摘要
目的观察和分析研究临床血液细菌检验中使用直接药敏试验的方法和效果,以提高其在血液细菌检验中的应用价值。方法选择2013年7月-2014年7月我院收治的需要进行血液细菌检验的患者标本共96例作为研究对象,将每份标本平均分为两份,每份均做需氧和厌氧培养。其中A组使用常规药敏试验,B份使用直接药敏试验,观察比较两种方法的细菌鉴定结果、药敏试验结果,以常规药敏试验作为标准,并进行统计学分析。结果两种方法对革兰氏阳性球菌鉴定结果无明显差异,差异无统计学意义;对革兰氏阴性杆菌检验结果中,两种方法的符合率对比差异不明显,差异无统计学意义。抗生素敏感性方面,直接药敏试验与常规药敏试验对比差异不明显,差异无统计学意义。两种方法检验所需时间对比差异明显,差异有统计学意义。结论在临床血液细菌检验中使用直接药敏试验的检验结果与常规药敏试验无明显差别。
Objective To observe and analyze the clinical blood bacteria test used in the method and effect of drug sensitive test directly, in order to improve the application value of bacteria in the blood test. Methods July 2013 to July 2014, our hospital of the need for blood specimens from 96 patients with bacterial test as the research object, the average each specimen is divided into two, each doing aerobic and anaerobic culture. Using conventional drug susceptibility test of group A, B A, medicine sensitive experiment using direct observation comparison of the two methods bacteria identification and drug susceptibility test results, with conventional drug susceptibility test as the standard, and statistical analysis. Results Two methods of gram positive coccus no difference between the appraisal result, there was no statistical y significant difference; In the gram-negative bacil us test results, the coincidence rate of two methods contrast difference is not obvious, there was no statistical y significant difference. Antibiotic susceptibility, direct drug susceptibility test no obvious difference compared with conventional drug susceptibility test, there was no statistical y significant difference. Two methods of time needed for inspection comparison difference to be markedly, the difference was statistical y significant. Conclusion In clinical blood bacteria test with the test result of the direct drug susceptibility test and conventional drug susceptibility test has no obvious difference.
出处
《中国卫生标准管理》
2015年第4期21-22,共2页
China Health Standard Management
关键词
直接药敏试验
血液细菌检验
效果
Direct drug susceptibility test
Blood bacteria inspection
The effect
