Skip to content
naulon
Not checkedNot checked for notices yet.

Evaluation of three methods for hemoglobin measurement in a blood donor setting

Jacob Rosenblit, Cláudia Regina Abreu, Leonel Nulman Szterling and 5 more

São Paulo Medical Journal · 1999

doi:10.1590/s1516-31801999000300003 (opens in a new tab)

We email you when a new notice or a question about this paper appears.

Abstract

CONTEXT: The hemoglobin (Hb) level is the most-used parameter for screening blood donors for the presence of anemia, one of the most-used methods for measuring Hb levels is based on photometric detection of cyanmetahemoglobin, as an alternative to this technology, HemoCue has developed a photometric method based on the determination of azide metahemoglobin. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of three methods for hemoglobin (Hb) determination in a blood bank setting. DESIGN: Prospective study utilizing blood samples to compare methods for Hb determination. SETTING: Hemotherapy Service of the Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, a private institution in the tertiary health care system. SAMPLE: Serial blood samples were collected from 259 individuals during the period from March to June 1996. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Test performances and their comparisons were assessed by the analysis of coefficients of variation (CV), linear regression and mean differences. RESULTS: The CV for the three methods were: Coulter 0.68%, Cobas 0.82% and HemoCue 0.69%. There was no difference between the mean Hb determination for the three methods (p>0.05). The Coulter and Cobas methods showed the best agreement and the HemoCue method gave a lower Hb determination when compared to both the Coulter and Cobas methods. However, pairs of methods involving the HemoCue seem to have narrower limits of agreement (± 0.78 and ± 1.02) than the Coulter and Cobas combination (± 1.13). CONCLUSION: The three methods provide good agreement for hemoglobin determination.

Abstract licence: CC BY

References5

    5 more references, whose wording the paper’s licence keeps private.

    Reads

    Read by people on this page

    None yet.

    Checked or read by AI through naulon

    None yet.

    A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

    Are you an author?

    Is this your paper?

    Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.