Autor: |
Dasi T; ICMR-National Institute of Nutrition, Jamia-Osmania Po, Tarnaka, TS, 500007, India., Palika R; ICMR-National Institute of Nutrition, Jamia-Osmania Po, Tarnaka, TS, 500007, India., Pullakhandam R; ICMR-National Institute of Nutrition, Jamia-Osmania Po, Tarnaka, TS, 500007, India., Augustine LF; ICMR-National Institute of Nutrition, Jamia-Osmania Po, Tarnaka, TS, 500007, India., Boiroju NK; ICMR-National Institute of Nutrition, Jamia-Osmania Po, Tarnaka, TS, 500007, India., Prasannanavar DJ; ICMR-National Institute of Nutrition, Jamia-Osmania Po, Tarnaka, TS, 500007, India., Pradhan AS; Division of Reproductive and Child Health, Indian Council of Medical Research, V. Ramalingaswami Bhawan, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi110029, India., Kurpad AV; Department of Physiology, St. John's Medical College, Sarjapur Road, Bengaluru, KA560034, India., Sachdev HS; Sitaram Bhartia Institute of Science and Research, New Delhi110016, India., Kulkarni B; ICMR-National Institute of Nutrition, Jamia-Osmania Po, Tarnaka, TS, 500007, India. |
Abstrakt: |
Population-based surveys commonly use point-of-care (POC) methods with capillary blood samples for estimating Hb concentrations; these estimates need to be validated by comparison with reference methods using venous blood. In a cross-sectional study in 748 participants (17-86 years, 708 women, Hb: 5·1 to 18·2 g/dl) from Hyderabad, India, we validated Hb measured from a pooled capillary blood sample by a POC autoanalyser (Horiba ABX Micros 60OT, Hb-C-AA ) by comparison with venous blood Hb measured by two reference methods: POC autoanalyser ( Hb-V-AA ) and cyanmethemoglobin method ( Hb-V-CM ). These comparisons also allowed estimation of blood sample-related and equipment-related differences in the Hb estimates. We also conducted a longitudinal study in 426 participants (17-21 years) to measure differences in the Hb response to iron folate (IFA) treatment by the capillary blood POC method compared with the reference methods. In the cross-sectional study, Bland-Altman analyses showed trivial differences between source of blood ( Hb-C-AA and Hb-V-AA ; mean difference, limits of agreement: 0·1, -0·8 to 1·0 g/dl) and between analytical methods ( Hb-V-AA and Hb-V-CM ; mean difference, limits of agreement: < 0·1, -1·8 to 1·8 g/dl). Cross-sectional anaemia prevalence estimated using Hb-C-AA did not differ significantly from Hb-V-CM or Hb-V-AA . In the longitudinal study, the Hb increment in response to IFA intervention was not different when using Hb-C-AA (1·6 ± 1·7 g/dl) compared with Hb-V-AA (1·7 ± 1·7 g/dl) and Hb-V-CM (1·7 ± 1·7 g/dl). The pooled capillary blood-autoanalyzer method ( Hb-C-AA ) offers a practical and accurate way forward for POC screening of anaemia. |