Penev M, Kamenov V, Donkova O, Petkova D
Vutr Boles. 1987;26(2):109-12.
The results are compared from the platelet count in blood via chamber method with phase contrast and via electronic method with "Thrombocounter C". The reproducibility was studied in a series in the low, referent and high region. The electronic-automatic method gives a better reproducibility than the chamber method in all three regions. The poorest is the reproducibility in the low region where VC of both methods were the closest. The results from the two methods are in a high positive correlation (r = 0.9145, n = 61), the arithmetical mean from the electronic method being insignificantly higher than the mean of the chamber method, p greater than 0.05. In the low region, with platelets under 80 X 10(9)/l, the reliability of the electronic-automatic method is decreased. The results from the chamber and electronic-automatic method have a normal distribution. The electronic-automatic method is several times faster and less tiresome than the chamber one.
通过相差显微镜计数室法和使用“Thrombocounter C”的电子法对血液中的血小板计数结果进行了比较。在低、参考值和高区域系列中研究了重复性。在所有三个区域中,电子自动法的重复性均优于计数室法。在两种方法变异系数最接近的低区域,重复性最差。两种方法的结果呈高度正相关(r = 0.9145,n = 61),电子法的算术平均值略高于计数室法的平均值,但p大于0.05,差异无统计学意义。在血小板低于80×10⁹/L的低区域,电子自动法的可靠性降低。计数室法和电子自动法的结果呈正态分布。电子自动法比计数室法快几倍且更省力。