尿沉渣全自动分析仪与显微镜检测法在尿常规检验中的应用效果比较分析

Comparative Analysis of the Application Effect of Automatic Analyzer and Microscope in Urine Routine Examination

目的:分别采用尿沉渣全自动分析仪和显微镜检测法进行尿常规检验,对比其应用的差异性和假阳性检出率。方法:选取2019年6月~2020年5月收治的300例尿常规检验患者。对照组患者采用显微镜检测法,观察组则为尿沉渣全自动分析仪检测,分析检验结果。结果:从检验上看,观察组白细胞阳性率为36.33%,对照组为34.00%,观察组检出率略高于对照组,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),假阳性率为3.53%。观察组红细胞阳性率检出率为30.33%,对照组为29.33%,观察组检出率略高于对照组,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但假阳性率为1.42%;在管型检出阳性率上,观察组检出率19%,对照组检出率12%,观察组检出率高于对照组,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但假阳性检出率略高为7.95%。结论:采用尿沉渣全自动分析仪与显微镜检测法进行尿常规检验,符合性较好,操作便捷,重复性好,具有自身优势,但准确率与镜检法相比仍有一定差距,因此对尿沉渣检验阳性结果显微镜法仍为必要补充。

Objective:In the experiment,we will use different methods to test urine routine,that is,automatic analyzer of urine sediment and microscope detection method,and compare their differences in application and false positive detection rate.Methods:The urine routine examiners were selected as the main body of the investigation,and the patients admitted from June 2019 to May 2020 were intercepted in the time period.The patients were grouped by random number table design scheme,and the test results of 300 patients were recorded.Patients in the control group were detected by microscope,while those in the observation group were detected by automatic analyzer,and the results were analyzed.Results:From the examination,the leucocyte positive rate in the observation group was 36.33%,while that in the control group was 34.00%.The detection rate in the observation group was slightly higher than that in the control group,with no significant difference(P>0.05).The false positive rate was 3.53%.The positive rate of red blood cells in the observation group was 30.33%,while that in the control group was 29.33%.The detection rate in the observation group was slightly higher than that in the control group,with no significant difference(P>0.05),but the false positive rate was 1.42%.The positive rate of tube type was 19%in the observation group and 12%in the control group.The detection rate in the observation group was higher than that in the control group,with no significant difference(P>0.05),but the false positive rate was slightly higher than 7.95%.Conclusion:Urine sediment automatic analyzer and microscopic examination method are in good agreement,which is not only quick and time-saving,but also has good repeatability.However,there is still a certain gap in accuracy compared with microscopic examination method.Therefore,microscopic examination is still necessary to supplement the positive results of urine sediment examination.