Charles Explorer logo
🇬🇧

Comparison of the accuracy of hemoglobin point of care testing using HemoCue and GEM Premier 3000 with automated hematology analyzer in emergency room

Publication at Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen |
2016

Abstract

The laboratory analysis provides accurate, but time consuming hemoglobin level estimation especially in the emergency setting. The reliability of time-sparing point of care devices (POCT) remains uncertain.

We tested two POCT devices accuracy (HemoCue(R)201+ and Gem(R)PremierTM3000) in routine emergency department workflow. Blood samples taken from patients admitted to the emergency department were analyzed for hemoglobin concentration using a laboratory reference Beckman Coulter LH 750 (HBLAB), the HemoCue (HBHC) and the Gem Premier 3000 (HBGEM).

Pairwise comparison for each device and HbLAB was performed using correlation and the Bland-Altman methods. The reliability of transfusion decision was assessed using three-zone error grid.

A total of 292 measurements were performed in 99 patients. Mean hemoglobin level were 115 +- 33, 110 +- 28 and 111 +- 30 g/l for HbHC, HbGEM and HbLAB respectively.

A significant correlation was observed for both devices: HbHC versus HbLAB (r2 = 0.93, p < 0.001) and HBGEM versus HBLAB (r2 = 0.86, p < 0.001). The Bland-Altman method revealed bias of MINUS SIGN 3.7 g/l (limits of agreement MINUS SIGN 20.9 to 13.5) for HBHC and HBLAB and 2.5 g/l (MINUS SIGN 18.6 to 23.5) for HBGEM and HBLAB, which significantly differed between POCT devices (p < 0.001).

Using the error grid methodology: 94 or 91 % of values (HbHC and HbGEM) fell in the zone of acceptable difference (A), whereas 0 and 1 % (HbHC and HbGEM) were unacceptable (zone C). The absolute accuracy of tested POCT devices was low though reaching a high level of correlation with laboratory measurement.

The results of the Morey's error grid were unfavorable for both POCT devices.