Koster T, Caekebeke-Peerlinck K M, Briet E
Department of Hematology, University Hospital, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Am J Clin Pathol. 1989 Sep;92(3):315-20. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/92.3.315.
The authors compared the sensitivity and the reproducibility of the bleeding time techniques according to Ivy and Simplate II. The sensitivity was studied in two groups: one group of 64 healthy volunteers and another group of 40 patients with various disorders of hemostasis, including 28 patients with Von Willebrand's disease. Ivy and Simplate II bleeding times were performed on each subject. The reproducibility was studied in 48 patients with mildly or moderately prolonged bleeding times that resulted from various disorders who had a duplicate Ivy or a duplicate Simplate II bleeding time. All subjects were randomized over the technologists and they were blinded for each other's results. By a receiver operating characteristic analysis, the Ivy method appeared to offer greater overall detection efficacy than the Simplate II method. For the Ivy method, the standard deviation of the ratios of the duplicate bleeding times was 0.37 and for the Simplate II method it was 0.33. The authors conclude that the Simplate II method is not superior in sensitivity or reproducibility to the Ivy method, which is cheaper, takes less time, and does not leave scars.
作者根据艾维法(Ivy)和模板Ⅱ法(Simplate II)比较了出血时间检测技术的敏感性和可重复性。敏感性研究分为两组:一组为64名健康志愿者,另一组为40名患有各种止血障碍的患者,其中包括28名血管性血友病患者。对每个受试者都进行了艾维法和模板Ⅱ法出血时间检测。可重复性研究针对48名因各种病症导致出血时间轻度或中度延长的患者,他们均重复进行了艾维法或模板Ⅱ法出血时间检测。所有受试者在技术人员之间随机分配,并且对彼此的检测结果不知情。通过受试者工作特征分析,艾维法似乎比模板Ⅱ法具有更高的总体检测效能。对于艾维法,重复出血时间比值的标准差为0.37,而模板Ⅱ法为0.33。作者得出结论,模板Ⅱ法在敏感性或可重复性方面并不优于艾维法,而艾维法成本更低、耗时更短且不会留下疤痕。