Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Dec;6(1):57.
doi: 10.1186/s13613-016-0152-6. Epub 2016 Jun 24.

Preanalytical conditions of point-of-care testing in the intensive care unit are decisive for analysis reliability

Affiliations

Preanalytical conditions of point-of-care testing in the intensive care unit are decisive for analysis reliability

Adrien Auvet et al. Ann Intensive Care. 2016 Dec.

Abstract

Background: Point-of-care testing (POCT) systems enable a wide range of tests to be rapidly performed at the bedside and have attracted increasing interest in the intensive care unit (ICU). However, previous studies comparing the concordance of POCT with central laboratory testing have reported divergent findings. Most reported studies on POCT reliability have focused on analyzer performance rather than the preanalytical phase. The aim of this study was to assess the reliability of results provided by point-of-care analyzers according to the organization of the care units and the preanalytical process.

Methods: In three adult critical care units, 491 paired blood samples were analyzed for hemoglobin, potassium, and sodium concentrations by blood gas analyzers (identical reference) and the central laboratory. The clinical significance of agreement was assessed using Bland-Altman plots. A quality improvement program was then implemented to improve the preanalytical POCT process for one ICU where there was poor agreement. A second comparison was performed on 278 paired blood samples in this unit.

Results: Biases were clinically nonsignificant for potassium and sodium concentrations for all tested critical care units, relative to the reference method. However, biases [limits of agreements] for hemoglobin analyses were clearly affected by the preanalytical process: -3 [-6; 1] g/L in the operating room, -5 [-28; 17] g/L in a 10-bed ICU, and -19 [-64; 27] g/L in a 37-bed ICU. The quality approach was implemented in the 37-bed ICU and led to corrective actions that: (1) reduced the time for the POCT preanalytical phase; (2) implemented a checklist to validate the preanalytical conditions; (3) used technical innovations. The improvement of the preanalytical process resulted in a substantial decrease of the bias for hemoglobin concentration measurements: -3 [-10; 5] g/L in the 37-bed ICU.

Conclusion: We clearly demonstrate that an identical analyzer can provide results of varying quality depending on the local constraints of the ICUs. We demonstrate that quality management focused on the preanalytical process and performed by the partners involved in the POCT can overcome these issues.

Keywords: Electrolyte; Hemoglobin; Intensive care; Point-of-care testing; Preanalytical.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Bland–Altman plots for the comparisons between each method for estimating the hemoglobin, potassium, and sodium concentrations. Comparisons of the analyses were performed in a cardiac surgery operative room (OR), b polyvalent intensive care unit of 37 beds (37-bed ICU). The preanalytical process of the 37-bed ICU was improved according to the multidisciplinary quality approach, and a second run of comparisons was performed in this critical care unit (c). The solid red line in each Bland–Altman plot indicates the mean difference (bias) between the methods (value from the central laboratory − value from blood gas analyzer delocalized in the intensive care unit); the broken blue lines indicate the 95 % limits of agreement

References

    1. Kost GJ, Ehrmeyer SS, Chernow B, Winkelman JW, Zaloga GP, Dellinger RP, Shirey T. The laboratory-clinical interface: point-of-care testing. Chest. 1999;115:1140–1154. doi: 10.1378/chest.115.4.1140. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lee EJ, Shin SD, Song KJ, Kim SC, Cho JS, Lee SC, Park JO, Cha WC. A point-of-care chemistry test for reduction of turnaround and clinical decision time. Am J Emerg Med. 2011;29:489–495. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2009.11.020. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kendall J, Reeves B, Clancy M. Point of care testing: randomised controlled trial of clinical outcome. BMJ. 1998;316:1052–1057. doi: 10.1136/bmj.316.7137.1052. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Casagranda I. Point-of-care testing in critical care: the clinician’s point of view. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2010;48:931–934. doi: 10.1515/CCLM.2010.191. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Schwarzer P, Kuhn S-O, Stracke S, Gründling M, Knigge S, Selleng S, Helm M, Friesecke S, Abel P, Kallner A, Nauck M, Petersmann A. Discrepant post filter ionized calcium concentrations by common blood gas analyzers in CRRT using regional citrate anticoagulation. Crit Care. 2015;19:321. doi: 10.1186/s13054-015-1027-1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources