• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

微量鉴定、API 20E及传统生化检测法对肠杆菌科细菌进行鉴定的时间-动作及成本比较研究

Time-motion and cost comparison study of micro-ID, API 20E, and conventional biochemical testing in identification of Enterobacteriaceae.

作者信息

Bale M J, Matsen J M

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 1981 Dec;14(6):665-70. doi: 10.1128/jcm.14.6.665-670.1981.

DOI:10.1128/jcm.14.6.665-670.1981
PMID:6801085
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC274017/
Abstract

A total of 730 Enterobacteriaceae strains isolated from 567 cultures were evaluated by a rapid kit method (Micro-ID; General Diagnostics, Morris Plains, N.J.; 4 h), an overnight incubation kit method (API 20E; Analytab Products, Plainview, N.Y.), and conventional biochemical test methodology (mostly overnight incubation and some rapid methods) to compare the amount of laboratory effort required, timing, and cost parameters. We assessed the amount of technologist time expended, the time sequence of culture reporting to physicians, the number of isolates requiring repeat testing or additional biochemical testing, the number of cultures held due to the need for identification of other organisms, the cost of total work-up, etc. Cultures evaluated included urines, respiratory cultures, wound cultures, body fluids, genital cultures, and cultures from miscellaneous categories. A total of 64% of the Enterobacteriaceae strains processed by the Micro-ID method could be identified within 24 h of receipt of the specimens in the clinical laboratories, in contrast to the need for an additional day required by the API or conventional biochemical methods. The Micro-ID method also required less technologist time (4.5 min) for set-up and interpretation than did either the API method (6 min) or conventional methods (7 min). Total direct costs (June 1981) per organism identified were: Micro-ID, $4.30; API 20E, $4.96; conventional biochemicals with commercially prepared media, $5.66. An estimate of 80% technologist time efficiency was made in all procedures.

摘要

从567份培养物中分离出的730株肠杆菌科菌株,采用快速试剂盒法(Micro-ID;通用诊断公司,新泽西州莫里斯平原;4小时)、过夜培养试剂盒法(API 20E;分析测试产品公司,纽约州普莱恩维尤)和传统生化检测方法(大多为过夜培养及一些快速方法)进行评估,以比较所需的实验室工作量、时间安排和成本参数。我们评估了技术人员花费的时间量、向医生报告培养结果的时间顺序、需要重复检测或额外生化检测的分离株数量、因需要鉴定其他微生物而搁置的培养物数量、总检测成本等。评估的培养物包括尿液、呼吸道培养物、伤口培养物、体液、生殖器培养物以及其他各类培养物。通过Micro-ID方法处理的肠杆菌科菌株中,共有64%可在临床实验室收到标本后的24小时内鉴定出来,相比之下,API或传统生化方法则需要多一天的时间。与API方法(6分钟)或传统方法(7分钟)相比,Micro-ID方法在设置和解读方面所需的技术人员时间也更少(4.5分钟)。鉴定每个生物体的直接总成本(1981年6月)分别为:Micro-ID,4.30美元;API 20E,4.96美元;使用商业制备培养基的传统生化方法,5.66美元。所有程序的技术人员时间效率估计为80%。

相似文献

1
Time-motion and cost comparison study of micro-ID, API 20E, and conventional biochemical testing in identification of Enterobacteriaceae.微量鉴定、API 20E及传统生化检测法对肠杆菌科细菌进行鉴定的时间-动作及成本比较研究
J Clin Microbiol. 1981 Dec;14(6):665-70. doi: 10.1128/jcm.14.6.665-670.1981.
2
Clinical evaluation of the MICRO-ID, API 20E, and conventional media systems for identification of Enterobacteriacea.用于鉴定肠杆菌科细菌的MICRO-ID、API 20E和传统培养基系统的临床评估
J Clin Microbiol. 1979 Aug;10(2):161-7. doi: 10.1128/jcm.10.2.161-167.1979.
3
Comparison of micro-ID and API 20E in rapid identification of Enterobacteriaceae.微量鉴定法与API 20E法在快速鉴定肠杆菌科细菌中的比较
J Clin Microbiol. 1982 May;15(5):885-90. doi: 10.1128/jcm.15.5.885-890.1982.
4
Comparison of micro-ID, API 20E, and conventional media systems in identification of Enterobacteriaceae.微量鉴定法、API 20E鉴定系统与传统培养基系统在肠杆菌科细菌鉴定中的比较
J Clin Microbiol. 1978 Jun;7(6):507-13. doi: 10.1128/jcm.7.6.507-513.1978.
5
Comparison of the API rapid E four-hour system with the API 20E overnight system for the identification of routine clinical isolates of the family Enterobacteriaceae.用于鉴定肠杆菌科常规临床分离株的API快速E四小时系统与API 20E过夜系统的比较。
J Clin Microbiol. 1985 Apr;21(4):542-5. doi: 10.1128/jcm.21.4.542-545.1985.
6
Comparison of four rapid methods for identification of Enterobacteriaceae from blood cultures.四种从血培养物中鉴定肠杆菌科细菌的快速方法的比较。
J Clin Microbiol. 1983 Mar;17(3):493-9. doi: 10.1128/jcm.17.3.493-499.1983.
7
Parallel comparison of accuracy of API 20E, Vitek GNI, MicroScan Walk/Away Rapid ID, and Becton Dickinson Cobas Micro ID-E/NF for identification of members of the family Enterobacteriaceae and common gram-negative, non-glucose-fermenting bacilli.对API 20E、Vitek GNI、MicroScan Walk/Away Rapid ID和Becton Dickinson Cobas Micro ID-E/NF用于鉴定肠杆菌科成员及常见革兰氏阴性、非葡萄糖发酵杆菌的准确性进行平行比较。
J Clin Microbiol. 1993 Dec;31(12):3165-9. doi: 10.1128/jcm.31.12.3165-3169.1993.
8
Rapid identification of Enterobacteriaceae with the micro-ID system versus API 20E and conventional media.使用微ID系统与API 20E及传统培养基对肠杆菌科细菌进行快速鉴定。
J Clin Microbiol. 1979 Sep;10(3):293-8. doi: 10.1128/jcm.10.3.293-298.1979.
9
Evaluation of Minibact, a new system for rapid identification of Enterobacteriaceae. Comparison of Minibact, Micro-ID and API 20E with a conventional method as reference.
Acta Pathol Microbiol Immunol Scand B. 1986 Apr;94(2):57-61.
10
Reevaluation of the API 20E identification system versus conventional biochemicals for identification of members of the family Enterobacteriaceae: a new look at an old product.API 20E鉴定系统与传统生化方法用于肠杆菌科细菌鉴定的重新评估:对一种旧产品的新审视。
J Clin Microbiol. 1992 Jan;30(1):123-5. doi: 10.1128/jcm.30.1.123-125.1992.

引用本文的文献

1
Biographical feature: John Matsen, M.D.个人简介:约翰·马特森,医学博士
J Clin Microbiol. 2014 Aug;52(8):2750-2. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01542-14. Epub 2014 Jun 11.
2
Evaluation of Staf-Sistem 18-R for identification of staphylococcal clinical isolates to the species level.评估Staf-Sistem 18-R用于将葡萄球菌临床分离株鉴定到种水平的能力。
J Clin Microbiol. 1994 Mar;32(3):649-53. doi: 10.1128/jcm.32.3.649-653.1994.
3
Comparative evaluation of the Eiken and API 20E systems and conventional methods for identification of members of the family Enterobacteriaceae.艾肯系统和API 20E系统与传统方法对肠杆菌科细菌鉴定的比较评估
J Clin Microbiol. 1984 Oct;20(4):754-7. doi: 10.1128/jcm.20.4.754-757.1984.
4
Evaluation of the Quantum II and Rapid E identification systems.量子II型和快速E鉴定系统的评估。
J Clin Microbiol. 1984 Sep;20(3):509-14. doi: 10.1128/jcm.20.3.509-514.1984.
5
Four hour identification of Enterobacteriaceae with the API Rapid 20E and Micro-ID systems.使用API Rapid 20E和Micro-ID系统对肠杆菌科进行四小时鉴定。
J Clin Pathol. 1985 Oct;38(10):1132-8. doi: 10.1136/jcp.38.10.1132.
6
Premarket evaluation of IDS RapID SS/u system for identification of urine isolates.用于尿液分离株鉴定的IDS RapID SS/u系统的上市前评估。
J Clin Microbiol. 1987 Jan;25(1):42-4. doi: 10.1128/jcm.25.1.42-44.1987.
7
Comparison of the Quantum II Bacterial Identification System and the AutoMicrobic System for the identification of gram-negative bacilli.Quantum II细菌鉴定系统与自动微生物鉴定系统用于革兰氏阴性杆菌鉴定的比较。
J Clin Microbiol. 1986 Jan;23(1):1-5. doi: 10.1128/jcm.23.1.1-5.1986.
8
Enterosistem 18-R: description and comparative evaluation with conventional methods for identification of members of the family Enterobacteriaceae.肠道系统18-R:与用于鉴定肠杆菌科成员的传统方法的描述及比较评估
J Clin Microbiol. 1991 Oct;29(10):2300-4. doi: 10.1128/jcm.29.10.2300-2304.1991.
9
Comparison of the autoSCAN-W/A rapid bacterial identification system and the Vitek AutoMicrobic system for identification of gram-negative bacilli.autoSCAN-W/A快速细菌鉴定系统与Vitek自动微生物鉴定系统对革兰氏阴性杆菌鉴定的比较
J Clin Microbiol. 1991 Jul;29(7):1422-8. doi: 10.1128/jcm.29.7.1422-1428.1991.

本文引用的文献

1
Clinical evaluation of the MICRO-ID, API 20E, and conventional media systems for identification of Enterobacteriacea.用于鉴定肠杆菌科细菌的MICRO-ID、API 20E和传统培养基系统的临床评估
J Clin Microbiol. 1979 Aug;10(2):161-7. doi: 10.1128/jcm.10.2.161-167.1979.
2
Comparison of Micro-ID and API 20E systems for identification of Enterobacteriaceae.用于鉴定肠杆菌科细菌的Micro-ID系统与API 20E系统的比较
J Clin Microbiol. 1979 May;9(5):605-8. doi: 10.1128/jcm.9.5.605-608.1979.
3
Performance of enterobacteriaceae identification systems. An analysis of College of American Pathologists Survey data.肠杆菌科鉴定系统的性能。对美国病理学家学会调查数据的分析。
Am J Clin Pathol. 1978 Sep;70(3 Suppl):539-47.
4
Comparison of micro-ID, API 20E, and conventional media systems in identification of Enterobacteriaceae.微量鉴定法、API 20E鉴定系统与传统培养基系统在肠杆菌科细菌鉴定中的比较
J Clin Microbiol. 1978 Jun;7(6):507-13. doi: 10.1128/jcm.7.6.507-513.1978.