摘要
目的:比较生化分析仪2种定标方式对ASO测定结果的影响及与散射比浊法检测结果的比较。方法:用生化仪二点定标及多点定标和及与散射比浊法分别检测250例标本ASO值,其中低值A组((40 U/ml)35例、低值B组(40 U/ml～80 U/ml)47例;中值A组(80 U/ml～120 U/ml)53例、中值B组(120 U/ml～160 U/ml)40例;高值A组(160 U/ml～200 U/ml)35例、高值B组(>200 U/ml)37例。结果:多点定标测定低值A、B组和高值A、B组ASO结果,与二点定标比较,差异有非常显著性(P(0.01),测定中值A、B组结果差异有显著性(P(0.05),散射比浊法与多点定标比较,差异无显著性。多点定标、二点定标和散射比浊法的平均回收率分别为98.3%、87.5%、99.3%,批内平均CV分别为2.3%、6.2%、1.9%,批间平均CV分别为3.2%、7.4%、2.1%。溶血和黄疸对二点定标的干扰明显大于多点定标和散射比浊法。结论:两种定标方法对测定结果有显著影响,多点定标与散射比浊法无显著响影,但离散度与CV高于散射比浊法。
Objective：To compare the biochemical analyzer two kinds of calibration methods on determination results of ASO and with nephelometry results of the comparison.Methods： With biochemical analyzer two point calibration and multi-point calibration with nephelometry ASO samples were measured value of 250 cases,including low A group（40 U/ml） 35 cases of low B（40 U/ml～80 U/ml） 47 cases;the value of A group（80 U/ml～120 U/ml） 53 cases,the value of B group（120 U/ml～160 U/ml） 40 cases;high value A group（160 U/ml～200 U/ml） 35 cases,high-value B group（200 U/ml） 37 例.Results： Determination of multi-point calibration results of low A,B group and the high value of A,B group ASO results,with two point calibration,the difference was significant（P0.01）,the determination of the value of A,B group difference in the results significant（P0.05）,nephelometry and multi-point calibration,the difference was not significant.Multi-point calibration,two point calibration and nephelometry,the average recoveries were 98.3%,87.5%,99.3%,average intra CV were 2.3%,6.2%,1.9% were awarded an average CV 3.2%,7.4%,2.1%.Hemolytic jaundice and calibration of the two points larger than interference and multi-point calibration nephelometry.Conclusion： On the determination of two calibration methods the results have a significant effect,multi-point calibration and nephelometry was no significant sound film,but the dispersion and the CV was higher than nephelometry.
出处
《中国卫生检验杂志》
CAS
2010年第11期2903-2904,共2页
Chinese Journal of Health Laboratory Technology
