Clinical Chemistry Link to Randox Laboratories Web Site
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Clinical Chemistry 32: 1857-1862, 1986;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an electronic Letter to
the Editor about this paper
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gogstad, G. O.
Right arrow Articles by Bjerke, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gogstad, G. O.
Right arrow Articles by Bjerke, A.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 32, 1857-1862, Copyright © 1986 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Turbidimetric determination of prothrombin time by clotting in a centrifugal analyzer

GO Gogstad, KH Dahl, A Christophersen and A Bjerke

Two thromboplastin reagents ("Thrombotest" and "Normotest Automated") were used in evaluation of an automated method for determination of prothrombin time based on turbidimetric measurement of clot formation in a centrifugal analyzer. We used 60 plasma samples from patients with various diseases or being treated with oral anticoagulant and 16 normal plasma samples. Prothrombin times were calculated by a computer connected to the analyzer, a reading being made at either a certain per cent increase in total absorbance or a fixed absorbance increase. Both correlated well with the manual method (r = 0.98-0.99). The reading points best fitting the manually obtained data were estimated by minimizing the residual sum of squares in regression analyses performed at various absorbance increases. The per cent reading was better in this respect. Normotest Automated could be nearly perfectly related to the manual method, whereas Thrombotest showed a (negligibly) small deviation. Reproducibility was good within run (CV less than or equal to 3.2%) as well as between batch of the reagents, as assessed from variation in INR (CV less than or equal to 4.9%). We conclude that turbidimetry of clot formation may be validly used in automation of the prothrombin-time test. The equipment needed and the total time per analysis are about as for chromogenic substrate methods, but reagent cost is considerably lower.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1986 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.