These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Evaluation of the performances of the UF-1000i(®) automated urine analyzer].
    Author: Fabbro C, Darolles J, Rault JP.
    Journal: Ann Biol Clin (Paris); 2011; 69(4):431-9. PubMed ID: 21896408.
    Abstract:
    The purpose of this study was the evaluation of the UF 1000i(®) automated urine analyzer (bioMérieux(©)).The coefficients of variation (CV) for the repeatability of the red blood cell (RBC), white blood cell (WBC) and bacteria counts were overall concordant with those announced by the supplier. However, for low concentrations, the CV for the repeatability for concentrations of 10(3) RBC/mL, 10(3) WBC/mL and 5×10(3) UA/mL were respectively of 26, 18 and 36% and thus higher than the CV (10%) reported for each of the three parameters by the supplier. Reproducibility results agreed with those given by the supplier (10%). The linearity range was different from that reported by the supplier and was shifted by a factor 10 for WBC and bacteria high concentrations. Cross contamination between samples was prevented by using the washing program recommended by the supplier which however led to a lower analysis frequency (80 samples per hour). Detection limits were of 5,7×10(1) RBC/mL, 5,7×10(1) WBC/mL and 1,6×10(4) UA/mL respectively for the RBC, WBC and bacteria. Quantification limits found in this study were of 1,3×10(3) RBC/mL, 1,7×10(3) WBC/mL, 5,1×10(3) UA/mL. An overestimation of the RBC count was observed within the range of 5×10(3) to 2×10(4) RBC/mL. Beyond this concentration range, the concordance is good. The correlation is poor within this range and good for higher concentrations. For WBC, concordance and correlation were satisfactory over the whole range tested.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]