Evaluation of aPTT and PT Results: A Comparison Between Point-of-Care Testing and Optical Fully Automatic Methods
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37287/ijghr.v8i1.378Keywords:
aPTT, optical fully automatic, point-of-care testing, PTAbstract
A coagulometer is a tool used to check coagulation parameters, such as prothrombin time (PT) and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), for which there are currently various detection methods. Examining PT and aPTT coagulation function requires a fast turnaround time and immediate results because the stability of coagulation factors is less than four hours, so a fast and precise examination is needed. Point-of-care testing (POCT) is a good alternative. This study aimed to determine the difference in aPTT and PT values between POCT and optical fully automatic. This comparison will be useful when selecting coagulometer devices. Methods: This study used a cross-sectional study with a non-probabilistic sample of 100 citrate samples. Each sample was tested for aPTT and PT using POCT and optical fully automatic testing. The results of each examination were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney, Bland-Altman Plot, and correlation statistical tests. In this study, precision tests were also carried out on both methods. methods. There was a significant difference (p < 0.001) in the comparative test results for the aPTT and PT values obtained using the POCT method compared to the optical fully automatic method. The average difference between the two methods was 6.6 seconds for the aPTT parameter and 4.98 for the PT parameter. Fourteen samples were found to have different interpretation values for the aPTT parameter, and 28 samples for the PT parameter. There is a significant difference between the POCT method and the optical fully automatic method. The precision test on the POCT method produced good results.
References
Arachchillage, D. R. J., Vipond, L., & Laffan, M. (2019). Limitations on point-of-care APTT for monitoring of unfractionated heparin in intensive care patients. Thrombosis research, 181, 124–126. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2019.07.029.
Bachler, M., Niederwanger, C., Hell, T., Höfer, J., Gerstmeyr, D., Schenk, B., Treml, B., & Fries, D. (2019). Influence of factor XII deficiency on activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) in critically ill patients. Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 48(3), 466–474. doi: 10.1007/s11239-019-01879-w
Baker, W. S., Albright, K. J., Berman, M., Spratt, H., Mann, P. A., Unabia, J., & Petersen, J. R. (2017). POCT PT INR - Is it adequate for patient care? A comparison of the Roche Coaguchek XS vs. Stago Star vs. Siemens BCS in patients routinely seen in an anticoagulation clinic. Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry, 472, 139–145. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2017.07.027
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. (2023). H47-A3: One-Stage Prothrombin Time (PT) Test and Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT) Test (3rd ed.). Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute.
Ebner, M., Birschmann, I., Peter, A., Spencer, C., Härtig, F., Kuhn, J., Blumenstock, G., Zuern, C. S., Ziemann, U., & Poli, S. (2017). Point-of-care testing for emergency assessment of coagulation in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants. Critical care (London, England), 21(1), 32. doi: 10.1186/s13054-017-1619-z.
Gong, J., Zhang, Y., Zhang, H., Li, Q., Ren, G., Lu, W., & Wang, J. (2022). Evaluation of blood coagulation by optical vortex tracking. Sensors, 22(13), 4793. doi: 10.3390/s22134793.
Hernaningsih, Yetti & Butarbutar, Trieva. (2019). The Effects of Plasma Prothrombin Time and Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time Based on Different Instruments and Methods. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH. 13. 10.7860/JCDR/2019/37999.13172.
Hörber, S., Lehmann, R., & Peter, A. (2019). Evaluation of the Atellica COAG 360 coagulation analyzer in a central laboratory of a maximum care hospital. International Journal of Laboratory Hematology, 42(1), 28–36. doi: 10.1111/ijlh.13119
Karigowda, L., Deshpande, K., Jones, S., & Miller, J. (2019). The accuracy of a point-of-care measurement of activated partial thromboplastin time in intensive care patients. Pathology, 51(6), 628–633. doi: 10.1016/j.pathol.2019.05.002
Kim, Y. S., Choi, J. W., Song, S. H., Hwang, H. Y., Sohn, S. H., Kim, J. S., Kang, Y., Gu, J. Y., Kim, K. H., & Kim, H. K. (2023). Comparison of the International Normalized Ratio Between a Point-of-Care Test and a Conventional Laboratory Test: the Latter Performs Better in Assessing Warfarin-induced Changes in Coagulation Factors. Annals of laboratory medicine, 43(4), 337–344. doi: 10.3343/alm.2023.43.4.337.
Louka, M., & Kaliviotis, E. (2021). Development of an optical method for the evaluation of whole blood coagulation. Biosensors, 11(4), 113. doi: 10.3390/bios11040113.
Mohammadi Aria, M., Erten, A., & Yalcin, O. (2019). Technology Advancements in Blood Coagulation Measurements for Point-of-Care Diagnostic Testing. Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 7, 395. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00395
Nam, M., Hur, M., Kim, H., Yoon, S., Lee, S., Shin, S., Moon, H., & Yun, Y. (2021). Performance evaluation of Coaguchek Pro II in comparison with Coaguchek XS plus and Sta-R Max using a Sta-R Neoplastine CI plus. International Journal of Laboratory Hematology, 43(5), 1191–1197. doi: 10.1111/ijlh.13466
Niederdöckl, J., Dempfle, C., Schönherr, H., Bartsch, A., Miles, G., Laggner, A., & Pathil, A. (2016). Point‐of‐care PT and aPTT in patients with suspected deficiencies of coagulation factors. International Journal of Laboratory Hematology, 38(4), 426–434. doi: 10.1111/ijlh.12519
Pagana, K. D., Pagana, T. J., & Pagana, T. N. (2019). Mosby's diagnostic and laboratory test reference (14th ed.). Elsevier
Şahingöz GE, Işıksaçan N, Koşer M. (2021). Comparison of Point of Point-of-Care INR Testing to the Routine Coagulometric Method. Türk Klinik Biyokimya Derg. 145-152. https://tkb.dergisi.org/pdf/pdf_TKB_398.pdf
Surman, Tim & Tran, M & Worthington, M. (2018). The Use of Point-of-Care Testing for Monitoring of APTT in Patients Receiving Heparin Infusion. International Journal of Surgery and Research (IJSR). 5. 10.19070/2379-156X-1800022.
Thabet, A., Al-Shatti, D., & Elrahwan, M. (2021). Reliability of CoaguChek Pro II point-of-care system in the outpatient setting in Farwaniya Hospital, Kuwait. American Journal of Laboratory Medicine, 6(3), 31. doi: 10.11648/j.ajlm.20210603.11.
Tshikudi, D. M., Tripathi, M. M., Hajjarian, Z., Van Cott, E. M., & Nadkarni, S. K. (2017). Optical sensing of anticoagulation status: Towards point-of-care coagulation testing. PLoS ONE, 12(8), e0182491. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0182491.
Yunensie, P. A. (2021). Discrepancy Inr Value (International Normalized Ratio) In the Optical And Electromechanical Method. Journal of Vocational Health Studies, 5(1), 12. doi: 10.20473/jvhs.v5.i1.2021.12-16.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Indonesian Journal of Global Health Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
