Literature DB >> 21036526

Comparison of 3 different multianalyte point-of-care devices during clinical routine on a medical intensive care unit.

Vanessa Stadlbauer1, Simon Wallner, Tatjana Stojakovic, Karlheinz H Smolle.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Multianalyte point-of-care (POC) devices are important to guide clinical decisions in critical care. However, the use of different devices in one hospital might cause problems. Therefore, we evaluated 3 commonly used POC devices and analyzed accuracy, reliability, and bias.
METHODS: Seventy-four arterial blood samples were analyzed by 3 POC devices (Cobas, Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany; ABL800 Flex, Radiometer GmbH, Germany; Gem Premiere, Instrumentation Laboratory, Germany). For selected parameters, samples were also analyzed in the central laboratory. pCO2, pO2, SO2, bicarbonate and standard bicarbonate, sodium, potassium, calcium, pH, lactate, base excess (BE[B] and BEecf), glucose, hemoglobin, and hematocrit were compared.
RESULTS: For most parameters, only minor, although statistically significant, changes were observed between the POC devices. For pO2, BE(B), hemoglobin, and hematocrit, clinically significant differences were found.
CONCLUSION: Although POC devices are of high standard and overall comparability between devices is high, there might be a clinically relevant bias between devices, as found in our study for pO2, BE(B), hemoglobin, and hematocrit. This can be of importance when interpreting results of the same patient obtained from different POC devices, as it could happen when a patient is transferred within a hospital where different devices are used.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21036526     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2010.09.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Crit Care        ISSN: 0883-9441            Impact factor:   3.425


  7 in total

1.  Accuracy of non-invasive continuous total hemoglobin measurement by Pulse CO-Oximetry in severe traumatized and surgical bleeding patients.

Authors:  Werner Baulig; Burkhardt Seifert; Donat R Spahn; Oliver M Theusinger
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2015-12-19       Impact factor: 2.502

2.  The Reproducibility of Blood Acid Base Responses in Male Collegiate Athletes Following Individualised Doses of Sodium Bicarbonate: A Randomised Controlled Crossover Study.

Authors:  Lewis A Gough; Sanjoy K Deb; Andy S Sparks; Lars R McNaughton
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 3.  Monitoring nutrition and glucose in acute brain injury.

Authors:  Neeraj Badjatia; Paul Vespa
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 3.210

4.  Performance Evaluation of the i-SmartCare 10 Analyzer and Method Comparison of Six Point-of-Care Blood Gas Analyzers.

Authors:  Sang-Mi Kim; Hyung-Doo Park
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 4.941

5.  Blood-gas vs. Central-Laboratory analyzers: interchangeability and reference intervals for sodium, potassium, glucose, lactate and hemoglobin.

Authors:  Kocijancic Marija; Kraus Frank Bernhard; Ludwig-Kraus Beatrice
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2021-10-30

Review 6.  Accuracy of blood-glucose measurements using glucose meters and arterial blood gas analyzers in critically ill adult patients: systematic review.

Authors:  Shigeaki Inoue; Moritoki Egi; Joji Kotani; Kiyoshi Morita
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2013-03-18       Impact factor: 9.097

7.  The usability of ventilators: a comparative evaluation of use safety and user experience.

Authors:  Plinio P Morita; Peter B Weinstein; Christopher J Flewwelling; Carleene A Bañez; Tabitha A Chiu; Mario Iannuzzi; Aastha H Patel; Ashleigh P Shier; Joseph A Cafazzo
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2016-08-20       Impact factor: 9.097

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.