Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, USA.
Am J Clin Pathol. 2011 May;135(5):741-8. doi: 10.1309/AJCPSF8ASGONNQM6.
Historically, it has been difficult for hospitals to change methods for activated clotting time (ACT) testing because of differences in ACT values obtained with different instruments, wide differences in target ranges used in different procedures, and the difficulty of performing crossover studies at the bedside in critical care situations. There are limited published data comparing the i-STAT (Abbott Point of Care, Princeton, NJ) kaolin ACT with the Medtronic ACT Plus (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN). The i-STAT system can perform ACT testing in addition to testing of a number of critical care analytes and may offer potential advantages over other ACT analyzers. Comparison of ACT values on 121 simultaneous split-sample tests yielded an R(2) of 0.88 with i-STAT = 0.79 Medtronic + 72.0. The Pearson correlation was R = 0.94, indicating statistically significant correlation between the 2 methods. Based on this comparison, we were able to implement the i-STAT ACT throughout our institution without changing target ranges for any individual procedure.
从历史上看,由于不同仪器获得的 ACT 值存在差异、不同程序中使用的目标范围差异很大,以及在重症监护情况下床边进行交叉研究的困难,医院改变 ACT 检测方法一直具有挑战性。目前比较 i-STAT(雅培床边护理,新泽西州普林斯顿)高岭土 ACT 与 Medtronic ACT Plus(美敦力,明尼苏达州明尼阿波利斯)的已发表数据有限。i-STAT 系统除了可以进行 ACT 检测外,还可以检测许多关键的护理分析物,并且可能比其他 ACT 分析仪具有潜在优势。对 121 个同时分割样本测试的 ACT 值进行比较,得出 i-STAT = 0.79 Medtronic + 72.0 的 R(2)为 0.88。Pearson 相关系数 R = 0.94,表明两种方法之间存在统计学显著相关性。基于此比较,我们能够在不改变任何单个程序的目标范围的情况下,在我们的机构中全面实施 i-STAT ACT。