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


     

Clinical Chemistry 42: 1068-1073, 1996;
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 Hubl, W.
Right arrow Articles by Bayer, P. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hubl, W.
Right arrow Articles by Bayer, P. M.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 42, 1068-1073, Copyright © 1996 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Use of precision profiles to evaluate precision of the automated leukocyte differential

W Hubl, L Tlustos and PM Bayer
Central Lab, Wilhelminenspital, Vienna, Austria.

The commonly used methods of assessing the precision of the automated leukocyte differential have certain drawbacks that affect the validity and comparability of results. In the present report, we introduce a procedure based on building precision profiles from a large number of within-run imprecision experiments. The profiles are fitted to the function for the CV of proportions, which yields the number of theoretically differentiated leukocytes. Differences between fitted curves are evaluated for statistical significance by the F-test. As an example, we compared the precision of two hematology analyzers, a flow- cytometric technique involving fluorescence-labeled monoclonal antibodies, and the manual differential. We were able to establish definite differences in precision between different analyzers and different leukocyte classes. Our data also indicated that conventional within-run imprecision studies may completely misjudge analyzer precision. Furthermore, we could demonstrate that the precision of analyzers that analyze a fixed amount of blood rather than a fixed number of leukocytes is strongly influenced by the leukocyte count of the sample, leading to high imprecision for leukopenic samples. We believe the proposed procedure is a useful addition to currently used protocols; it yields clear results and creates a statistical basis of comparison between various instruments and techniques of differentiation.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1996 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.