Abstract
Two interlaboratory surveys of urine nickel analyses were performed in which eight or nine urine samples were distributed to laboratories in seven nations for measurements of nickel concentrations by atomic absorption spectrometry. In both surveys, wide discrepancies were observed in the values for urine nickel concentrations that were obtained in different laboratories by various analytical methods. This finding documents a serious need for improvement in the proficiency of nickel analyses. Nonetheless, excellent interlaboratory concordance was found in the rankings of urine samples in order of increasing nickel concentrations. Analytical techniques that involved preliminary wet or dry ashing and extration steps before flameless atomic absorption spectrometry were generally superior to techniques for direct analysis of urine by flameless atomic absorption spectrometry in respect to (a) analytical sensitivity, (b) recovery of added nickel, (c) interlaboratory precision, and (d) interlaboratory concordance of ranking of urine samples in order of increasing nickel concentrations.
Determination of diethyllead in the urine by flameless atomic absorption spectrometry.
