比较HemoCue®和定量Buffy Coat®和Coulter反测血红蛋白浓度在非洲儿童急性无并发症疟疾:Bland-Altman分析。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q3 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Dhol S Ayuen, Peter Olupot-Olupot, Rita Muhindo, Marie A Onyamboko, Seun Ajayi, Natenapa Chimjinda, Chiraporn Taya, Sophie Uyoga, Thomas N Williams, Kathryn Maitland, Caterina Fanello, Nicholas P J Day, Walter R Taylor, Mavuto Mukaka
{"title":"比较HemoCue®和定量Buffy Coat®和Coulter反测血红蛋白浓度在非洲儿童急性无并发症疟疾:Bland-Altman分析。","authors":"Dhol S Ayuen, Peter Olupot-Olupot, Rita Muhindo, Marie A Onyamboko, Seun Ajayi, Natenapa Chimjinda, Chiraporn Taya, Sophie Uyoga, Thomas N Williams, Kathryn Maitland, Caterina Fanello, Nicholas P J Day, Walter R Taylor, Mavuto Mukaka","doi":"10.1186/s12936-025-05318-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Anaemia is a deleterious consequence of malaria, and its accurate diagnosis is crucial for effective management. However, laboratory methods for measuring haemoglobin (Hb) concentration, like the Coulter Counter and the Quantitative Buffy Coat® (QBC®), are costly and not widely accessible in resource-limited settings. The point-of-care HemoCue® test is a cheaper alternative and suitable in rural areas. The study aimed to determine the level of agreement between Coulter Counter/QBC® vs. HemoCue®-measured Hb concentrations by Bland-Altman analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>As part of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of single low-dose primaquine in Ugandan and Congolese children with acute uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria, Hb concentrations were measured on days 0, 3, 7, and 28 using Coulter Counter (Uganda, n = 1880 paired values), QBC® (DR Congo, n = 1984 paired values) and HemoCue® Hb-301™. The predefined clinically acceptable limits were set at ± 0.5 g/dL.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Bland-Altman analysis showed that the HemoCue® minus Coulter Counter mean Hb difference was - 0.15 g/dL with lower and upper limits of agreement of - 3.68 g/dL and 3.39 g/dL, respectively. Corresponding HemoCue® minus QBC® values were - 0.23 g/dL, - 1.66 g/dL and 1.22 g/dL. Linear regression of Hb concentration differences vs. mean Hb concentrations showed negative correlations: r = - 0.43 and r = - 0.34 for HemoCue® vs. Coulter Counter and HemoCue® vs. QBC®, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to Coulter and QBC®, mean HemoCue® measured Hb concentrations were lower and, compared to the Coulter or QBC® methods, had an overall tendency to measure lower Hb concentrations with increasing Hb concentrations. Upper and lower limits of agreement were wider than the predefined clinically acceptable limits of ± 0.5 g/dL. HemoCue® should be used with caution in settings where decisions about blood transfusions are made.</p>","PeriodicalId":18317,"journal":{"name":"Malaria Journal","volume":"24 1","pages":"77"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11895147/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing HemoCue® and Quantitative Buffy Coat® and Coulter Counter-measured haemoglobin concentrations in African children with acute uncomplicated malaria: a Bland-Altman analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Dhol S Ayuen, Peter Olupot-Olupot, Rita Muhindo, Marie A Onyamboko, Seun Ajayi, Natenapa Chimjinda, Chiraporn Taya, Sophie Uyoga, Thomas N Williams, Kathryn Maitland, Caterina Fanello, Nicholas P J Day, Walter R Taylor, Mavuto Mukaka\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12936-025-05318-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Anaemia is a deleterious consequence of malaria, and its accurate diagnosis is crucial for effective management. However, laboratory methods for measuring haemoglobin (Hb) concentration, like the Coulter Counter and the Quantitative Buffy Coat® (QBC®), are costly and not widely accessible in resource-limited settings. The point-of-care HemoCue® test is a cheaper alternative and suitable in rural areas. The study aimed to determine the level of agreement between Coulter Counter/QBC® vs. HemoCue®-measured Hb concentrations by Bland-Altman analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>As part of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of single low-dose primaquine in Ugandan and Congolese children with acute uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria, Hb concentrations were measured on days 0, 3, 7, and 28 using Coulter Counter (Uganda, n = 1880 paired values), QBC® (DR Congo, n = 1984 paired values) and HemoCue® Hb-301™. The predefined clinically acceptable limits were set at ± 0.5 g/dL.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Bland-Altman analysis showed that the HemoCue® minus Coulter Counter mean Hb difference was - 0.15 g/dL with lower and upper limits of agreement of - 3.68 g/dL and 3.39 g/dL, respectively. Corresponding HemoCue® minus QBC® values were - 0.23 g/dL, - 1.66 g/dL and 1.22 g/dL. Linear regression of Hb concentration differences vs. mean Hb concentrations showed negative correlations: r = - 0.43 and r = - 0.34 for HemoCue® vs. Coulter Counter and HemoCue® vs. QBC®, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to Coulter and QBC®, mean HemoCue® measured Hb concentrations were lower and, compared to the Coulter or QBC® methods, had an overall tendency to measure lower Hb concentrations with increasing Hb concentrations. Upper and lower limits of agreement were wider than the predefined clinically acceptable limits of ± 0.5 g/dL. HemoCue® should be used with caution in settings where decisions about blood transfusions are made.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18317,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Malaria Journal\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"77\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11895147/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Malaria Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-025-05318-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Malaria Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-025-05318-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:贫血是疟疾的一种有害后果,其准确诊断对有效管理至关重要。然而,用于测量血红蛋白(Hb)浓度的实验室方法,如Coulter Counter和定量Buffy Coat®(QBC®),价格昂贵,并且在资源有限的环境中无法广泛使用。即时检测HemoCue®是一种更便宜的替代方法,适用于农村地区。该研究旨在通过Bland-Altman分析确定Coulter Counter/QBC®与HemoCue®测量的Hb浓度之间的一致性水平。方法:作为一项随机、安慰剂对照试验的一部分,使用Coulter计数器(乌干达,n = 1880配对值)、QBC®(刚果DR, n = 1984配对值)和HemoCue®Hb-301™,在乌干达和刚果急性无并发症恶性疟原虫疟疾儿童中使用单次低剂量伯氨喹,在第0、3、7和28天测量Hb浓度。预先设定的临床可接受限度为±0.5 g/dL。结果:Bland-Altman分析显示,HemoCue®- Coulter Counter平均Hb差值为- 0.15 g/dL,一致性的下限和上限分别为- 3.68 g/dL和3.39 g/dL。相应的HemoCue®- QBC®值分别为- 0.23 g/dL、- 1.66 g/dL和1.22 g/dL。Hb浓度差异与平均Hb浓度的线性回归显示为负相关:HemoCue®与Coulter计数器和HemoCue®与QBC®分别为r = - 0.43和r = - 0.34。结论:与Coulter和QBC®方法相比,HemoCue®测量的平均Hb浓度较低,并且与Coulter或QBC®方法相比,总体倾向于随着Hb浓度的增加而测量较低的Hb浓度。一致性的上限和下限比预先确定的临床可接受的±0.5 g/dL的范围更宽。HemoCue®在需要输血的环境中应谨慎使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing HemoCue® and Quantitative Buffy Coat® and Coulter Counter-measured haemoglobin concentrations in African children with acute uncomplicated malaria: a Bland-Altman analysis.

Background: Anaemia is a deleterious consequence of malaria, and its accurate diagnosis is crucial for effective management. However, laboratory methods for measuring haemoglobin (Hb) concentration, like the Coulter Counter and the Quantitative Buffy Coat® (QBC®), are costly and not widely accessible in resource-limited settings. The point-of-care HemoCue® test is a cheaper alternative and suitable in rural areas. The study aimed to determine the level of agreement between Coulter Counter/QBC® vs. HemoCue®-measured Hb concentrations by Bland-Altman analysis.

Methods: As part of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of single low-dose primaquine in Ugandan and Congolese children with acute uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria, Hb concentrations were measured on days 0, 3, 7, and 28 using Coulter Counter (Uganda, n = 1880 paired values), QBC® (DR Congo, n = 1984 paired values) and HemoCue® Hb-301™. The predefined clinically acceptable limits were set at ± 0.5 g/dL.

Results: The Bland-Altman analysis showed that the HemoCue® minus Coulter Counter mean Hb difference was - 0.15 g/dL with lower and upper limits of agreement of - 3.68 g/dL and 3.39 g/dL, respectively. Corresponding HemoCue® minus QBC® values were - 0.23 g/dL, - 1.66 g/dL and 1.22 g/dL. Linear regression of Hb concentration differences vs. mean Hb concentrations showed negative correlations: r = - 0.43 and r = - 0.34 for HemoCue® vs. Coulter Counter and HemoCue® vs. QBC®, respectively.

Conclusions: Compared to Coulter and QBC®, mean HemoCue® measured Hb concentrations were lower and, compared to the Coulter or QBC® methods, had an overall tendency to measure lower Hb concentrations with increasing Hb concentrations. Upper and lower limits of agreement were wider than the predefined clinically acceptable limits of ± 0.5 g/dL. HemoCue® should be used with caution in settings where decisions about blood transfusions are made.

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
Malaria Journal
Malaria Journal 医学-寄生虫学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
23.30%
发文量
334
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Malaria Journal is aimed at the scientific community interested in malaria in its broadest sense. It is the only journal that publishes exclusively articles on malaria and, as such, it aims to bring together knowledge from the different specialities involved in this very broad discipline, from the bench to the bedside and to the field.
×
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