Vision-C全自动血沉仪性能验证评价

VISION-C automatic blood sedimentation instrument performance verification

目的 评价Vision-C全自动血沉仪的检测性能。方法 采用第三方质控品检测仪器精密度;随机选取本院就诊患者标本共100例,以传统魏氏法为参考方法进行比对,分析仪器法的准确性;对同一仪器不同分析通道、标本量差异及阻挡透光性等因素进行了干扰检测,对仪器检测红细胞沉降率(ESR)进行综合评价。结果 仪器的精密度为2.8%;与魏氏法比较,两法ESR测定结果相关性良好(r=0.982 7),当仪器法测定结果在0~140 mm/h时各组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);其通道差异高值差异为9、CV%=3.5%,中值差异为6、CV%=4.4%,低值差异为3、CV%=8.2%;对标本量在1 mL的结果差异均值为33.2%,贴上条形码后的结果差异均值为10.9%。结论 Vision-C全自动血沉仪检测成本低、操作简便、检测快速、与魏氏法结果有很好的相关性,但对标本量不足及透光性方面抗干扰能力较弱,适用于临床日常检测,须建立分析前操作流程及进行严格培训。

Objective Evaluation of the performance of Vision-C automatic ESR analyzer.Methods The accuracy and precision of the third party quality control products were tested,and the results were within the target range.Pick up 100 patients in hospital,physical examination and outpatient were analyzed by Vision-C automatic erythrocyte sedimentation rate(ESR)analyzer,and compared with Westergren method to determine erythrocyte sedimentation rate(ESR).Results The precision of the instrument:2.8%;compared with the Westergren method,the results of the two methods ESR good correlation(r=0.9827),when the determination results in 0-140 mm/h was no statistically significant difference(P>0.05);the channel difference high value difference is 9,CV%=3.5%,6,median difference CV%=4.4%,the low value difference is 3,CV%=8.2%;the mean difference of the sample size around the 1 mL value was 33.2%,and the mean difference was 10.9%after the bar code was attached.Conclusion Vision-C automatic ESR analyzer detection of low cost,simple operation,fast detection,and Westergren results have good correlation,but the lack of transparency and the underlying aspects of weak anti-interference ability,suitable for clinical routine detection,analysis and shall establish strict training before operation.