Härter G, Klimm H D, König B, Koberstein R
Fakultät für Biologie der Univ., Konstanz.
Fortschr Med. 1990 Apr 10;108(10):203-6.
In a prospective study involving eleven general practices, dry-chemical laboratory methods were compared with wet-chemical methods in the establishment of the diagnosis. The study included 658 patients in whom defined liver disease, lipid metabolic disturbances, diabetes mellitus or hyperuricemia were clinically suspected. In the "dry chemistry" group, between 12 and 29% fewer basic examinations (ESR, Hb, erythrocytes, leukocytes) were performed than in the "wet chemistry" group. In addition the number of analyses per patient in the so-called search program and among the subsequently requested laboratory analyses were also lower by about 21% in the "dry chemistry" group. This indicates that through the use of "dry chemistry", laboratory examinations can be used with greater selectivity. A further advantage of "dry chemistry" is the appreciably shorter time required to establish and report the diagnosis.
在一项涉及11家普通诊所的前瞻性研究中,对干化学实验室方法与湿化学方法在诊断确立方面进行了比较。该研究纳入了658例临床上怀疑患有明确肝病、脂质代谢紊乱、糖尿病或高尿酸血症的患者。在“干化学”组中,进行的基础检查(血沉、血红蛋白、红细胞、白细胞)比“湿化学”组少12%至29%。此外,在所谓的筛查项目以及后续要求的实验室分析中,“干化学”组每位患者的分析次数也低约21%。这表明通过使用“干化学”,实验室检查可以更具选择性地使用。“干化学”的另一个优点是确立诊断并报告结果所需的时间明显更短。