HemoCue against Coulter LH-750 in the estimation of hemoglobin levels of blood donors in mobile collection settings: a comparative study

Sultan A.M. Saghir, Amer A. Almaiman, Aishah K.A. Shatar, Norris Naim, Huda S. Baqir



DOI: https://doi.org/10.13181/mji.v27i4.2635

Abstract


Background: The fast and outpatient setting for a determination of the hemoglobin (Hb) level is a well-recognized prerequisite to detect anemia in blood donors. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of the HemoCue methods (HemoCue B-Hb and HemoCue-301) against Coulter LH-750 as a reference method for Hb determination.

Methods: This study was an experimental cross-sectional study. It includes 455 blood samples that were collected from volunteer blood donors between January 15, 2010 and February 15, 2011. The performance of the three methods and their comparisons were assessed using the analysis of coefficients of variation (CV), linear regression, and mean difference. Correlation coefficient and Bland–Altman plots were drawn to compare the two HemoCue measurements and the automated cell analyzer against each other and to evaluate their results. The Hb concentrations were compared using the concordance correlation coefficient.

Results: The findings exhibited that the CV for the three methods Coulter LH-750, HemoCue B-Hb, and HemoCue-301 were 0.60%, 0.72%, and 0.92%, respectively. A statistically significant difference was observed between the means of the Hb measurements for the three methods (p<0.001). The HemoCue B-Hb and HemoCue-301 methods showed the best agreement, and the Coulter LH-750 method gave a lower Hb value compared with the two HemoCue methods. The results showed a positive correlation of HemoCue Hb results compared with the reference method.

Conclusion: All three methods provide a good agreement for Hb determination. The new device HemoCue-301 was found to be more accurate compared with HemoCue B-Hb and Coulter LH-750.

Keywords


blood donation; Coulter LH-750; HemoCue; hemoglobin

Full Text:

PDF

References


  1. Gómez-Simón A, Navarro-Nú-ez L, Pérez-Ceballos E, Lozano, ML, Candela, MJ, Cascales, A, et al. Evaluation of four rapid methods for hemoglobin screening of whole blood donors in mobile collection settings. Transfus Apher Sci. 2007;36(3):235–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transci.2007.01.010
  2. Tondon R, Verma A, Pandey P, Chaudhary R. Quality evaluation of four hemoglobin screening methods in a blood donor setting along with their comparative cost analysis in an Indian scenario. Asian J Transfus Sci. 2009;3(2):66–9. https://doi.org/10.4103/0973-6247.53874
  3. Transfusion practice guidelines for clinical and laboratory personnel. 3rd Edition March, National Blood Centre, Ministry of Health. 2008.
  4. International Nutritional Anaemia Consultative Group (INACG). Measurements of iron status: a report of the International Nutritional Anaemia Consultative Group. USA: INACG, 1985.
  5. Newman B. Blood donor suitability and allogeneic whole blood donation. Transfus Med Rev. 2001;15(3):234–44. https://doi.org/10.1053/tmrv.2001.24593
  6. Morris S, Ruel M, Cohen RJ, Dewey KG, de la Brière B, Hassan MN. Precision, accuracy, and reliability of hemoglobin assessment with use of capillary blood. Am J Clin Nutr. 1999;69(6):1243–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/69.6.1243
  7. Neufeld L, García-Guerra A, Sánchez-Francia D, Newton-Sánchez O, Ramírez-Villalobos MD, Rivera-Dommarco J. Hemoglobin measured by Hemocue and a reference method in venous and capillary blood: a validation study. Salud Publica Mex. 2002;44(3):219–27. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0036-36342002000300005
  8. Stone JE, Simmons WK, Jutsum PJ, Gurney JM. An evaluation of methods of screening for anaemia. Bull World Health Organ. 1984;62(1):115–20.
  9. Hudson-Thomas M, Bingham KC, Simmons WK. An evaluation of the HemoCue for measuring haemoglobin in field studies in Jamaica. Bull World Health Organ. 1994;72(3):423–6.
  10. von Schenck H, Falkensson M, Lundberg B. Evaluation of "HemoCue," a new device for determining hemoglobin. Clin Chem. 1986;32(3):526–9.
  11. Rechner IJ, Twigg A, Davies AF, Imong S. Evaluation of the HemoCue compared with the Coulter STKS for measurement of neonatal haemoglobin. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2002;86(3):F188–9. https://doi.org/10.1136/fn.86.3.F188
  12. Lin LI. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics. 1989;45(1):255–68. https://doi.org/10.2307/2532051
  13. Lin LI. Assay validation using the concordance correlation coefficient. Biometrics. 1992;48(2):599–604. https://doi.org/10.2307/2532314
  14. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;327(8476):307–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8
  15. Chen PP, Short TG, Leug DH, Oh TE. A clinical evaluation of the Haemocue haemoglobinometer using capillary, venous and arterial samples. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1992;20(4):497–500.
  16. van den Broek NR, Ntonya C, Mhango E, White SA. Diagnosing anaemia in pregnancy in rural clinics: assessing the potential of the haemoglobin colour scale. Bull World Health Organ. 1999;77(1):15–21.
  17. Rosenblit J, Abreu CR, Szterling LN, Kutner JM, Hamerschlak N, Frutuoso P, et al. Evaluation of three methods for haemoglobin measurement in a blood donor setting. Sao Paulo Med J. 1999;117(3):108–12. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-31801999000300003
  18. Cable RG. Hb screening of blood donors: how close is close enough? Transfusion. 2003;43(3):306–8. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1537-2995.2003.00372.x





Copyright (c) 2018 Sultan A.M. Saghir, Amer A. Almaiman, Aishah K.A. Shatar, Norris Naim, Huda S. Baqir

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

All articles and issues in Medical Journal of Indonesia have unique DOI number registered in Crossref.
 
Romeo