, privacy, and how we make decisions about our health, especially when using artificial intelligence.
Such data, while seemingly innocuous, is often capable of revealing a great deal about a person’s underlying health, their daily habits, and even, sometimes, their identity. On the one hand, this raises considerations about privacy and the extent to which the companies that gather personal health information are capable of safeguarding it. On the other hand, the possibility that this kind of information will be used to inform decisions about a person’s health raises questions about the role of technology in the delivery of healthcare in the modern world and whether consumers can rely on wearable and mobile devices to provide useful insight into fitness and affliction. Several of these questions are also asked in the research setting, where mobile health applications are used to recruit participants for clinical studies. In all cases, the prevalence and power of wearables and other mobile devices in the era of artificial intelligence indicates that accounting for these potential legal and ethical concerns is necessary. In this presentation, I will outline some of the legal, ethical and policy concerns raised by this emerging technology using the Canadian legal landscape and describe whether it may be harnessed in ways that empower patients and society as a whole.
Symposium 4: Harmonization of Quality
Wednesday June 5, 0900-1215
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Describe the current status in the harmonization of quality indicators.
- Discuss the progress towards consensus for the determination of reference intervals.
- Identify opportunities for laboratories to improve patient care through the Choosing Wisely campaign.
0900-0945
Quality Indicators in Laboratory Medicine: The Path to Patient Safety
Vincent De Guire, Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemount; Grappe OPTILAB Montréal-CHUM, Montréal
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this presentation participants will be able to:
- Discuss the current status in the harmonization of quality indicators.
- Understand how local initiatives, part of a more global solution can maximize adhesion of laboratories to the use of quality indicators.
- Learn more about the national program for quality indicators comparison.
Quality improvement is a priority for all laboratories. Monitoring and improving our processes using Quality Indicators (QI) is essential to ensure the highest standards for our patients. With mostly all laboratories using these metrics, there is still a lack of standardization limiting the potential of improvement through comparison. In this presentation we will discuss the status of QIs standardization as well as local and international initiatives in progress in the field. The session will be of value to: Clinical Chemists, Trainees, and other healthcare professionals.
0945-1030
Reference Interval Harmonization in Canada: An Update from the CSCC Working Group
Jennifer Taher, University of Toronto
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Discuss the gaps and variability in available reference intervals (RIs) across Canada and the benefits of harmonized RIs.
- Discuss direct and indirect approaches to determining RIs.
- Discuss the strategies for harmonized RIs being carried out by the CSCC hRI Working Group.
Reference intervals (RIs) are widely used as clinical decision-making tools. Unfortunately, significant variation in RIs exists between clinical laboratories thereby contributing to a lack of consistency in result interpretation and clinical decision making. Evidence in the literature suggests that differences in RIs is not necessarily related to assay standardization or bias between instruments. With harmonization initiatives underway in several countries, the CSCC formed a national Working Group to coordinate its efforts to harmonize RIs across Canada. Our goal is to develop harmonized RIs together with common reporting formats. To assess and develop Canadian harmonized RIs, we use a combination of direct reference value data from healthy Canadians and indirect analysis of retrospective patient data. The direct RIs are from the Canadian Laboratory Initiate on Pediatric Reference Intervals (CALIPER) and the Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS). To calculate indirect RIs, we have collected Canadian provincial health datasets from three provinces (British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario) for 24 analytes and applied the Arzideh statistical method to assess outliers, regional differences, monthly stability, and partitions based on age and sex. We compare the indirect and direct RIs to ultimately develop a final harmonized RI recommendation for each analyte. Our data shows minimal differences in reference values across provinces for many of these initial analytes, supporting the development and use of harmonized RIs across Canada. Future steps are aimed national guideline development and implementation. The session will be of value to: Clinical biochemists, laboratory directors, technologists, physicians, IVD industry scientists, regulators and other healthcare professionals and learners who participate in patient care.
1030-1045
Refreshment Break
1045-1110
Indirect Methods for Estimating Reference Intervals – Ready for Clinical Use?
Thomas Streichert, Institut für Klinische Chemie, University of Cologne
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- Describe direct and indirect methods to determine reference limits (RLs) for IVD tests.
- Compare the basic idea of indirect approaches for estimating RLs to the classical direct approach.
- List advantages and limitations of indirect methods.
VD testing is essential for patient management, more than 60% of clinical decisions are based on IVD tests. Reliable and accurate reference limits (RLs) for laboratory analyses are crucial for the correct interpretation of IVD test results and thus for the clinical decision. The common approach – so called “direct approach”- to determine RLs following the IFCC recommendation requires the selection of reference individuals, a reference sample group, measuring reference values, plotting the reference distribution and calculation of RLs. According to the European Directive IVD medical devices, manufacturers are obliged to supply their clients with appropriate reference RLs for the use of their assay platforms and reagents, though manufacturers tend to ask their customers to establish their own RLs. Following the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15189 standard for clinical laboratory accreditation each laboratory should periodically (re-)evaluate its own RLs. However, due to high costs and challenging procedures most of the laboratories do not (re-)evaluate the RLs given by the manufacturer. Indirect methods for the estimation of RLs use large data pools and data mining strategies to select results from a mixed population (containing diseased and non-diseased subjects, such as it is found in a hospital or ambulance) to identify a probably “healthy” subpopulation. This subpopulation is then used to derive RLs. Of course, high data quality and large quantities are critical prerequisites for indirect methods to estimate RLs. These indirect approaches enable laboratories to evaluate their RLs at the least possible cost and additionally help to overcome specific disadvantages of direct approaches like age-stratification, transference problems and last but not least ethical problems in the case of children or elderly persons. This talk will be of value to: Clinical Chemists, Clinical Pathologists and Trainees.
1100-1200
Addressing Laboratory Test Over-utilization Through Collaboration
Lisa K. Hicks, University of Toronto; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute; St. Michaels Hospital
Learning Objectives:
At the end of this session participants will be able to:
- List key factors that contribute to success in efforts to address laboratory overutilization.
- Describe different types of strategies that can be employed to address overutilization of labs.
- Provide examples of different strategies to address overutilization of labs.
- Discuss how local initiatives can be scaled and the importance of context during spread.
This presentation will discuss how overutilization of laboratory tests is widespread across multiple regions and practice settings and will argue that the keys to addressing overutilization are: Collaboration with clinical partners and harmonization of efforts within and across sites and regions. Key factors in successful efforts to address overutilization of laboratory testing will be listed. Different types of change strategies will be outlined with examples. Finally the presentation will discuss the challenge of how to spread successful initiatives beyond a single site and the importance of considering local context as efforts are scaled.