当前 Heska 和 IDEXX 床旁生化分析仪与商用实验室分析仪对猫科动物血浆分析性能的比较。

IF 1.2 4区 农林科学 Q3 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Randolph M. Baral, Susan M. Jaensch, Douglas A. Hayward, Kathleen P. Freeman
{"title":"当前 Heska 和 IDEXX 床旁生化分析仪与商用实验室分析仪对猫科动物血浆分析性能的比较。","authors":"Randolph M. Baral,&nbsp;Susan M. Jaensch,&nbsp;Douglas A. Hayward,&nbsp;Kathleen P. Freeman","doi":"10.1111/vcp.13310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Point-of-care (POC) biochemistry analyzers are widely used in small animal clinical practice but infrequently independently assessed for performance.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To assess the performance of two current model point-of-care biochemistry analyzers (Heska Element DC and IDEXX Catalyst) compared with a commercial laboratory analyzer (Cobas 8000).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>One hundred twenty-one cats from a feline hospital population were sampled with plasma results from a single lithium heparin tube assessed on all three analyzers. Plasma biochemistry results from each POC analyzer were compared with the commercial laboratory analyzer using Bland–Altman difference plots and by determining whether the limits of agreement (LOAs) (95% of differences) fell within various quality goals after correcting for inherent bias.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Only 7 of 14 analytes on the Heska analyzer and 2 analytes on the IDEXX analyzer attained the most stringent LOA quality goal, which was being within desirable total error based on biologic variation (TE<sub>des</sub>). The number of analytes achieving quality goals increased with less stringent standards such as American Society of Veterinary Clinical Pathologists allowable total error (ASVCP TE<sub>A</sub>) guidelines or if &lt;95% of clinical comparisons reaching these quality goals is considered acceptable. Widespread bias was found between both POC analyzers and the commercial laboratory analyzer.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The performance of both POC biochemistry analyzers was variable compared with a commercial laboratory analyzer. Performance goals were only able to be attained after the bias for each analyzer was accounted for by offsetting the LOAs and quality goals set by the mean bias for each analyte on each analyzer.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":23593,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary clinical pathology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/vcp.13310","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analytical performance of feline plasma on current Heska and IDEXX point-of-care biochemistry analyzers compared with a commercial laboratory analyzer\",\"authors\":\"Randolph M. Baral,&nbsp;Susan M. Jaensch,&nbsp;Douglas A. Hayward,&nbsp;Kathleen P. Freeman\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/vcp.13310\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Point-of-care (POC) biochemistry analyzers are widely used in small animal clinical practice but infrequently independently assessed for performance.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>To assess the performance of two current model point-of-care biochemistry analyzers (Heska Element DC and IDEXX Catalyst) compared with a commercial laboratory analyzer (Cobas 8000).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>One hundred twenty-one cats from a feline hospital population were sampled with plasma results from a single lithium heparin tube assessed on all three analyzers. Plasma biochemistry results from each POC analyzer were compared with the commercial laboratory analyzer using Bland–Altman difference plots and by determining whether the limits of agreement (LOAs) (95% of differences) fell within various quality goals after correcting for inherent bias.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Only 7 of 14 analytes on the Heska analyzer and 2 analytes on the IDEXX analyzer attained the most stringent LOA quality goal, which was being within desirable total error based on biologic variation (TE<sub>des</sub>). The number of analytes achieving quality goals increased with less stringent standards such as American Society of Veterinary Clinical Pathologists allowable total error (ASVCP TE<sub>A</sub>) guidelines or if &lt;95% of clinical comparisons reaching these quality goals is considered acceptable. Widespread bias was found between both POC analyzers and the commercial laboratory analyzer.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The performance of both POC biochemistry analyzers was variable compared with a commercial laboratory analyzer. Performance goals were only able to be attained after the bias for each analyzer was accounted for by offsetting the LOAs and quality goals set by the mean bias for each analyte on each analyzer.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23593,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Veterinary clinical pathology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/vcp.13310\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Veterinary clinical pathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/vcp.13310\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary clinical pathology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/vcp.13310","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:护理点(POC)生化分析仪广泛应用于小动物临床实践,但很少对其性能进行独立评估:评估两种现有型号的床旁生化分析仪(Heska Element DC 和 IDEXX Catalyst)与商用实验室分析仪(Cobas 8000)的性能比较:方法:从猫科动物医院的 121 只猫中采样,用所有三种分析仪评估来自单支锂肝素管的血浆结果。使用布兰-阿尔特曼(Bland-Altman)差异图将每种 POC 分析仪的血浆生化结果与商业实验室分析仪的结果进行比较,并在校正固有偏差后确定一致性限(LOAs)(差异的 95%)是否在各种质量目标范围内:结果:在Heska分析仪的14种分析物中,只有7种分析物达到了最严格的LOA质量目标,即基于生物变异的理想总误差(TEdes)。如果采用美国兽医临床病理学家协会允许总误差(ASVCP TEA)准则或结论等不太严格的标准,达到质量目标的分析物数量会增加:与商用实验室分析仪相比,两种 POC 生化分析仪的性能参差不齐。只有通过用每台分析仪上每种分析物的平均偏差来抵消 LOAs 和质量目标,并对每台分析仪的偏差进行核算后,才能实现性能目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Analytical performance of feline plasma on current Heska and IDEXX point-of-care biochemistry analyzers compared with a commercial laboratory analyzer

Analytical performance of feline plasma on current Heska and IDEXX point-of-care biochemistry analyzers compared with a commercial laboratory analyzer

Background

Point-of-care (POC) biochemistry analyzers are widely used in small animal clinical practice but infrequently independently assessed for performance.

Objective

To assess the performance of two current model point-of-care biochemistry analyzers (Heska Element DC and IDEXX Catalyst) compared with a commercial laboratory analyzer (Cobas 8000).

Methods

One hundred twenty-one cats from a feline hospital population were sampled with plasma results from a single lithium heparin tube assessed on all three analyzers. Plasma biochemistry results from each POC analyzer were compared with the commercial laboratory analyzer using Bland–Altman difference plots and by determining whether the limits of agreement (LOAs) (95% of differences) fell within various quality goals after correcting for inherent bias.

Results

Only 7 of 14 analytes on the Heska analyzer and 2 analytes on the IDEXX analyzer attained the most stringent LOA quality goal, which was being within desirable total error based on biologic variation (TEdes). The number of analytes achieving quality goals increased with less stringent standards such as American Society of Veterinary Clinical Pathologists allowable total error (ASVCP TEA) guidelines or if <95% of clinical comparisons reaching these quality goals is considered acceptable. Widespread bias was found between both POC analyzers and the commercial laboratory analyzer.

Conclusions

The performance of both POC biochemistry analyzers was variable compared with a commercial laboratory analyzer. Performance goals were only able to be attained after the bias for each analyzer was accounted for by offsetting the LOAs and quality goals set by the mean bias for each analyte on each analyzer.

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
Veterinary clinical pathology
Veterinary clinical pathology 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
133
审稿时长
18-36 weeks
期刊介绍: Veterinary Clinical Pathology is the official journal of the American Society for Veterinary Clinical Pathology (ASVCP) and the European Society of Veterinary Clinical Pathology (ESVCP). The journal''s mission is to provide an international forum for communication and discussion of scientific investigations and new developments that advance the art and science of laboratory diagnosis in animals. Veterinary Clinical Pathology welcomes original experimental research and clinical contributions involving domestic, laboratory, avian, and wildlife species in the areas of hematology, hemostasis, immunopathology, clinical chemistry, cytopathology, surgical pathology, toxicology, endocrinology, laboratory and analytical techniques, instrumentation, quality assurance, and clinical pathology education.
×
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