查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 全自動尿液分析儀USCANNER和UF-1000i與人工鏡檢之相關性評估
- iQ200尿沉渣自動分析儀與人工鏡檢結果分析與探討
- 尿液常規分析: 尿沉渣顯微鏡檢查品質保證的探討
- 八十四年度臨床鏡檢品管測試結果報告
- 運用全自動尿沉渣分析儀篩檢泌尿道感染以降低臨床培養率
- UF-100自動尿沉渣檢查及人工鏡檢之相關性分析(應用於大量體檢的正確性與便利性)
- Applicatoin of Sysmex UF-100 Urine Flow Cytometer in Large-Scale Health Examination
- 手工快速定量檢驗尿沉渣方法之探討
- 運用泰克爾康自動分析儀測定葡萄汁糖分之試驗
- M. chelonae/Mycobacterium abscessus complex引起新生兒菌血症病例報告
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 全自動尿液分析儀USCANNER和UF-1000i與人工鏡檢之相關性評估=Correlations of Automated Urine Sediment Analyzers USCANNER and UF-1000i with Manual Microscopy |
---|---|
作 者 | 陳瑞雅; 陳契仁; 蔡佩芳; 張原肇; | 書刊名 | 北市醫學雜誌 |
卷 期 | 12:4 2015.12[民104.12] |
頁 次 | 頁291-296 |
分類號 | 414.91 |
關鍵詞 | 尿沉渣; 自動分析儀; 人工鏡檢; Urine sediment; Automatic analyzer; Manual microscopy; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 目的:尿液沉渣的顯微鏡檢查在腎臟和泌尿道疾病的評估是非常重要的。近幾年因應以病人為中心之醫療、降低病人等候時間,尿液全自動化成為趨勢。本研究目的在於評估全自動儀器UF-1000i及USCANNER與人工鏡檢尿液沉渣之比較。方法:本研究收集351個尿液檢體,分別先使用全自動分析儀USCANNER與UF-1000i上機,再使用傳統人工鏡檢方式,比較三種方法之分析結果相關性。統計分析使用SPSS14.0軟體做描述性統計,並使用Pearson相關係數分析比較儀器和人工顯微鏡檢方法的一致性。結果:研究結果顯示UF-1000i對於白血球分析能力(98.5%)及紅血球分析能力(99.4%)較高, 而USCANNER對於上皮細胞計數(89.8%)較敏感。兩個儀器(UF-1000i 和USCANNER)與人工鏡檢的相關性結果,紅血球分別為(r=0.766 和0.677),白血球為(r=0.831和0.824),而上皮細胞為(r=0.628 和0.743)。UF-1000i對細菌分析能力與人工顯微鏡檢相關性較好(r=0.822),但USCANNER與人工鏡檢中度相關(r=0.459)需要人工適度修正,而且USCANNER 容易受到Amorphous phosphate 等其他物質干擾影響而誤判。結論:此兩型儀器表現出類似的性能,他們可標準化技術且節省尿液沉渣分析時間,特別是減少分析前誤差,離心時間和檢體量。雖然UF-1000I、USCANNER和人工顯微鏡檢相關性結果良好,人工尿液分析確認結果從自動化的方法是顯著有用的,然而對於病理情況下仍有其技術的限制。這兩型儀器對於圓柱體及結晶、Yeast、Fungus、精蟲、陰道滴蟲等其他物質判斷性不佳,需要仰賴人工鏡檢判讀。 |
英文摘要 | Objective: Microscopic examination of urine sediments is essential for evaluation of renal and urinary tract diseases. To reduce patient’s waiting time for the results of urine sediment analysis, the utilization of automation devices has become a trend. The aim of this study was to compare the performances of the UF-1000i and the USCANNER with manual microscopy. Methods: This study collected 351 urine samples. They were examined by two devices (UF-1000i and USCANNER). The results of urine sediment analysis were compared with reports obtained from manual microscopy.Correlations between results from devices and microscopy were evaluated with the Pearson’s correlation. All statistics was performed with SPSS14.0. Results: The UF-1000i was more sensitive for leukocytes (98.5%) and erythrocyte (99.4%) evaluations while the USCANNER was more sensitive for epithelial cell counting (89.8%). There were high correlations between the two devices and manual microscopy in the evaluations of erythrocytes (r=0766 and 0.677 in UF-1000i and USCANNER, respectively) and leukocytes (r=0.831 and 0.824 in UF-1000i and USCANNER, respectively), followed by epithelial cells (r=0.628 and 0.743 in UF-1000i and USCANNER, respectively). Results from the UF- 1000i was highly correlated with manual microscopy (r=0.822) for bacteria count. USCANNER was moderately correlated with manual microscopy (r=0.459), and easily affected by other substances like amorphous phosphate. Conclusion: These two devices showed comparable performances in terms of time-saving and standardized techniques, especially for the reduction of pre-analytical errors, centrifugation time, and specimen volume. Although the UF-1000i, USCANNER and visual-microscopic measurements were in agreement, confirmation of the automated results using manual urine analysis is essential especially for pathological cases that are close to the limits of the techniques. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。