Spiked sample standards; Their uses and disadvantages in analytical quality control

Standard samples, that is matrices containing precisely known concentrations of various radionuclides, are necessary adjuncts to any analytical quality control program. In general, we prefer the use of “natural matrix standards,” samples into which the radionuclides have become incorporated under natural conditions, and over as long a time span as possible. Under some circumstances, however, real advantages are offered by “spiked sample standards” samples to which the isotope of interest has been added in a precisely known amount, at the time of preparing the standard. It is our purpose to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of spiked standards and to contrast them with those of natural matrix standards, as well as to discuss the preparation of the former class of standards and the evidence supporting our recommendation of caution in their use.In general, spiked standards offer advantages of low cost of preparation, of advance assurance that the amount and chemical form of the radioisotopes added are known, and of the possibility of preparation of unnatural matrices, or of nuclides that are to be expected but not yet to be found in nature. The most salient disadvantages of spiked standards derive from the usual uncertainty concerning the concentration of any radionuclides in the matrix before spiking and from the difficulty of insuring that there will be no difference in analytical behavior between the spike and the same isotope that has become incorporated in the matrix under natural conditions. Consideration of these advantages and disadvantages leads to identification of a list of special problems for which spiked standards may be advantageous and of a list of precautions indicated in the interpretation of the resulting data. The argument against the general applicability of spiked standards appear overwhelming.