• Elizabeth Lee Lewandrowski, Elizabeth M Van Cott, Kimberly Gregory, Ik-Kyung Jang, and Kent B Lewandrowski.
• Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, USA.
• Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 2011 May 1; 135 (5): 741-8.

AbstractHistorically, it has been difficult for hospitals to change methods for activated clotting time (ACT) testing because of differences in ACT values obtained with different instruments, wide differences in target ranges used in different procedures, and the difficulty of performing crossover studies at the bedside in critical care situations. There are limited published data comparing the i-STAT (Abbott Point of Care, Princeton, NJ) kaolin ACT with the Medtronic ACT Plus (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN). The i-STAT system can perform ACT testing in addition to testing of a number of critical care analytes and may offer potential advantages over other ACT analyzers. Comparison of ACT values on 121 simultaneous split-sample tests yielded an R(2) of 0.88 with i-STAT = 0.79 Medtronic + 72.0. The Pearson correlation was R = 0.94, indicating statistically significant correlation between the 2 methods. Based on this comparison, we were able to implement the i-STAT ACT throughout our institution without changing target ranges for any individual procedure.

10 keywords...

hide…