...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Anesthesiology >Systematic comparison of four point-of-care methods versus the reference laboratory measurement of hemoglobin in the surgical ICU setting: a cross-sectional method comparison study
【24h】

Systematic comparison of four point-of-care methods versus the reference laboratory measurement of hemoglobin in the surgical ICU setting: a cross-sectional method comparison study

机译:四个护理点方法的系统比较与手术ICU设置中血红蛋白的参考实验室测量:横截面积比较研究

获取原文
           

摘要

Transfusion decision during the perioperative period mostly relies on the point-of-care testing for Hb measurement. This study aimed systematically compared four point-of-care methods with the central laboratory measurement of hemoglobin (LHb) regarding the accuracy, precision, and assay practicality to identify the preferred point-of-care method during the perioperative period. This cross-sectional method comparison study was conducted in the surgical intensive care unit at Ramathibodi Hospital, Thailand, from September 2015 to July 2016. Four point-of-care methods, i.e., capillary hematocrit (HctCap), HemoCue Hb201+, iSTAT with CG8+ cartridge, and SpHb from Radical-7 pulse co-oximeter were carried out when LHb was ordered. Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman analyses were performed to assess the accuracy and precision, while the workload, turnaround time, and the unit cost were evaluated for the method practicality. Thirty-five patients were enrolled, corresponding to 48 blood specimens for analyses, resulting in the measured hemoglobin of 11.2?±?1.9?g/dL by LHb. Ranking by correlation (r), mean difference (bias) and 95% limit of agreement (LOA) showed the point-of-care methods from the greater to the less performance as followed, iSTAT-LHb pair (r?=?0.941; bias 0.15 (95% LOA; ??1.41, 1.12) g/dL), HemoCue-LHb pair (r?=?0.922; bias ??0.18 (95% LOA; ??1.63, 1.28) g/dL), SpHb-LHb pair (r?=?0.670; bias 0.13 (95% LOA; ??3.12, 3.39) g/dL) and HctCap-LHb pair (r?=?0.905; bias 0.46 (95% LOA; ??1.16, 2.08) g/dL). Considering the practicality, all point-of-care methods had less workload and turnaround time than LHb, but only HemoCue and HctCap had lower unit cost. This study identified HemoCue as the suitable point-of-care method for the sole purpose of Hb measurement in the surgical ICU setting, while iSTAT should be considered when additional data is needed.
机译:在围手术期期间的输血决定主要依赖于HB测量的护理点测试。本研究旨在系统地比较了四种护理方法,其具有血红蛋白(LHB)的中央实验室测量关于精度,精度和测定实用性,以识别围手术期间优选的护理点方法。这项横断面积比较研究在2015年9月至2016年7月,在泰国雷马拉斯维迪医院的外科医疗中心进行了比较研究。四种护理方法,即毛细管血液比素(HCTCAP),Hemocue HB201 +,Istat,CG8 +排序LHB时,进行盒和来自自由基-7脉冲共血管的SPHB。进行了Pearson相关性和Bland-Altman分析,以评估准确性和精度,而工作量,周转时间和单位成本进行了评估,用于该方法实用性。注册了三十五名患者,对应于48次血液标本进行分析,导致测量的血红蛋白为11.2≤1.9≤1.9?1.9?G / DL。通过相关性(R)排名,平均差异(偏差)和95%的协议限制(LOA)显示了从越来越多的性能的护理点方法,ISTAT-LHB对(R?= 0.941;偏见0.15(95%LOA; ?? 1.41,112)G / DL),Hemocue-LHB对(R?= 0.922;偏差为0.18(95%LOA; 1.63,1.28)G / DL),SPHB -LHB对(r?= 0.670;偏置0.13(95%LOA; 3.12,3.12,3.39)G / DL)和HCTCAP-LHB对(R?= 0.905;偏置0.46(95%LOA; ?? 1.16, 2.08)G / DL)。考虑到实用性,所有护理点方法都具有较少的工作量和周转时间而不是LHB,但只有Hemocue和HctCap的单位成本较低。本研究确定了血腥作为合适的护理方法,以便在手术ICU设置中唯一目的进行HB测量,而当需要额外的数据时,应考虑ISTAT。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号