Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Published in Association with the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)

Editor-in-Chief: Plebani, Mario

Ed. by Gillery, Philippe / Lackner, Karl J. / Lippi, Giuseppe / Melichar, Bohuslav / Payne, Deborah A. / Schlattmann, Peter / Tate, Jillian R.

12 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR increased in 2015: 3.017
Rank 5 out of 30 in category Medical Laboratory Technology in the 2014 Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report/Science Edition

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.873
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.982
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2015: 2.238

Online
ISSN
1437-4331
See all formats and pricing
Volume 44, Issue 8 (Aug 2006)

Issues

Preliminary performance evaluation of blood gas analyzers

Pedro Couck
  • Department of Clinical Chemistry, Academic Hospital of the Free University Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
/ Timothy Ghys
  • Department of Clinical Chemistry, Academic Hospital of the Free University Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
/ Evelyne Van Gastel
  • Department of Clinical Chemistry, Academic Hospital of the Free University Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
/ Mia Van Coillie
  • Department of Clinical Chemistry, Academic Hospital of the Free University Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
/ Frans Gorus
  • Department of Clinical Chemistry, Academic Hospital of the Free University Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
/ Erik Gerlo
  • Department of Clinical Chemistry, Academic Hospital of the Free University Brussels, Brussels, Belgium

Abstract

Background: We evaluated the imprecision and bias of three instruments for the determination of blood gases, pH and ionized calcium (Ca2+) in human arterial blood samples, in comparison with the performance of an established methodology.

Methods: The ABL 735, Omni S and Rapidpoint 405 blood gas analyzers were evaluated and compared to the ABL 620 analyzer. Imprecision was determined according to the NCCLS EP10-A2 evaluation protocol. The NCCLS EP9-A2 evaluation protocol was used to determine bias relative to the ABL 620 system. Experimental data were compared against preset quality specifications.

Results: The three new instruments showed excellent imprecision for the measurement of pH, but only the ABL 620 met the preset imprecision goals for all analytes tested. All new instruments showed good correlation with the comparative instrument. The slope of the regression equation was significantly different from 1.0 in six out of the 12 comparisons, indicating systematic differences between the instruments. Nevertheless, the predicted bias values relative to the comparative instrument did not exceed the preset quality specifications for two out of the three new instruments.

Conclusions: Preliminary evaluation using the NCCLS evaluation protocols EP10-A2 and EP9-A2, may provide valuable information on performance characteristics of blood gas analyzers.

Clin Chem Lab Med 2006;44:1030–4.

Keywords: analytical goals; blood gas analysis; performance evaluation

References

  • 1.

  • 2.

  • 3.

  • 4.

  • 5.

  • 6.

  • 7.

  • 8.

  • 9.

  • 10.

  • 11.

  • 12.

  • 13.

  • 14.

  • 15.

  • 16.

  • 17.

  • 18.

  • 19.

About the article

Corresponding author: Pedro Couck, Department of Clinical Chemistry, Academic Hospital of the Free University Brussels, Laarbeeklaan 101, 1090 Brussels, Belgium Fax: +32-2-4775047,


Received: March 3, 2006

Accepted: May 22, 2006

Published in Print: 2006-08-01


Citation Information: Clinical Chemical Laboratory Medicine, ISSN (Online) 1437-4331, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CCLM.2006.185. Export Citation

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Fernando Jesús Hermida Ameijeiras, Berta González Ponce, and Blanca Reimunde Noreña
Revista del Laboratorio Clínico, 2010, Volume 3, Number 3, Page 118

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in