正常个体的手动鉴别计数和自动鉴别白细胞计数的比较研究

M. Bajimaya, N. Mahotra, L. Shrestha, S. Pradhan, N. Malla, S. Kandel, Sonam Chaudhary, Sanyukta Gurung
{"title":"正常个体的手动鉴别计数和自动鉴别白细胞计数的比较研究","authors":"M. Bajimaya, N. Mahotra, L. Shrestha, S. Pradhan, N. Malla, S. Kandel, Sonam Chaudhary, Sanyukta Gurung","doi":"10.3126/jpsn.v2i1.42289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Differential leukocyte is a frequently ordered laboratory test. It is the percentage distribution of types of leukocytes on a stained film. There are two methods to determine differential leukocyte count which are manual and automated. Manual method is considered the gold standard and is used to validate differential counts obtained by automated method. The comparative knowledge about the different methods to determine differential leukocyte count may guide us to use of proper method to determine the differential count more accurately and in a shorter time. The study aims to compare differential leukocyte count of normal blood samples by manual and automatic methods.\nMaterials and methods: A cross-sectional, analytical study was conducted in laboratory of Kasturba Hospital, Manipal. A total of 347 blood samples of adults that did not show abnormalities in automatic analyzer were included in the study by purposive sampling method. Blood smears for manual count were prepared by Leishman’s stain.\nResults: A significant difference was observed between manual and automated leukocyte differential counts in 100 and 200 cells per specimen in neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils and basophils.\nConclusions: The study concludes the need of improving accuracy and reliability of the automated methods. A reference range generated by further studies could help provide more accurate determination of differential leukocyte count.","PeriodicalId":241370,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Physiological Society of Nepal","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Manual differential count and automated differential leukocyte count in normal individuals: a comparative study\",\"authors\":\"M. Bajimaya, N. Mahotra, L. Shrestha, S. Pradhan, N. Malla, S. Kandel, Sonam Chaudhary, Sanyukta Gurung\",\"doi\":\"10.3126/jpsn.v2i1.42289\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Differential leukocyte is a frequently ordered laboratory test. It is the percentage distribution of types of leukocytes on a stained film. There are two methods to determine differential leukocyte count which are manual and automated. Manual method is considered the gold standard and is used to validate differential counts obtained by automated method. The comparative knowledge about the different methods to determine differential leukocyte count may guide us to use of proper method to determine the differential count more accurately and in a shorter time. The study aims to compare differential leukocyte count of normal blood samples by manual and automatic methods.\\nMaterials and methods: A cross-sectional, analytical study was conducted in laboratory of Kasturba Hospital, Manipal. A total of 347 blood samples of adults that did not show abnormalities in automatic analyzer were included in the study by purposive sampling method. Blood smears for manual count were prepared by Leishman’s stain.\\nResults: A significant difference was observed between manual and automated leukocyte differential counts in 100 and 200 cells per specimen in neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils and basophils.\\nConclusions: The study concludes the need of improving accuracy and reliability of the automated methods. A reference range generated by further studies could help provide more accurate determination of differential leukocyte count.\",\"PeriodicalId\":241370,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Physiological Society of Nepal\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Physiological Society of Nepal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3126/jpsn.v2i1.42289\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Physiological Society of Nepal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3126/jpsn.v2i1.42289","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

白细胞分化是一项常用的实验室检查。它是在染色膜上不同类型白细胞的百分比分布。有两种方法来确定差异白细胞计数是手动和自动。手工方法被认为是金标准,用于验证由自动方法获得的差异计数。通过对不同白细胞计数测定方法的比较了解,可以指导我们在较短的时间内采用正确的方法,更准确地测定白细胞计数。本研究的目的是比较人工和自动方法对正常血液样本白细胞计数的差异。材料和方法:在马尼帕尔Kasturba医院实验室进行了横断面分析研究。采用目的采样法,将自动分析仪未显示异常的成人血样共347份纳入研究。手工计数血涂片采用利什曼染色法。结果:在每个标本100和200个细胞中,在中性粒细胞、淋巴细胞、单核细胞、嗜酸性粒细胞和嗜碱性粒细胞中,人工和自动白细胞差异计数有显著差异。结论:自动化方法的准确性和可靠性有待提高。进一步研究产生的参考范围有助于提供更准确的鉴别白细胞计数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Manual differential count and automated differential leukocyte count in normal individuals: a comparative study
Introduction: Differential leukocyte is a frequently ordered laboratory test. It is the percentage distribution of types of leukocytes on a stained film. There are two methods to determine differential leukocyte count which are manual and automated. Manual method is considered the gold standard and is used to validate differential counts obtained by automated method. The comparative knowledge about the different methods to determine differential leukocyte count may guide us to use of proper method to determine the differential count more accurately and in a shorter time. The study aims to compare differential leukocyte count of normal blood samples by manual and automatic methods. Materials and methods: A cross-sectional, analytical study was conducted in laboratory of Kasturba Hospital, Manipal. A total of 347 blood samples of adults that did not show abnormalities in automatic analyzer were included in the study by purposive sampling method. Blood smears for manual count were prepared by Leishman’s stain. Results: A significant difference was observed between manual and automated leukocyte differential counts in 100 and 200 cells per specimen in neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, eosinophils and basophils. Conclusions: The study concludes the need of improving accuracy and reliability of the automated methods. A reference range generated by further studies could help provide more accurate determination of differential leukocyte count.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信