Nem-Yun Boo1, Yun-Fah Chang2, Ying-Xin Leong3, Zhen-Yu Tok3, Lai-Cheng Hooi3, Seok-Chiong Chee4, Zuraidah Abdul Latif5. 1. Department of Population Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University Tunku Abdul Rahman, Selangor, Malaysia. boony@utar.edu.my. 2. Department of Mathematical and Actuarial Sciences, Faculty of Engineering and Science, University Tunku Abdul Rahman, Selangor, Malaysia. 3. Department of Population Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University Tunku Abdul Rahman, Selangor, Malaysia. 4. Department of Paediatrics, Hospital Selayang, Selangor, Malaysia. 5. Department of Paediatrics, Hospital Ampang, Selangor, Malaysia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the accuracy of a point-of-care Bilistick method for measuring total serum bilirubin (TSB) and its turn-around-time (TAT) against hospital laboratory methods. METHODS: This prospective study was carried out on 561 term-gestation jaundiced neonates in two Malaysian hospitals. Venous blood sample was collected from each neonate for contemporary measurement of TSB by hospital laboratories and Bilistick. TAT was the time interval between specimen collection and TSB result reported by each method. RESULTS: The mean laboratory-measured TSB was 194.85 (±2.844) µmol/L and Bilistick TSB was 169.37 (±2.706) µmol/L. Pearson's correlation coefficient was: r = 0.901 (p < 0.001). The mean difference of [laboratory TSB- Bilistick TBS] was 26.48 (±29.41) µmol/L. The Bland-Altman plots show that the 95% limits of agreement (-31.1577, 84.11772) contain 94.7% (=531/561) of the difference in TSB readings. Bilistick has a 99% accuracy and 100% sensitivity to predict laboratory TSB levels of ≥80 µmol/L and ≥360 µmol/L at lower Bilistick TSB levels of ≥55 and ≥315 µmol/L, respectively. TAT of Bilistick TSB (2.0 min) was significantly shorter than TAT (105 min) of laboratory TSB (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Bilistick has shorter TAT. The accuracy and sensitivity of Bilistick TSB for predicting laboratory TSB is high at lower cutoff levels.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the accuracy of a point-of-care Bilistick method for measuring total serum bilirubin (TSB) and its turn-around-time (TAT) against hospital laboratory methods. METHODS: This prospective study was carried out on 561 term-gestation jaundiced neonates in two Malaysian hospitals. Venous blood sample was collected from each neonate for contemporary measurement of TSB by hospital laboratories and Bilistick. TAT was the time interval between specimen collection and TSB result reported by each method. RESULTS: The mean laboratory-measured TSB was 194.85 (±2.844) µmol/L and Bilistick TSB was 169.37 (±2.706) µmol/L. Pearson's correlation coefficient was: r = 0.901 (p < 0.001). The mean difference of [laboratory TSB- Bilistick TBS] was 26.48 (±29.41) µmol/L. The Bland-Altman plots show that the 95% limits of agreement (-31.1577, 84.11772) contain 94.7% (=531/561) of the difference in TSB readings. Bilistick has a 99% accuracy and 100% sensitivity to predict laboratory TSB levels of ≥80 µmol/L and ≥360 µmol/L at lower Bilistick TSB levels of ≥55 and ≥315 µmol/L, respectively. TAT of Bilistick TSB (2.0 min) was significantly shorter than TAT (105 min) of laboratory TSB (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Bilistick has shorter TAT. The accuracy and sensitivity of Bilistick TSB for predicting laboratory TSB is high at lower cutoff levels.
Authors: A R Horn; G F Kirsten; S M Kroon; P A Henning; G Möller; C Pieper; M Adhikari; P Cooper; B Hoek; S Delport; M Nazo; B Mawela Journal: S Afr Med J Date: 2006-09
Authors: Christian V Hulzebos; Libor Vitek; Carlos D Coda Zabetta; Aleš Dvořák; Paul Schenk; Eline A E van der Hagen; Christa Cobbaert; Claudio Tiribelli Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 3.756
Authors: Gary L Darmstadt; Davidson H Hamer; John B Carlin; Prakash M Jeena; Eduardo Mazzi; Anil Narang; A K Deorari; Emmanuel Addo-Yobo; Mak Azad Chowdhury; Praveen Kumar; Yaw Abu-Sarkodie; Kojo Yeboah-Antwi; Pallab Ray; Andres E Bartos; Samir K Saha; Eric Foote; Rajiv Bahl; Martin W Weber Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-12-31 Impact factor: 2.692