摘要
目的分析两种细菌鉴定法在血液检验中的应用效果。方法研究对象为方便选取该院在2019年7月—2020年7月需要进行血液检验的患者120例,通过计算机随机表数字法将其分为参照组和研究组,各60例,分别开展常规药敏试验检测和直接药敏试验检测。比较其组间耐药符合率差异、革兰阳性菌符合率差异以及革兰阴性菌符合率差异,同时观察两组患者在药敏检测反应时间方面以及操作时间方面的时间差异,并且统计其检验满意度评分差异。结果参照组耐药符合率(96.67%)、革兰阳性菌符合率(96.33%)以及革兰阴性菌符合率(96.33%),均低于研究组的98.33%、96.67%、98.33%,但是组间数据差异无统计学意义(χ^(2)=0.000、0.175、0.835,P>0.05);研究组药敏检测反应时间(12.47±0.29)h、操作时间(26.07±1.34)h短于参照组的(15.61±0.48)h、(34.08±3.66)h,研究组检验满意度评分(89.06±4.22)分高于参照组(76.15±3.97)分,组间数据差异有统计学意义(t=43.370、15.589、22.847,P<0.05)。结论常规药敏试验检测和直接药敏试验检测在血液检验中均具有较高的检验符合率,但是相较于前者,后者的检验耗时相对更短,更有利于提高患者的临床检验满意度。
Objective To analyze the application effects of two bacterial identification methods in blood tests.Methods convenient select the subjects of this study were 120 patients who needed blood test in the hospital from July 2019 to July 2020.They were divided into the reference group and the study group by computer random table numerical method,with 60 patients in each group.Conventional drug sensitivity test and direct drug sensitivity test were carried out respectively.The differences of drug resistance coincidence rate,gram-positive bacteria coincidence rate and gram-negative bacteria coincidence rate between the two groups were compared.Meanwhile,the time differences of drug sensitivity test reaction time and operation time between the two groups were observed,and the difference of test satisfaction score was statistically analyzed.Results The coincidence rates of drug resistance(96.67%),gram-positive bacteria(96.33%)and gram-negative bacteria(96.33%)in the reference group were all lower than 98.33%,96.67%and 98.33%in the study group,but there was no statistically significant difference between groups(χ^(2)=0.000,0.175,0.835,P>0.05);The reaction time(12.47±0.29)h and operation time(26.07±1.34)h in the study group were shorter than those in the control group(15.61±0.48)h and(34.08±3.66)h.The score of test satisfaction in the study group(89.06±4.22)points was higher than that in the control group(76.15±3.97)points.The differences between groups were statistically significant(t=43.370,15.589,22.847,P<0.05).Conclusion Both conventional susceptibility testing and direct susceptibility testing have higher test coincidence rates in blood tests,but compared with the former,the latter’s testing time is relatively shorter,which is more conducive to improving patients’clinical test satisfaction.
作者
姜维
JIANG Wei(Department of Laboratory Medicine,Zhaoyuan People's Hospital,Zhaoyuan,Shandong Province,265400 China)
出处
《中外医疗》
2021年第20期169-171,共3页
China & Foreign Medical Treatment
关键词
常规药敏试验检测
直接药敏试验检测
细菌鉴定法
血液检验
检验符合率
满意度
Conventional susceptibility testing
Direct susceptibility testing
Bacterial identification method
Blood test
Test coincidence rate
Satisfaction
