Dear group
I am after some advice, please.
Our clinical team went and purchased a number of the JM-103 TcB meters to be used in conjunction with the NICE guidance (NICE clinical guideline 98. Neonatal Jaundice. Issue date: May 2010).
Had they asked, there was a later version, JM-105, which looked more suitable for them or there was the Phillips TcB meter to be considered as well. However, these meters had been purchased. When they wanted us to verify the meter, the
Pathology consensus was that this meter was not fit for purpose as we could not get good verification results from it. We could not get a consistent positive or negative bias from these meters and correlation was poor especially with neonates of Afro-Carribean
descent.
Now, it emerges that we have done this all wrong and that the verification is not a like-for-like, but as a screen in order to test whether the neonate should in fact have a blood test. Looking at the data, I would say most of the TcB
results we achieved would indicate that the results were comparable enough so that yes a serum bilirubin would have been performed based on the TcB screen if the result was high and no if it was low.
Does anyone at all have any experience of this and whether the verification exercise would be enough to validate this process?
I would be interested to hear your opinions.
Many thanks.
Kind regards
Karen
Karen Stade
POCT Coordinator
Pathology Department
London
E9 6SR
):
020 8510 7891 7:
020 8510 7555
::
[log in to unmask]
Or: [log in to unmask]
If you have any POCT queries please contact Edita Bacinskaite ([log in to unmask])
P
Please consider the environment before printing this email.