Establishment and discussion of autoverification rules for transfusion compatibility testing.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 HEMATOLOGY
Transfusion Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-11 DOI:10.1111/tme.13077
Daobo Peng, Xiaohui Wang, Jie Huang
{"title":"Establishment and discussion of autoverification rules for transfusion compatibility testing.","authors":"Daobo Peng, Xiaohui Wang, Jie Huang","doi":"10.1111/tme.13077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To develop an automated verification workflow for transfusion compatibility testing (TCT) based on the AUTO10-A guidelines and blood group serology characteristics and to conduct a simulated validation of the test and subtest results by assessing the appropriateness of the autoverification rules.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>The accuracy of TCT results is a fundamental prerequisite for ensuring the safety of blood transfusions. However, the verification of these results still requires manual intervention.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Five autoverification rules and their standards were determined: agglutination intensity, normal results, logical relationships, delta checks and interlaboratory test comparisons. The established categories and standards for the five rules were retrospectively validated using 13 506 samples (requests) that had been manually verified in our laboratory from January 2020 to June 2023.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 66 638 test items were involved in the autoverification, with 3844 items violating the verification rules, resulting in a pass rate of 96.10%. Considering individual test items, four tests had a pass rate of more than 90% in both the test item result table and the test subitem result table. However, there were significant differences in the pass rates between different tests. The same conclusion can be drawn when the unit is requests. The different standards set for the agglutination intensity and the delta check in the ABO typing testing subitems showed significant differences in pass rates.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The incorporation of manually verified results into the automated verification simulation indicated that the five rules established in this study have good applicability, and appropriate standards can lead to reasonable pass rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":23306,"journal":{"name":"Transfusion Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"413-420"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transfusion Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/tme.13077","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To develop an automated verification workflow for transfusion compatibility testing (TCT) based on the AUTO10-A guidelines and blood group serology characteristics and to conduct a simulated validation of the test and subtest results by assessing the appropriateness of the autoverification rules.

Background: The accuracy of TCT results is a fundamental prerequisite for ensuring the safety of blood transfusions. However, the verification of these results still requires manual intervention.

Materials and methods: Five autoverification rules and their standards were determined: agglutination intensity, normal results, logical relationships, delta checks and interlaboratory test comparisons. The established categories and standards for the five rules were retrospectively validated using 13 506 samples (requests) that had been manually verified in our laboratory from January 2020 to June 2023.

Results: A total of 66 638 test items were involved in the autoverification, with 3844 items violating the verification rules, resulting in a pass rate of 96.10%. Considering individual test items, four tests had a pass rate of more than 90% in both the test item result table and the test subitem result table. However, there were significant differences in the pass rates between different tests. The same conclusion can be drawn when the unit is requests. The different standards set for the agglutination intensity and the delta check in the ABO typing testing subitems showed significant differences in pass rates.

Discussion: The incorporation of manually verified results into the automated verification simulation indicated that the five rules established in this study have good applicability, and appropriate standards can lead to reasonable pass rates.

制定和讨论输血兼容性测试的自动验证规则。
目标:根据 AUTO10-A 指南和血型血清学特征开发输血相容性检测(TCT)的自动验证工作流程,并通过评估自动验证规则的适当性对检测和子检测结果进行模拟验证:背景:TCT 结果的准确性是确保输血安全的基本前提。背景:TCT 结果的准确性是确保输血安全的基本前提,但这些结果的验证仍需要人工干预:确定了五种自动验证规则及其标准:凝集强度、正常结果、逻辑关系、三角检查和实验室间检验比较。利用 2020 年 1 月至 2023 年 6 月期间本实验室人工验证的 13 506 份样本(请求),对五项规则的既定类别和标准进行了回顾性验证:共有 66 638 个测试项目参与了自动验证,其中 3844 个项目违反了验证规则,验证通过率为 96.10%。从单个测试项目来看,在测试项目结果表和测试子项目结果表中,有 4 项测试的通过率超过 90%。不过,不同测试的合格率有很大差异。如果以要求为单位,也可以得出同样的结论。在 ABO 分型测试子项目中,凝集强度和 delta 检查的标准不同,通过率也有显著差异:讨论:将人工验证结果纳入自动验证模拟表明,本研究制定的五项规则具有良好的适用性,适当的标准可带来合理的通过率。
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
Transfusion Medicine
Transfusion Medicine 医学-血液学
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
96
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Transfusion Medicine publishes articles on transfusion medicine in its widest context, including blood transfusion practice (blood procurement, pharmaceutical, clinical, scientific, computing and documentary aspects), immunohaematology, immunogenetics, histocompatibility, medico-legal applications, and related molecular biology and biotechnology. In addition to original articles, which may include brief communications and case reports, the journal contains a regular educational section (based on invited reviews and state-of-the-art reports), technical section (including quality assurance and current practice guidelines), leading articles, letters to the editor, occasional historical articles and signed book reviews. Some lectures from Society meetings that are likely to be of general interest to readers of the Journal may be published at the discretion of the Editor and subject to the availability of space in the Journal.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信