Akurasi Hitung Jumlah Eritrosit Metode Manual dan Metode Otomatis

Neni Oktiyani, fahriyan fahriyan, A. Muhlisin
{"title":"Akurasi Hitung Jumlah Eritrosit Metode Manual dan Metode Otomatis","authors":"Neni Oktiyani, fahriyan fahriyan, A. Muhlisin","doi":"10.31964/mltj.v3i2.166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a laboratory, an erythrocyte is done by using hemocytometer and microscope. The task is to measure and assess the size and shape of the erythrocyte. But this procedure is time consuming, complex and tedious. As a solution to this problem, to provide an automated, cost-effective and efficient alternative to detection and counting of erythrocyte, hematology analyzers are used. However, false results related either to erythrocyte or other parameters from complete blood count may be observed in several instances. The objective study was to compare the accuracy of erythrocyte count results of automatic hematological analysis by the manual method. The study is an analytic survey with a cross-sectional design. Erythrocyte counting is done by using three types of control blood, namely high, normal and low, with 9 repetitions. In high control blood, the mean erythrocytes count by the manual method was 7.08 million/μl with a bias value of 1.4%, while that by the automated method was 7.03 million/μl with a bias value of 0.7%. The mean erythrocyte count in normal control blood by the manual method was 4.50 million/μl with a bias value of 0.9%, while that by the automated method was 4.4 million/μl with a bias value of 2.4%. And in low control blood, the mean erythrocyte count by the manual method was 1.72 million/μl with 4.4% bias value, while that the automated method was 1.67 million/μl with 1.2% bias value. Statistical analysis showed no significant difference in accuracy between the erythrocyte count of manual methods with automated methods.","PeriodicalId":76135,"journal":{"name":"Medical laboratory technology","volume":"3 1","pages":"37-41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical laboratory technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31964/mltj.v3i2.166","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

In a laboratory, an erythrocyte is done by using hemocytometer and microscope. The task is to measure and assess the size and shape of the erythrocyte. But this procedure is time consuming, complex and tedious. As a solution to this problem, to provide an automated, cost-effective and efficient alternative to detection and counting of erythrocyte, hematology analyzers are used. However, false results related either to erythrocyte or other parameters from complete blood count may be observed in several instances. The objective study was to compare the accuracy of erythrocyte count results of automatic hematological analysis by the manual method. The study is an analytic survey with a cross-sectional design. Erythrocyte counting is done by using three types of control blood, namely high, normal and low, with 9 repetitions. In high control blood, the mean erythrocytes count by the manual method was 7.08 million/μl with a bias value of 1.4%, while that by the automated method was 7.03 million/μl with a bias value of 0.7%. The mean erythrocyte count in normal control blood by the manual method was 4.50 million/μl with a bias value of 0.9%, while that by the automated method was 4.4 million/μl with a bias value of 2.4%. And in low control blood, the mean erythrocyte count by the manual method was 1.72 million/μl with 4.4% bias value, while that the automated method was 1.67 million/μl with 1.2% bias value. Statistical analysis showed no significant difference in accuracy between the erythrocyte count of manual methods with automated methods.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
红细胞增多症手动法和自动法的计算准确度
在实验室里,红细胞是用血细胞仪和显微镜做的。任务是测量和评估红细胞的大小和形状。但这个过程耗时、复杂且乏味。作为该问题的解决方案,为了提供红细胞检测和计数的自动化、经济高效的替代方案,使用了血液学分析仪。然而,在某些情况下,可能会观察到与红细胞或全血细胞计数的其他参数相关的错误结果。本研究的目的是比较手动方法自动血液学分析红细胞计数结果的准确性。这项研究是一项横断面设计的分析调查。红细胞计数是通过使用三种类型的对照血液进行的,即高、正常和低,重复9次。在高对照血液中,手动法的平均红细胞计数为708万/μl,偏差值为1.4%,而自动法的平均红细胞计数为703万/微米l,偏差为0.7%,而自动法的红细胞计数为440万/μl,偏差值为2.4%。在低对照血液中,手动法的平均红细胞计数是172万/μl,偏差值4.4%,而自动法是167万/μI,偏差值1.2%。统计分析显示,手动方法和自动方法的红细胞计数准确性没有显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of Toxoplasma gondii IgM and IgG Seropositivities in Serum Samples Sent from Pediatric and Adult Hematology/Oncology Outpatient Clinics Increased Mean Platelet Volume (MPV) in Patients with ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) Compared to Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI) Patients Pediculosis Capitis dan Personal Hygiene pada Anak SD di Daerah Pedesaan Kotamadya Banjarbaru Akurasi Hitung Jumlah Eritrosit Metode Manual dan Metode Otomatis Serum Lipemik dengan Flokulan Gamma-Siklodekstrin pada Pemeriksaan Glukosa
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1