Alpha 2.0
Login Register
» Articles » PMID: 20808648

Quality Evaluation of Four Hemoglobin Screening Methods in a Blood Donor Setting Along with Their Comparative Cost Analysis in an Indian Scenario

Overview
Journal Asian J Transfus Sci
Specialty Hematology
Date 2010 Sep 3
PMID 20808648
Citations 11
Authors
Rashmi Tondon
Anupam Verma
Prashant Pandey
Rajendra Chaudhary
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Despite the wide range of methods available for measurement of hemoglobin, no single technique has emerged as the most appropriate and ideal for a blood donation setup.

Materials And Methods: A prospective study utilizing 1014 blood samples was carried out in a blood donation setting for quality evaluation of four methods of hemoglobin estimation along with cost analysis: Hematology cell analyzer (reference), HCS, CuSO4 method and HemoCue.

Results: Mean value of HemoCue (mean +/- SD = 14.7 +/- 1.49 g/dl) was higher by 0.24 compared to reference (mean +/- SD = 13.8 +/- 1.52 g/dl) but not statistically significant ( P > 0.05). HemoCue proved to be the best technique (sensitivity 99.4% and specificity 84.4%) whereas HCS was most subjective with 25.2% incorrect estimations. CuSO4 proved to be good with 7.9% false results. Comparative cost analysis of each method was calculated to be 35 INR/test for HemoCue, 0.76 INR /test for HCS and 0.06-0.08 INR /test for CuSO4.

Conclusion: CuSO4 method gives accurate results, if strict quality control is applied. HemoCue is too expensive to be used as a primary screening method in an economically restricted country like India.

Citing Articles

Assessment of the Key Performance Indicator Proposed by NABH in the Blood Centre of a Tertiary Health Care Hospital in Southern India.

Gnanaraj J, Kulkarni R, Sahoo D, Abhishekh B Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus. 2023; 39(2):308-316.

PMID: 37006976 PMC: 10064356. DOI: 10.1007/s12288-022-01563-9.

The risks of low hemoglobin deferral in a large retrospective cohort of plasmapheresis donors and the influence factors of return for a subsequent donation in China.

Xiao G, Dong D, Wang Y, Li C, Huang G, Yang H PeerJ. 2023; 11:e14999.

PMID: 36935911 PMC: 10019327. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.14999.

Comparison of efficacy of filter paper cyanmethemoglobin method with automated hematology analyzer for estimation of hemoglobin.

Kumar L, Kangle R Asian J Transfus Sci. 2022; 16(1):78-82.

PMID: 36199413 PMC: 9528559. DOI: 10.4103/ajts.AJTS_135_16.

Evaluation of new non-invasive & conventional invasive methods of haemoglobin estimation in blood donors.

Rout D, Sachdev S, Marwaha N Indian J Med Res. 2019; 149(6):755-762.

PMID: 31496528 PMC: 6755785. DOI: 10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_301_17.

Development of a Paper-Based Sensor Compatible with a Mobile Phone for the Detection of Common Iron Formulas Used in Fortified Foods within Resource-Limited Settings.

Waller A, Toc M, Rigsby D, Gaytan-Martinez M, Andrade J Nutrients. 2019; 11(7).

PMID: 31330891 PMC: 6682910. DOI: 10.3390/nu11071673.

References
1.
Bland J, Altman D . Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986; 1(8476):307-10. View
2.
Boulton F, Nightingale M, Reynolds W . Improved strategy for screening prospective blood donors for anaemia. Transfus Med. 1994; 4(3):221-5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3148.1994.tb00275.x. View
3.
Timan I, Tatsumi N, Aulia D, Wangsasaputra E . Comparison of haemoglobinometry by WHO Haemoglobin Colour Scale and copper sulphate against haemiglobincyanide reference method. Clin Lab Haematol. 2004; 26(4):253-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2257.2004.00622.x. View
4.
James V, Jones K, Turner E, Sokol R . Statistical analysis of inappropriate results from current Hb screening methods for blood donors. Transfusion. 2003; 43(3):400-4. DOI: 10.1046/j.1537-2995.2003.00316.x. View
5.
Ingram C, Lewis S . Clinical use of WHO haemoglobin colour scale: validation and critique. J Clin Pathol. 2001; 53(12):933-7. PMC: 1731129. DOI: 10.1136/jcp.53.12.933. View