Clinical Chemistry
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 40: 579-585, 1994;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gregory, L. C.
Right arrow Articles by Christenson, R. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gregory, L. C.
Right arrow Articles by Christenson, R. H.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 40, 579-585, Copyright © 1994 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Eight compact analysis systems evaluated for measuring total cholesterol

LC Gregory, SH Duh and RH Christenson
Department of Pathology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore 21201.

We examined the analytical performance of eight compact systems for measuring total cholesterol: AccuMeter, Cobas Ready, Discovery f2, DT60, L-D-X, Reflotron, QCA, and Vision. We determined average bias at two decision levels, the mean absolute bias, and the percentage of results differing from the comparison method results by > 8.9% allowable total error limit for multiple reagent lots. Average bias was < 3% for all lots tested for AccuMeter, Discovery f2, and DT60, but > 3% for one or more lots or sample types tested with the other systems. Of results from each reagent lot, > 95% were within the 8.9% total error specifications with Discovery f2, DT60, and QCA, whereas the performance of L-D-X, Vision, and Reflotron depended on reagent lot and (or) sample type. Of all results from each lot tested with AccuMeter and Cobas Ready, > 5% exceeded the total allowable error limit. We determined imprecision for five systems: Cobas Ready, Discovery f2, and QCA had CVs < 3%, whereas CVs for AccuMeter and L-D-X were > 3% but < 5%.


The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:


Home page
 The Annals of PharmacotherapyHome page
J. R Taylor and L. M Lopez
Cholesterol: Point-of-Care Testing
Ann. Pharmacother., July 1, 2004; 38(7): 1252 - 1257.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1994 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.