Evaluation of hematology analyzers by verification tests
Xiaolin Lü
Abstract
Xiaolin Lü
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the veracity and consistency of the results obtained from several automated hematology analyzers by valid analysing range. Methods Anticoagulative peripheral blood and QC blood were determined by one automated hematology analyzer with best performance as reference analyzer and other ones respectively. The precisions and complete blood count results were compared with those among automated hematology analyzers by relative bias and valid analysing range. Results Compared with the results of KX-21N, the results by CD-1700 and Celltac F showed excellent consistency, the results of HCT and RBC showed difference by Pentra 120, HCT showed difference by CD-1600 and Celltac α, respectively. Valid analysing range, compared with relative bias, was better effective in evaluation of hematology analyzer. Conclusions Valid analysing range joined with precision is of better effective in evaluation of hematology analyzer.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Objective To evaluate the veracity and consistency of the results obtained from several automated hematology analyzers by valid analysing range. Methods Anticoagulative peripheral blood and QC blood were determined by one automated hematology analyzer with best performance as reference analyzer and other ones respectively. The precisions and complete blood count results were compared with those among automated hematology analyzers by relative bias and valid analysing range. Results Compared with the results of KX-21N, the results by CD-1700 and Celltac F showed excellent consistency, the results of HCT and RBC showed difference by Pentra 120, HCT showed difference by CD-1600 and Celltac α, respectively. Valid analysing range, compared with relative bias, was better effective in evaluation of hematology analyzer. Conclusions Valid analysing range joined with precision is of better effective in evaluation of hematology analyzer.
Key concepts: Hematology analyzer, Hematology, Consistency (knowledge bases), Spectrum analyzer, Significant difference, Internal medicine, Medicine, Mean difference