Durbacă S, Stoean C
Cantacuzino Institute, Bucharest, Romania.
Roum Arch Microbiol Immunol. 1992 Jul-Sep;51(3):141-6.
The evaluation of Schick test results as compared to the results obtained by determination of diphtheria antitoxin concentration in blood using the neutralizing test on rabbit--Jensen on the one hand and to those obtained by the passive hemagglutination reaction on the other has revealed some discrepancies against the two tests: 7.09% (4.08% pseudo-protected, 3.01 pseudo-susceptible) as against TN-Jensen and 8.6% (5.59% pseudo-protected and 3.01% pseudo-susceptible) as against the passive hemagglutination reaction results. The reported discrepancies were due to the fact that the results of Schick test did not correlate perfectly with the amount of circulating antitoxin, the diphtheria immunity level was wrongly indicated by the Schick test. The passive hemagglutination reaction has proved to be adequate to mass-screening investigations being capable to replace Schick test.
将锡克试验结果与一方面通过兔-詹森中和试验测定血液中白喉抗毒素浓度所获得的结果以及另一方面通过被动血凝反应所获得的结果进行比较，发现与这两种试验存在一些差异：与兔-詹森试验相比为7.09%（4.08%假阳性，3.01%假阴性），与被动血凝反应结果相比为8.6%（5.59%假阳性和3.01%假阴性）。所报告的差异是由于锡克试验结果与循环抗毒素量并非完全相关，锡克试验错误地指示了白喉免疫水平。被动血凝反应已被证明足以用于大规模筛查调查，能够取代锡克试验。
