Literature DB >> 8818894

Comparison of efficacy and cost-effectiveness of BIOMIC VIDEO and Vitek antimicrobial susceptibility test systems for use in the clinical microbiology laboratory.

I Berke1, P M Tierno.   

Abstract

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing expense may be a significant portion of a clinical microbiology laboratory's budget. This study compares the BIOMIC VIDEO system (Giles Scientific, Inc., New York, N.Y.) with the Vitek system (bioMérieux Vitek, Inc., Hazelwood, Mo.), an established automated method of antimicrobial susceptibility testing with the ability to generate MIC data. The BIOMIC system is relatively inexpensive and automates the reading of the classical disk agar diffusion test to provide both qualitative (susceptibility interpretation) and quantitative (MIC) data. The overall MIC correlation between the two systems for the 2,913 drug-organism combinations tested was 92.6%. The overall agreement for susceptibility interpretation was 97.4%. The BIOMIC system offers a 57.4% savings per test over the Vitek system. The BIOMIC system utilizes an older technology which is more efficient and yet yields results comparable to those of established automated MIC methods. The savings achievable in laboratories and hospitals nationwide may contribute significantly to the containment of national health care expenditures.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8818894      PMCID: PMC229166          DOI: 10.1128/jcm.34.8.1980-1984.1996

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  8 in total

1.  Health care plans covering outpatient x-rays and lab tests.

Authors:  A C Williams
Journal:  Mon Labor Rev       Date:  1993-08

2.  Comparison of BIOGRAM and commercial microdilution antimicrobial susceptibility test systems.

Authors:  R L Sautter; G A Denys
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1987-02       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Antibiotic susceptibility testing by a standardized single disk method.

Authors:  A W Bauer; W M Kirby; J C Sherris; M Turck
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  1966-04       Impact factor: 2.493

4.  Rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Gram-negative clinical isolates with the AutoMicrobic system.

Authors:  B A Backes; S J Cavalieri; J T Rudrik; E M Britt
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1984-06       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Evaluation of the BIOGRAM antimicrobial susceptibility test system.

Authors:  R F D'Amato; L Hochstein; J R Vernaleo; D J Cleri; A A Wallman; M S Gradus; C Thornsberry
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1985-11       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Concurrent comparability of automated systems and commercially prepared microdilution trays for susceptibility testing.

Authors:  S L Hansen; P K Freedy
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Reliability of two novel methods, Alamar and E test, for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  S M Novak; J Hindler; D A Bruckner
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Piperacillin susceptibility tests by the single-disk agar diffusion technique.

Authors:  A L Barry; C Thornsberry; R E Badal; C N Baker; R N Jones; E H Gerlach
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 5.191

  8 in total
  6 in total

1.  Evaluation of the Wider system, a new computer-assisted image-processing device for bacterial identification and susceptibility testing.

Authors:  R Cantón; M Pérez-Vázquez; A Oliver; B Sánchez Del Saz; M O Gutiérrez; M Martínez-Ferrer; F Baquero
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Comparison and evaluation of Osiris and Sirscan 2000 antimicrobial susceptibility systems in the clinical microbiology laboratory.

Authors:  A Nijs; R Cartuyvels; A Mewis; V Peeters; J L Rummens; K Magerman
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Multilaboratory study of the Biomic automated well-reading instrument versus MicroScan WalkAway for reading MicroScan antimicrobial susceptibility and identification panels.

Authors:  Robert C Fader; Emily Weaver; Rhonda Fossett; Michele Toyras; John Vanderlaan; David Gibbs; Andrew Wang; Nikolaus Thierjung
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Agar disk diffusion and automated microbroth dilution produce similar antimicrobial susceptibility testing results for Salmonella serotypes Newport, Typhimurium, and 4,5,12:i-, but differ in economic cost.

Authors:  Karin Hoelzer; Kevin J Cummings; Lorin D Warnick; Ynte H Schukken; Julie D Siler; Yrjo T Gröhn; Margaret A Davis; Tom E Besser; Martin Wiedmann
Journal:  Foodborne Pathog Dis       Date:  2011-08-30       Impact factor: 3.171

5.  Evaluation of a scanner-assisted colorimetric MIC method for susceptibility testing of gram-negative fermentative bacteria.

Authors:  Mokhlasur Rahman; Inger Kühn; Motiur Rahman; Barbro Olsson-Liljequist; Roland Möllby
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 4.792

Review 6.  A review of the current state of digital plate reading of cultures in clinical microbiology.

Authors:  Daniel D Rhoads; Susan M Novak; Liron Pantanowitz
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2015-05-28
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.