Back to Search Start Over

Ambulatory human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) testing: a verification of two hCG point of care devices.

Authors :
Kyriacou, Christopher
Yang, Wei
Kapur, Shikha
Maheetharan, Shanuja
Pikovsky, Margaret
Parker, Nina
Barcroft, Jennifer
Bobdiwala, Shabnam
Sur, Shyamaly
Stalder, Catriona
Gould, Deborah
Ofili-Yebovi, Dede
Day, Andrea
Unsworth, Nick
Wilkes, Edmund H.
Tan, Tricia
Bourne, Tom
Source :
Clinical Chemistry & Laboratory Medicine; Mar2024, Vol. 62 Issue 4, p664-673, 10p
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Quantitative human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) measurements are used to manage women classified with a pregnancy of unknown location (PUL). Two point of care testing (POCT) devices that quantify hCG are commercially available. We verified the i-STAT 1 (Abbott) and the AQT 90 FLEX (Radiometer) prior to use in PUL triage. Tests for precision, external quality assurance (EQA), correlation, hook effect and recovery were undertaken alongside a POCT usability assessment during this prospective multi-center verification. Coefficients of variation ranged between 4.0 and 5.1 % for the three i-STAT 1 internal quality control (IQC) solutions and between 6.8 and 7.3 % for the two AQT IQC solutions. Symmetric differences in POCT EQA results when compared with laboratory and EQA stock values ranged between 3.2 and 24.5 % for the i-STAT 1 and between 3.3 and 36.9 % for the AQT. Correlation coefficients (i-STAT 1: 0.96, AQT: 0.99) and goodness of fit curves (i-STAT 1: 0.92, AQT: 0.99) were excellent when using suitable whole blood samples. An hCG hook effect was noted with the i-STAT 1 between 572,194 and 799,089 IU/L, lower than the hook effect noted with the AQT, which was between 799,089 and 1,619,309 IU/L. When hematocrit concentration was considered in sample types validated for use with each device, hCG recovery was 108 % with the i-STAT 1 and 98 % with the AQT. The i-STAT 1 scored lower on usability overall (90/130) than the AQT (121/130, p<0.001, Mann-Whitney). Both hCG POCT devices were verified for use in clinical practice. Practical factors must also be considered when choosing which device to use in each unit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
14346621
Volume :
62
Issue :
4
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
Clinical Chemistry & Laboratory Medicine
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
175678897
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2023-0703