Self-sampling of capillary blood for safety monitoring of DMARD therapy in patients with rheumatic disease: a feasibility and method-comparison study.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Josefine Bak H Adelhelm, Trine Rennebod Larsen, Ulla Jakobsen, Pernille J Vinholt, Maria Boysen Sandberg, Inger Marie Jensen Hansen, Søren Andreas Just
{"title":"Self-sampling of capillary blood for safety monitoring of DMARD therapy in patients with rheumatic disease: a feasibility and method-comparison study.","authors":"Josefine Bak H Adelhelm, Trine Rennebod Larsen, Ulla Jakobsen, Pernille J Vinholt, Maria Boysen Sandberg, Inger Marie Jensen Hansen, Søren Andreas Just","doi":"10.1080/00365513.2025.2463087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Our study aimed to compare the quality of patient self-collected capillary samples with venous blood samples. Additionally, we assessed whether patients with rheumatic disease are both capable of and willing to perform capillary self-sampling through subjective and objective assessments. This research explores the future potential of at-home self-sampling. Patients with rheumatic diseases were asked to perform up to four supervised self-collected capillary blood samples, followed by a standard venous sample performed by study personnel. Anti-rheumatic drug treatment monitoring parameters, including biochemistry and hematology, were analyzed using Cobas 8000 and Sysmex XN-9000, respectively. The agreement was evaluated by Bland-Altman plots and compared to critical difference limits. Study personnel and patients answered a survey questionnaire after every visit to evaluate feasibility. In total, 21 patients completed 53 paired capillary and venous samples from November 2019 to December 2020. We found a strong correlation (<i>r</i> > 0.87) and good agreement for most parameters; platelets showed the poorest agreement. Patients experienced little pain, found self-sampling easy and reported no serious complications. Hemolysis affected 12/53 capillary biochemistry samples, and 5/53 capillary hematology samples coagulated. The good agreement for most parameters and excellent feasibility encourages the potential for capillary self-sampling of DMARD monitoring parameters, relevant limitations were hemolysis and aggregating platelets.</p>","PeriodicalId":21474,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation","volume":" ","pages":"108-115"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Investigation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00365513.2025.2463087","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Our study aimed to compare the quality of patient self-collected capillary samples with venous blood samples. Additionally, we assessed whether patients with rheumatic disease are both capable of and willing to perform capillary self-sampling through subjective and objective assessments. This research explores the future potential of at-home self-sampling. Patients with rheumatic diseases were asked to perform up to four supervised self-collected capillary blood samples, followed by a standard venous sample performed by study personnel. Anti-rheumatic drug treatment monitoring parameters, including biochemistry and hematology, were analyzed using Cobas 8000 and Sysmex XN-9000, respectively. The agreement was evaluated by Bland-Altman plots and compared to critical difference limits. Study personnel and patients answered a survey questionnaire after every visit to evaluate feasibility. In total, 21 patients completed 53 paired capillary and venous samples from November 2019 to December 2020. We found a strong correlation (r > 0.87) and good agreement for most parameters; platelets showed the poorest agreement. Patients experienced little pain, found self-sampling easy and reported no serious complications. Hemolysis affected 12/53 capillary biochemistry samples, and 5/53 capillary hematology samples coagulated. The good agreement for most parameters and excellent feasibility encourages the potential for capillary self-sampling of DMARD monitoring parameters, relevant limitations were hemolysis and aggregating platelets.

自采毛细血管血液用于风湿病患者DMARD治疗的安全监测:可行性和方法比较研究
我们的研究目的是比较患者自行采集的毛细血管样本和静脉血样本的质量。此外,我们通过主观和客观评估来评估风湿病患者是否有能力并愿意进行毛细管自采样。本研究探讨了家庭自我抽样的未来潜力。风湿病患者被要求进行多达四次监督下自行采集的毛细血管血样,然后由研究人员进行标准静脉血样。采用Cobas 8000和Sysmex XN-9000对抗风湿药物治疗监测参数进行生化和血液学分析。用Bland-Altman图对一致性进行了评估,并与临界差限值进行了比较。每次来访后,研究人员和患者分别填写问卷,评估可行性。2019年11月至2020年12月,共有21例患者完成了53例配对毛细血管和静脉样本。我们发现大多数参数具有很强的相关性(r > 0.87)和良好的一致性;血小板表现出最差的一致性。患者疼痛小,自我取样容易,无严重并发症。12/53的毛细管生化样品溶血,5/53的毛细管血液学样品凝固。大多数参数的良好一致性和良好的可行性鼓励了毛细管自采样DMARD监测参数的潜力,相关限制是溶血和血小板聚集。
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
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
85
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation is an international scientific journal covering clinically oriented biochemical and physiological research. Since the launch of the journal in 1949, it has been a forum for international laboratory medicine, closely related to, and edited by, The Scandinavian Society for Clinical Chemistry. The journal contains peer-reviewed articles, editorials, invited reviews, and short technical notes, as well as several supplements each year. Supplements consist of monographs, and symposium and congress reports covering subjects within clinical chemistry and clinical physiology.
×
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