Assessing Concordance of Results: A Comparative Study of the Manual and Automated Urinalysis Methods

Introduction. An accurate urine analysis is a good indicator of the status of the renal and genitourinary system. However, limited studies have been done on comparing the diagnostic performance of the fully automated analyser and manual urinalysis especially in Ghana. This study evaluated the concor...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:BioMed research international 2024, Vol.2024, p.6963423-8
Main Authors: Gyamfi, Nicholas Kwame Afriyie, Osei, George Nkrumah, Brenyah, Ruth C., Agyemang, Lawrence Duah, Ampomah, Paulina, Darkwah, Kwame Osei, Toboh, Emmanuel, Ephraim, Richard K D
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Automation
Classification (sedimentation)
Comparative studies
Correlation
Crystals
Density
Epithelial cells
Epithelium
Erythrocytes
Female
Ghana
Gravity
Hospitals
Humans
Kidney diseases
Leukocytes
Male
Medical laboratories
Metabolism
Middle Aged
Physical properties
Sediments
Specific gravity
Teaching hospitals
Urinalysis
Urinalysis - methods
Urine
Urogenital system
Yeast
Yeasts
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Introduction. An accurate urine analysis is a good indicator of the status of the renal and genitourinary system. However, limited studies have been done on comparing the diagnostic performance of the fully automated analyser and manual urinalysis especially in Ghana. This study evaluated the concordance of results of the fully automated urine analyser (Sysmex UN series) and the manual method urinalysis at the Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital in Kumasi, Ghana. Methodology. Sixty-seven (67) freshly voided urine samples were analysed by the automated urine analyser Sysmex UN series and by manual examination at Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital, Ghana. Kappa and Bland-Altman plot analyses were used to evaluate the degree of concordance and correlation of both methods, respectively. Results. Substantial (κ=0.711, p
ISSN:2314-6133
2314-6141
DOI:10.1155/2024/6963423