Schmitt Y
Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg A. 1986 Apr;261(2):187-97.
Two different tools for automation in medical microbiological diagnosis were tested. The results of biochemical identification of bacteria and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were compared with conventional methods--biochemical identification with Minitek and API 20 E and susceptibility testing wih the nutrient agar diffusion test. Sceptor from Becton Dickinson is usable because of a good accordance with conventional methods and the good quality of the associated computer program (different types of statistical evaluation). The 'fully automated' MS 2 from Abbott has more limitations and is more expensive in material, but is able to give a diagnosis in few hours, if a pure culture is available. Differences to conventional methods are greater.
对医学微生物诊断中的两种不同自动化工具进行了测试。将细菌的生化鉴定结果和抗菌药敏试验结果与传统方法进行了比较——使用Minitek和API 20 E进行生化鉴定,以及使用营养琼脂扩散试验进行药敏试验。由于与传统方法一致性良好且相关计算机程序质量高(有不同类型的统计评估),贝克顿·迪金森公司的Sceptor可用。雅培公司的“全自动”MS 2有更多局限性,材料成本更高,但如果有纯培养物,它能够在几小时内给出诊断结果。与传统方法的差异更大。