摘要
目的研究在临床血液检验中采用细菌鉴定的准确性、敏感性和可行性。方法取2014年5月-2015年9月我院收治的408份血液样本进行细菌阳性的鉴定,采用直接细菌鉴定和常规药敏试验来进行细菌鉴定。结果革兰氏阳性菌球菌敏感的符合率为94.4%,中度敏感的符合率为93.4%,耐药的符合率为98.2%;革兰氏阳性菌杆菌敏感的符合率为98.7%,中度敏感的符合率为94.3%,耐药的符合率为98.3%。两种检验方法在药敏试验的敏感,中度敏感以及耐药的符合率中都较高（P〉0.05）,但是直接法获得最终检验结果报告的时间短于常规检测法,差异具有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论接细菌鉴定和常规检测法、药敏试验法的准确率、符合率都较高,但是该方法的检测时间更短,更加的方便快捷。
Objective To investigate the accuracy,sensitivity and plausibility of bacteria identification in application of clinical blood test. Methods Chose 408 blood samples that were collected in hospital from May 2014 to September 2015 to test its positive bacteria,and two test methods were taken,they were direct bacteria identification and conventional drug-sensitivity test. Results As for direct bacteria identification,the sensitivity coincidence rate of gram positive bacteria was 94.4%,the medium-sensitive coincidence rate of gram positive bacteria was 93.4% and the medication-tolerance coincidence rate was 98.2%,while,as for conventional drug-sensitivity test,the sensitivity coincidence rate of gram positive bacteria was 98.7%,the mediumsensitive coincidence rate of gram positive bacteria was 94.3% and the medication-tolerance coincidence rate was 98.3%,the results show that the sensitivity coincidence rate,the medium-sensitive coincidence rate and the medication-tolerance coincidence rate are relatively high for these two test methods（P〈0.05）,however,there was a differential between direct bacteria identification and conventional drug-sensitivity test in terms of testreport completed time,and the former was quicker than the latter（P〈0.05）. Conclusion Both direct bacteria identification and conventional drug-sensitivity test bear high accuracy,sensitivity and plausibility of bacteria identification in application of clinical blood test,but direct bacteria identification is much quicker and more convenient.
出处
《中国卫生标准管理》
2016年第1期157-158,共2页
China Health Standard Management
关键词
细菌鉴定
血液检验
应用研究
Bacteria identification
Blood test
Application study
