The Comparison between Microhematocrit and Automated Methods for Hematocrit Determination
Gebrewahd Gebretsadkan · International Journal of Blood Research and Disorders · 2015
Background: Microhematocrit (HCT) method is a gold standard method for hematocrit determination. A comparative cross sectional study was conducted from 28 April to 28 June, 2014 to assess the analytical performance between microhematocrit and automated methods for hematocrit determination. Methodology: A total of 384 EDTA (Ethyl Diamine Tetra Acetic Acid) collected blood samples from patients attending Yirgalem hospital were analyzed for HCT by both methods. The data for hematocrit value was analyzed by linear regression and Pearson correlation co- efficient. The result of the two methods was expressed as a mean SD (standard deviation). Result: The correlation coefficient (R=0.95) indicated the strong correlation between manual and automated methods to determine the hematocrit. The manual HCT and automated HCT were significantly different (P<0.002) at 95% confidence interval. The result indicated higher coefficient of variation (CV) in manual method than automated HCT results, which implicated the percision is good for automated method (mindray 3000 plus) and not good for manual method. Conclusion: Generally, the study showed the hematocrit value obtained from hematology analyzer (mindray 3000 plus) is different from that of manual, but it is directly proportional in most cases. The automated method can not replace the manual for hematocrit determination though the result of both methods are close to each other.