Suppr超能文献

用于皮肤点刺试验的测试设备比较。

Comparison of test devices for skin prick testing.

作者信息

Carr Warner W, Martin Bryan, Howard Robin S, Cox Linda, Borish Larry

机构信息

Department of Allergy and Immunology, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Silver Spring, MD 20910, USA.

出版信息

J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2005 Aug;116(2):341-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2005.03.035.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Allergy skin testing guides developing avoidance plans and writing an immunotherapy prescription. The goal for the allergist is to apply allergen skin testing to the appropriate patient population by using a device that minimizes both false-negative and false-positive findings while minimizing patient discomfort. New skin testing devices continue to be developed with a trend toward production of multiheaded devices. Data on the performance of these devices in a head-to-head prospective fashion are limited.

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to study 8 commonly used devices to compare their performance in a head-to-head fashion.

METHODS

In a prospective, double-blind fashion, the performance of 8 skin test devices was evaluated. Devices were tested with histamine and saline on both the arms and back of each subject. Devices were rotated over 4 testing sessions, at least a week apart, so each device was tested in each anatomic testing location. Performance elements examined included wheal, flare, pain, sensitivity, specificity, and intradevice variability.

RESULTS

We found significant differences in all areas of device performance among all devices examined. Multiheaded devices also demonstrated significant intradevice variability and were more painful than single devices. Furthermore, multiheaded devices had larger reactions on the back, whereas single devices had larger reactions on the arms.

CONCLUSION

Statistically significant differences exist among all devices tested. Providers should consider this data when choosing a device that suits their practice setting and ensure that technicians are sufficiently trained on the correct use of that device.

摘要

背景

过敏皮肤试验有助于制定避免接触计划并开具免疫疗法处方。过敏症专科医生的目标是通过使用一种能将假阴性和假阳性结果降至最低,同时将患者不适降至最低的设备,对合适的患者群体进行过敏原皮肤试验。新的皮肤试验设备不断研发,呈现出向多头设备发展的趋势。关于这些设备在直接比较的前瞻性研究中的性能数据有限。

目的

我们的目标是研究8种常用设备,以直接比较它们的性能。

方法

采用前瞻性、双盲方式评估8种皮肤试验设备的性能。在每个受试者的手臂和背部用组胺和生理盐水对设备进行测试。设备在4次测试中轮流使用,每次间隔至少一周,以便每种设备在每个解剖测试部位都能得到测试。所检查的性能要素包括风团、红晕、疼痛、敏感性、特异性和设备内部变异性。

结果

我们发现,在所检查的所有设备的性能的各个方面都存在显著差异。多头设备也表现出显著的设备内部变异性,且比单头设备更疼。此外,多头设备在背部引起的反应更大,而单头设备在手臂上引起的反应更大。

结论

在所有测试设备之间存在统计学上的显著差异。医疗服务提供者在选择适合其执业环境的设备时应考虑这些数据,并确保技术人员接受了关于正确使用该设备的充分培训。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验