OBJECTIVE: To evaluate hemoglobin E screening tests in a large scale of cases. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted Whole blood obtained from subjects was evaluated for CBC, OF, DCIP, and hemoglobin typing. RESULTS: Five hundred twenty seven hemoglobin E and 280 reference subjects participated. DCIP's sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 97.16%, 98.93%, 99.42%, and 95.19%, respectively. These values of OF were 69.12%, 80.00%, 86.67%, and 57.88%, respectively. In the combination of DCIP and OF gave rise to these values of 99.43%, 79.29%, 90.03%, and 96.67%, respectively. Finally the combination of DCIP and MCV < 80 fL resulted in these values to be 99.43%, 98.93%, 99.43%, and 98.93%, respectively. False positive and false negative rate were 1.07% and 0.57%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Combination of DCIP and MCVwas better than that of DCIP and OF in hemoglobin E screening.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate hemoglobin E screening tests in a large scale of cases. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted Whole blood obtained from subjects was evaluated for CBC, OF, DCIP, and hemoglobin typing. RESULTS: Five hundred twenty seven hemoglobin E and 280 reference subjects participated. DCIP's sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 97.16%, 98.93%, 99.42%, and 95.19%, respectively. These values of OF were 69.12%, 80.00%, 86.67%, and 57.88%, respectively. In the combination of DCIP and OF gave rise to these values of 99.43%, 79.29%, 90.03%, and 96.67%, respectively. Finally the combination of DCIP and MCV < 80 fL resulted in these values to be 99.43%, 98.93%, 99.43%, and 98.93%, respectively. False positive and false negative rate were 1.07% and 0.57%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Combination of DCIP and MCVwas better than that of DCIP and OF in hemoglobin E screening.