首页> 外文期刊>The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease: the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease >Random blinded rechecking of sputum acid-fast bacilli smear using fluorescence microscopy: 8 years' experience
【24h】

Random blinded rechecking of sputum acid-fast bacilli smear using fluorescence microscopy: 8 years' experience

机译:使用荧光显微镜对痰液抗酸杆菌涂片进行随机盲法复查:8年经验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: The Hong Kong TB Reference Laboratory is a high volume laboratory examining around 400 sputum acid-fast bacilli smears daily using fluorescence microscopy (FM). OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of blinded rechecking applied to FM in a high-throughput laboratory. METHOD: From 2003, 2.5% (5% in 2003 and 2004) of all smears were randomly selected, relabelled and assigned to each technician (rechecker) in turn. These smears were restained and re-examined. Discordance between initial screener and rechecker was resolved by a controller. RESULTS: From 2003 to 2010, low false-negative (LFN) errors (0.10-0.27%) were within the critical values, at 85% (1 year) and 90% (7 years) sensitivity. However, LFN error (0.28-0.62%) among recheckers was prominent. There were also low false-positive (LFP) cases (0.13-0.75%), but subsequent cultures showed these to be mycobacteria culture-positive. This relatively poor performance among the recheckers might be due to background fluorescence increase after restaining and/or inefficiency of the rechecking procedure. CONCLUSION: In a high-throughput laboratory, blind rechecking is a good means of quality assurance. To minimise false LFP, problems due to restaining should be resolved before blinded rechecking can be generally applied in the field for FM where mycobacterial cultures are not routinely performed.
机译:背景:香港结核病参考实验室是一个高容量实验室,每天使用荧光显微镜(FM)检查约400次痰液抗酸杆菌涂片。目的:评估在高通量实验室中应用于FM的盲法复检的有效性。方法:从2003年开始,所有涂片的2.5%(2003年和2004年为5%)被随机选择,重新贴标签并依次分配给每个技术人员(复检者)。这些涂片被保留并重新检查。初始筛选器和重新检查器之间的不一致已由控制器解决。结果:从2003年到2010年,低假阴性(LFN)错误(0.10-0.27%)处于临界值内,敏感度分别为85%(1年)和90%(7年)。但是,复查者之间的LFN误差(0.28-0.62%)很明显。也有低假阳性(LFP)病例(0.13-0.75%),但随后的培养表明它们是分枝杆菌培养阳性。重新检查者之间相对较差的性能可能是由于重新检查过程中保留的背景荧光增加和/或效率低下所致。结论:在高通量实验室中,盲目复查是保证质量的好方法。为了最大程度地减少错误的LFP,应解决因保留而引起的问题,然后才能在通常不常规进行分枝杆菌培养的FM现场进行盲目复查。

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