Time filter

Source Type

Urrechaga E.,Hospital Galdakao Usansolo Galdakao
Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis | Year: 2017

Background: The ADAMS™ A1c HA-8180T (ARKRAY, Inc., Kyoto, Japan) is a high pressure liquid chromatography system designed for separation and quantitation of HbA1c, while detecting hemoglobin (Hb) variants and HbA2, with an analysis time of just 3.5 min. The aim was to evaluate the analytical performance of this analyzer for routine HbA1c quantitation. Methods: Trueness, imprecision, carry over, linearity, the effect of anemia and correlation with ADAMS™ A1c HA-8180V (in Variant mode) were assessed according to guidelines of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and manufacturer. The presence of coexisting interfering chemically modified Hb variants was also assessed. Results: The results were found to be accurate (total error of 1.74%) and precise: within-run, between-run, between-day and total coefficients of variation were 0.71%, 0.77%, 0.36%, and 0.93% at low concentrations, and 0.43%, 0.29%, 0%, and 0.48% at high concentrations of HbA1c. Carry over, linearity, and correlation of methods were excellent. HbA1c measurement was independent of total Hb concentration in a range 40-214 g/L, and shows no interference from Hb chemically modified commonly observed in this type of analysis, while common Hb variants are detected. Conclusion: The analyzer is a suitable system for glycemic control in patients with diabetes and the detection of Hb variants. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.


Las Hayas C.,Hospital Galdakao Usansolo Galdakao | Gonzalez N.,Hospital Galdakao Usansolo Galdakao | Aguirre U.,Hospital Galdakao Usansolo Galdakao | Elizalde B.,Direccion Terrirorial de Gipuzkoa | And 5 more authors.
Health Policy | Year: 2010

Objectives: To determine whether a system originally developed to ascertain the appropriateness of cataract intervention may also be used to prioritize patients on cataract extraction waiting lists. Methods: The IRYSS-appropriateness of indication for cataract surgery tool and the IRYSS-Cataract Priority Score were applied to a sample of 5448 patients consecutively placed on waiting lists for cataract surgery. Clinical data were gathered by ophthalmologists, and patients self-completed the Visual Function Index-14. The general linear model (GLM) was used to assign scores to the categories of the appropriateness and priority criteria. The relationship between both systems was evaluated by correlating scores. To assess the validity of the new appropriateness and priority scores, correlations with visual acuity (VA) and visual function were calculated. Results: The GLM method generated highly similar scores for both appropriateness and prioritization systems. The correlation between scores was very strong (r=0.96). The appropriateness scoring system correlated 0.29 with VA and 0.21 with gain in visual function. The priority system correlated -0.54 with VA and -0.28 with preintervention visual function. Conclusions: The new appropriateness scoring system strongly correlates with the priority scoring system. This easy-to-use appropriateness rating could serve as a tool for simultaneously assessing the appropriateness of cataract surgery and assigning priority. © 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd.


PubMed | Hospital Galdakao Usansolo Galdakao
Type: Journal Article | Journal: Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands) | Year: 2010

To determine whether a system originally developed to ascertain the appropriateness of cataract intervention may also be used to prioritize patients on cataract extraction waiting lists.The IRYSS-appropriateness of indication for cataract surgery tool and the IRYSS-Cataract Priority Score were applied to a sample of 5448 patients consecutively placed on waiting lists for cataract surgery. Clinical data were gathered by ophthalmologists, and patients self-completed the Visual Function Index-14. The general linear model (GLM) was used to assign scores to the categories of the appropriateness and priority criteria. The relationship between both systems was evaluated by correlating scores. To assess the validity of the new appropriateness and priority scores, correlations with visual acuity (VA) and visual function were calculated.The GLM method generated highly similar scores for both appropriateness and prioritization systems. The correlation between scores was very strong (r=0.96). The appropriateness scoring system correlated 0.29 with VA and 0.21 with gain in visual function. The priority system correlated -0.54 with VA and -0.28 with preintervention visual function.The new appropriateness scoring system strongly correlates with the priority scoring system. This easy-to-use appropriateness rating could serve as a tool for simultaneously assessing the appropriateness of cataract surgery and assigning priority.

Loading Hospital Galdakao Usansolo Galdakao collaborators
Loading Hospital Galdakao Usansolo Galdakao collaborators