摘要
目的探讨微柱凝胶免疫检测技术鉴定临床血型及保证输血安全的价值。方法选取丰城市人民医院和樟树市人民医院2017年2月~2019年2月收治的100例需要进行输血治疗的患者作为研究对象,按照随机数字表法分为盐水试管法组(50例)与微柱凝胶免疫法组(50例)。盐水试管法组采用盐水试管法检测,微柱凝胶免疫法组采用微柱凝胶免疫法检测。比较两种检测方法的正反定型符合率、正反定型不符率、交叉配血成功率、交叉配血不合格率、假阳性率、检测敏感度、特异性、输血意外事件发生率与输血服务质量评分。结果两种检测方法的正反定型符合率、正反定型不符率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);微柱凝胶免疫法的交叉配血成功率高于盐水试管法,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);微柱凝胶免疫法的交叉配血不合格率低于盐水试管法,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);微柱凝胶免疫法与盐水试管法的检查方法的检测敏感度、特异性比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);微柱凝胶免疫法的输血服务质量评分高于盐水试管法,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);微柱凝胶免疫法的输血意外事件发生率低于盐水试管法,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论微柱凝胶免疫检测技术鉴定法可以有效降低输血意外事件发生率和提高其输血服务质量。
Objective To explore the value of microcolumn gel immunoassay for identifying clinical blood type and ensuring blood transfusion safety.Methods A total of 100 patients who underwent transfusion therapy from February 2017 to February 2019 in Fengcheng People′s Hospital and Zhangshu People′s Hospital were enrolled in the study.According to the random number table method,they were divided into the saline test tube method group(50 cases)and the microcolumn gel immunoassay group(50 cases).The saline test tube method was detected by saline test tube method group,and the microcolumn gel immunoassay method was detected by microcolumn gel immunoassay group.The positive and negative stereotypes,positive and negative stereotypes,cross-matching success rate,cross-matching failure rate,false positive rate,detection sensitivity,specificity,transfusion accident rate and blood transfusion service quality score data indicators were compared between the two detection methods.Results There were no significant differences in the positive and negative conformity rates and positive and negative stereotypes of the two detection methods(P>0.05).The cross-matching success rate of microcolumn gel immunoassay of the microcolumn gel immunoassay method was higher than that of the saline test tube method,there was statistically significant difference(P<0.05).The cross-matching failure rate of the microcolumn gel immunoassay method was lower than that of the saline test tube method,the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).There was no significant difference in the detection sensitivity and specificity of the examination method between the microcolumn gel immunoassay method and saline test tube method(P>0.05).The blood transfusion service quality score of the microcolumn gel immunoassay method was higher than that of the saline test tube method,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).The incidence of transfusion accidents in the microcolumn gel immunoassay method was lower than that in the saline test tube method,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Conclusion Microcolumn gel immunoassay identification method can effectively reduce the incidence of transfusion accidents and improve the quality of blood transfusion services.
作者
钟清兰
朱小艳
敖四珍
叶锦华
ZONG Qing-lan;ZHU Xiao-yan;AO Si-zhen;YE Jin-hua(Fengcheng People′s Hospital,Jiangxi Province,Fengcheng331100,China;Zhangshu People′s Hospital,Jiangxi Province,Zhangshu331200,China)
出处
《中国当代医药》
2020年第15期183-185,202,共4页
China Modern Medicine
关键词
微柱凝胶免疫检测
技术鉴定
血型
输血安全
盐水试管法
Microcolumn gel immunoassay
Technical identification
Blood type
Blood transfusion safety
Saline test tube method
