Suppr超能文献

A组链球菌的快速检测:儿科卫星实验室中护士和实验室技术人员使用三种检测试剂盒的比较性能

Rapid detection of group A streptococci: comparative performance by nurses and laboratory technologists in pediatric satellite laboratories using three test kits.

作者信息

Donatelli J, Macone A, Goldmann D A, Poon R, Hinberg I, Nanji A, Thorne G M

机构信息

Rapid Diagnostics Laboratory, Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 02115.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 1992 Jan;30(1):138-42. doi: 10.1128/jcm.30.1.138-142.1992.

Abstract

Rapid tests for detecting group A streptococci in throat swabs are often performed outside hospitals or commercial laboratories by individuals with little or no technical training. We compared the abilities of nurses and technologists to perform and interpret three commercial kits (Directigen 1-2-3, ICON Strep A, and Culturette Brand 10-Minute Strep A ID) in three hospital satellite locations (the emergency department, a walk-in emergency clinic, and a general pediatric clinic). When the three tests were compared with culture, the sensitivities of the tests as performed by nurses and technologists, respectively, were 39 versus 44% for Directigen, 55 versus 51% for Culturette, and 72 versus 39% for ICON. A significant difference in sensitivity was found only with ICON tests. This result was largely explained by the tendency of technologists to test moist swabs, while nurses generally processed dry swabs; ICON test sensitivity was significantly greater with dry swabs. The specificities of Directigen and ICON tests performed by nurses and technologists were high (97 to 100%). The difference in the specificities of the Culturette test as determined from results obtained by nurses and technologists (80 versus 98%) was due to the tendency of one nurse to overinterpret the latex agglutination reaction. Analysis of the accuracies of the tests during practice periods compared with the accuracies of the tests during the study periods revealed statistically significant improvement in test performance. We conclude that these tests are specific but not sensitive when performed by nurses and technologists in satellite laboratories. With one exception, nurses and technologists performed the tests with comparable accuracy after brief training periods.

摘要

用于检测咽喉拭子中A组链球菌的快速检测通常由几乎没有或完全没有技术培训的人员在医院外或商业实验室进行。我们比较了护士和技术人员在三个医院卫星地点(急诊科、随诊急诊诊所和普通儿科诊所)操作和解读三种商用试剂盒(Directigen 1-2-3、ICON A组链球菌检测试剂盒和Culturette品牌10分钟A组链球菌鉴定试剂盒)的能力。将这三种检测与培养法进行比较时,护士和技术人员所进行检测的灵敏度分别为:Directigen试剂盒为39%对44%,Culturette试剂盒为55%对51%,ICON试剂盒为72%对39%。仅ICON检测在灵敏度上存在显著差异。这一结果很大程度上是因为技术人员倾向于检测湿润的拭子,而护士通常处理干燥的拭子;干燥拭子的ICON检测灵敏度显著更高。护士和技术人员进行的Directigen和ICON检测的特异性很高(97%至100%)。护士和技术人员所获结果确定的Culturette检测特异性差异(80%对98%)是由于一名护士过度解读乳胶凝集反应的倾向。与研究期间检测的准确性相比,对实践期间检测准确性的分析显示检测性能有统计学上的显著改善。我们得出结论,这些检测由卫星实验室的护士和技术人员进行时具有特异性但不具有敏感性。除了一个例外,护士和技术人员在经过短暂培训期后以相当的准确性进行了检测。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

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