| Literature DB >> 28282926 |
Safia Boghani1, Zuguo Mei2, Geraldine S Perry3, Gary M Brittenham4, Mary E Cogswell5.
Abstract
The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of capillary hemoglobin (Hb) measurements in detecting anemia among low-income toddlers (aged 12-35 months) and pregnant women. In analyses of data among toddlers from Kansas City (n = 402) and St. Louis, Missouri (n = 236), and pregnant women at <20 weeks gestation from Cleveland, Ohio (n = 397), we compared subjects' anemia status based on capillary Hb concentrations in finger puncture samples as measured by the HemoCue system with their anemia status based on venous Hb concentrations as measured by the HemoCue and Coulter Counter. The sensitivity of capillary blood analyses in identifying cases of anemia was 32.8% (95% Confidence Intervals (CI): 21.0%-46.3%), among Kansas City toddlers, 59.7% (95% CI: 45.8%-72.4%) among St. Louis toddlers, and 66.7% (95% CI: 46.0%-83.5%) among pregnant women in Cleveland; the corresponding specificities were 97.7%, 86.6%, and 96.7%, respectively. The correlation between HemoCue and Coulter Counter measurements of venous Hb (0.9) was higher than that between HemoCue measurements of capillary and venous blood (0.8). The results show that Hb measurements of capillary blood with HemoCue were not optimal for determining the anemia status of toddlers and pregnant women.Entities:
Keywords: anemia; children; hemoglobin; iron deficiency; pregnant women
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28282926 PMCID: PMC5372916 DOI: 10.3390/nu9030253
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Sociodemographic characteristics of participants * by site.
| Site | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristics | Kansas City, Missouri | St. Louis, Missouri | Cleveland, Ohio |
| Population | Low-income toddlers from two clinics | Low-income toddlers from two clinics | Low-income pregnant women from one clinic |
| Sample size, | 413 | 213 | 397 |
| Mean age | 22 months | 23 months | 24 years |
| Female, % | 48 | 49 | 100 |
| Race, % | Black—66 | Not Available | Black—28 |
| Hispanic—7 | Hispanic—16 | ||
| White—15 | White—55 | ||
| Other—12 | Other—1 | ||
* Participants were enrollees in the Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).
Comparisons of hemoglobin concentration measurements among Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) participants in three previous studies, by sampling and analytic method for data collected between 2002 and 2003.
| Kansas City, | St. Louis, | Cleveland, | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sampling Method: | Capillary | Venous | Venous | Capillary | Venous | Capillary | Venous | Venous |
| Analytic Method: | HemoCue | HemoCue | Coulter | HemoCue | Coulter | HemoCue | HemoCue | Coulter |
| Mean, g/dL | 12.5 (10.9, 13.9) | 12.2 (10.7, 13.7) | 11.8 (10.4, 13.1) | 11.6 (9.4, 13.4) | 11.5 (9.6, 13.0) | 12.8 (10.9, 14.6) | 12.4 (10.5, 14.1) | 12.6 (910.7, 14.4) |
| Standard deviation, g/dL | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 1.2 | 0.9 | 1.2 | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Anemic, % | 6.8 (4.6, 9.7) 1 | 8.7 (6.2, 11.9) | 14.4 (11.0, 18.9) | 25.8 (20.1, 32.3) | 24.9 (19.2, 30.7) | 6.3 (3.9, 8.7) | 9.3 (6.5, 12.2) | 6.8 (4.3, 9.3) |
| Mean paired difference 2 (95% limits of agreement), g/dL | 0.69 3 (−0.55, 1.94) | 0.36 (−0.59, 1.31) | Referent | 0.07 (−2.01, 2.15) | Referent | 0.24 (−1.11, 1.60) | −0.20 (−1.27, 0.86) | Referent |
| Spearman correlation coefficient | 0.72 (0.67, 0.76) | 0.89 (0.87, 0.91) | Referent | 0.56 (0.46, 0.64) | Referent | 0.81 (0.77, 0.84) | 0.89 (0.87, 0.91) | Referent |
| Participants for whom the difference between Two methods divided by the means of two methods <5%, 4 % | 38.3 (33.6, 43.1) | 76.3 (71.9, 80.3) | Referent | 52.6 (45.9, 59.3) | Referent | 66.3 (61.4, 70.9) | 86.2 (82.4, 89.4) | Referent |
| Sensitivity, 5 % | 32.8 (21.3, 46.0) | 51.7 (38.2, 65.1) | Referent | 60.4 (44.1, 71.4) | Referent | 66.7 (46.0–83.5) | 92.6 (75.7, 99.1) | Referent |
| Specificity, 6 % | 97.7 (95.6, 99.0) | 97.7 (95.6, 99.0) | Referent | 85.6 (79.2, 90.7) | Referent | 98.1 (96.1, 99.2) | 96.7 (94.4, 98.3) | Referent |
1 95% confidence interval (CI) presented in parentheses, unless otherwise specified; 2 Difference in hemoglobin measured by the method indicated versus the referent (venous coulter); 3 Paired t-test, p < 0.05; 4 Number of participants ((difference between two methods/mean of two methods) < 0.05)/all participants; 5 Number anemic by the indicated method and the referent method divided by number anemic by the referent method; 6 Number not anemic by the indicated method and the referent method divided by number not anemic by the referent method.
Figure 1Bland–Altman scatter plots of the difference in hemoglobin concentration from capillary blood analyzed with HemoCue vs. venous blood analyzed with Coulter Counter by the mean of the estimates. Dashed lines represent 95% limits of agreement. Panel (A) Kansas City (n = 413), Panel (B) St. Louis (n = 213), and Panel (C) Cleveland (n = 397).
Figure 2Scatter plots of hemoglobin concentration from capillary blood analyzed with HemoCue vs. venous blood analyzed with Coulter Counter. The solid line represents the mean regression line and the grey areas represent the 95% confidence limits. (A) Kansas City (n = 413); (B) St. Louis (n = 213); and (C) Cleveland (n = 397).
Three statistical comparisons of hemoglobin concentrations derived from HemoCue analyses of capillary blood samples with concentrations derived from HemoCue analyses of venous blood samples from toddlers in Kansas City and pregnant women in Cleveland.
| Statistical Comparisons | Kansas City ( | Cleveland ( |
|---|---|---|
| Correlation coefficient | 0.72 (0.67, 0.76) | 0.81 (0.77, 0.84) |
| Mean paired difference for capillary minus venous hemoglobin (95% limits of agreement), g/dL | 0.33 1 (−0.99, 1.66) | 0.44 1 ( 0.96, 1.84) |
| % of participants for whom the difference in Hb values derived from the 2 methods divided by the mean Hb value of the 2 methods was <5% 2 | 59.6 (71.9, 80.3) | 55.9 (50.9, 60.9) |
1 Paired t-test, p < 0.05; 2 Number of participants ((difference between two methods/mean of two methods) <0.05)/all participants.