肠道识别系统的比较。

Health laboratory science Pub Date : 1977-01-01
K A Borchardt, J Gibson
{"title":"肠道识别系统的比较。","authors":"K A Borchardt,&nbsp;J Gibson","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>An evaluation of methods for identification of Enterobacteriaceae was made employing the new commercial Micro-Media Enteric System (MMES) with that of the Analytab Products Incorporated (API) and the Conventional tube media schema as suggested by the Center for Disease Control (CDS). The MMES system employed 20 biochemical tests, the API 21, and the CDC procedure 25. Sixteen of these were identical biochemical tests. Two hundred clinical isolates of Enterobacteriaceae were tested employing procedures recommended by the manufacturers of MMES and API, and methods suggested by CDC. Among the sixteen identical biochemical tests the agreement was 98.0% (Conventional), 98.2% (API), and 97.98% (MMES). Bacteria misidentified by the API system totaled 5 (2.5%), 12 (6%) for the Conventional, and 13 (6.5%) for the MMES. Five of the bacteria misidentified with the MMES procedure were due to false positive citrate tests. This problem was subsequently eliminated. The results of this study indicated that the new MMES method for identification of Enterobacteriaceae compared favorably with both the API and Conventional procedures. However, significant advantages of the MMES method were evident in initial purchase price, utilization of technology time, and less tedium performing the test.</p>","PeriodicalId":12869,"journal":{"name":"Health laboratory science","volume":"14 1","pages":"5-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1977-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of enteric identification systems.\",\"authors\":\"K A Borchardt,&nbsp;J Gibson\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>An evaluation of methods for identification of Enterobacteriaceae was made employing the new commercial Micro-Media Enteric System (MMES) with that of the Analytab Products Incorporated (API) and the Conventional tube media schema as suggested by the Center for Disease Control (CDS). The MMES system employed 20 biochemical tests, the API 21, and the CDC procedure 25. Sixteen of these were identical biochemical tests. Two hundred clinical isolates of Enterobacteriaceae were tested employing procedures recommended by the manufacturers of MMES and API, and methods suggested by CDC. Among the sixteen identical biochemical tests the agreement was 98.0% (Conventional), 98.2% (API), and 97.98% (MMES). Bacteria misidentified by the API system totaled 5 (2.5%), 12 (6%) for the Conventional, and 13 (6.5%) for the MMES. Five of the bacteria misidentified with the MMES procedure were due to false positive citrate tests. This problem was subsequently eliminated. The results of this study indicated that the new MMES method for identification of Enterobacteriaceae compared favorably with both the API and Conventional procedures. However, significant advantages of the MMES method were evident in initial purchase price, utilization of technology time, and less tedium performing the test.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12869,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health laboratory science\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"5-10\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1977-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health laboratory science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health laboratory science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

采用美国疾病控制与预防中心(CDS)推荐的新型商业微媒体肠道系统(MMES)和Analytab Products Incorporated (API)的微媒体肠道系统及传统试管培养基方案,对肠杆菌科细菌的鉴定方法进行了评价。MMES系统采用20项生化试验,API 21, CDC程序25。其中16项是相同的生化测试。采用MMES和API制造商推荐的程序和CDC建议的方法对200株肠杆菌科临床分离株进行检测。在16种相同的生化试验中,常规生化试验的符合率为98.0%,API生化试验的符合率为98.2%,MMES生化试验的符合率为97.98%。API系统误检细菌总数为5个(2.5%),常规系统为12个(6%),MMES系统为13个(6.5%),其中5个是由于柠檬酸盐检测假阳性导致的。这个问题后来被消除了。本研究结果表明,该方法与API和常规方法相比具有较好的鉴定效果。然而,MMES方法在初始购买价格、技术时间利用率和测试过程中较少的繁琐性方面具有明显的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of enteric identification systems.

An evaluation of methods for identification of Enterobacteriaceae was made employing the new commercial Micro-Media Enteric System (MMES) with that of the Analytab Products Incorporated (API) and the Conventional tube media schema as suggested by the Center for Disease Control (CDS). The MMES system employed 20 biochemical tests, the API 21, and the CDC procedure 25. Sixteen of these were identical biochemical tests. Two hundred clinical isolates of Enterobacteriaceae were tested employing procedures recommended by the manufacturers of MMES and API, and methods suggested by CDC. Among the sixteen identical biochemical tests the agreement was 98.0% (Conventional), 98.2% (API), and 97.98% (MMES). Bacteria misidentified by the API system totaled 5 (2.5%), 12 (6%) for the Conventional, and 13 (6.5%) for the MMES. Five of the bacteria misidentified with the MMES procedure were due to false positive citrate tests. This problem was subsequently eliminated. The results of this study indicated that the new MMES method for identification of Enterobacteriaceae compared favorably with both the API and Conventional procedures. However, significant advantages of the MMES method were evident in initial purchase price, utilization of technology time, and less tedium performing the test.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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