Mathematical Statistics of Factors Affecting the Unqualified Quality of Blood Samples in Medical Examination

Hongpeng Chen, Fapeng Wang, L. Su, D. Pan, Xiuyang Li, Hong Chen, Yuxun Tang, Zhaomin Jin, Weiming Weng, Hongwei Fan
{"title":"Mathematical Statistics of Factors Affecting the Unqualified Quality of Blood Samples in Medical Examination","authors":"Hongpeng Chen, Fapeng Wang, L. Su, D. Pan, Xiuyang Li, Hong Chen, Yuxun Tang, Zhaomin Jin, Weiming Weng, Hongwei Fan","doi":"10.1109/ICPHDS51617.2020.00056","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, the main factors that affected the unqualified factors of blood samples in clinical medical examination were discussed, and provided favorable theoretical basis and control countermeasures for the teaching reform and development of clinical laboratory mathematical statistics in medical colleges and universities. From January 2020 to October 2020, 1355 unqualified blood samples were analyzed. The results of mathematical statistics analysis showed that the common factors of unqualified blood samples were included: hemolysis 279 cases (20.64%), coagulation 238 cases (17.60%), anticoagulant incomplete 146 cases (10.80%), improper blood collection test tube 137 cases (10.13%), insufficient specimen volume 194 cases (14.28%), inadequate preparation of 127 cases (9.39%), delayed submission for examination 98 (7.17%), 72 cases (5.33%) of blood sampling from the same side of infusion, and 64 cases (4.66%) of other factors. There were many reasons for unqualified blood samples, but some of them sometimes could completely be avoided. This required that each department should improve the blood sample control system, and at the same time enhanced the sense of responsibility and professional skills of the staff, so as to reduce the unqualified rate of samples as much as possible, which could make the test results more accurate, and have a great help for early diagnosis and differential diagnosis.","PeriodicalId":308387,"journal":{"name":"2020 International Conference on Public Health and Data Science (ICPHDS)","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2020 International Conference on Public Health and Data Science (ICPHDS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPHDS51617.2020.00056","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper, the main factors that affected the unqualified factors of blood samples in clinical medical examination were discussed, and provided favorable theoretical basis and control countermeasures for the teaching reform and development of clinical laboratory mathematical statistics in medical colleges and universities. From January 2020 to October 2020, 1355 unqualified blood samples were analyzed. The results of mathematical statistics analysis showed that the common factors of unqualified blood samples were included: hemolysis 279 cases (20.64%), coagulation 238 cases (17.60%), anticoagulant incomplete 146 cases (10.80%), improper blood collection test tube 137 cases (10.13%), insufficient specimen volume 194 cases (14.28%), inadequate preparation of 127 cases (9.39%), delayed submission for examination 98 (7.17%), 72 cases (5.33%) of blood sampling from the same side of infusion, and 64 cases (4.66%) of other factors. There were many reasons for unqualified blood samples, but some of them sometimes could completely be avoided. This required that each department should improve the blood sample control system, and at the same time enhanced the sense of responsibility and professional skills of the staff, so as to reduce the unqualified rate of samples as much as possible, which could make the test results more accurate, and have a great help for early diagnosis and differential diagnosis.
医学检查血液样本质量不合格影响因素的数理统计
本文探讨了影响临床医学检验中血液样本不合格因素的主要因素,为医学院校临床检验数理统计教学改革与发展提供了有利的理论依据和控制对策。2020年1月至2020年10月,共分析不合格血样1355份。数理统计分析结果显示,不合格血样的常见因素包括:溶血279例(20.64%),凝血238例(17.60%),抗凝不全146例(10.80%),采血试管不当137例(10.13%),标本量不足194例(14.28%),准备不充分127例(9.39%),送检延迟98例(7.17%),输注同侧采血72例(5.33%),其他因素64例(4.66%)。血样不合格的原因有很多,但有些原因有时是完全可以避免的。这就要求各部门完善血样控制制度,同时增强工作人员的责任心和专业技能,尽可能降低血样不合格率,使检测结果更加准确,对早期诊断和鉴别诊断有很大帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信