快速试剂盒法与原子荧光法测定水砷含量结果比较  

Comparison between rapid arsenic detection method and HG-AFS for detection of arsenic in drinking water

作　　者：程晓天[1] 张杰[1] 李军[1] 高建国[1] 桑志平[1] 韩凌凌[1] 

机构地区：[1]山西省地方病防治研究所检验中心,临汾041000

出　　处：《中国地方病防治》2005年第1期36-37,共2页Chinese Journal of Control of Endemic Diseases

摘　　要：目的　比较快速试剂盒法 (速测法 )和原子荧光法 (HG -AFS法 )测定地方性砷中毒病区饮水中砷含量的可靠性和应用价值。方法　用速测法和HG -AFS法测定水样 70 8份 ,对两种方法检测结果进行比较 ,数据处理应用SPSS10 .0forWindows软件进行配对设计的秩和检验。结果　两种方法测得的结果总体差异显著 (u =1.2 72 ,P >0 .0 5 ) ,但速测法结果在 0 .0 1～ 0 .10mg/L之间与HG -AFS法结果差异显著 (u =2 .119,P <0 .0 5 )。结论　HG -AFS法稳定可靠 ,速测法操作简单 ,可以在现场应用。用速测法初步筛选 ,用HG -AFS法对速测法结果为 0 .0 1mg/L以上的样品定量分析 ,即可减少工作量 ,又能保证分析结果的可靠性 ,完全能满足地方性砷中毒工作的需求。Objective To compare the reliability and practical value of rapid arsenic detection method(rapid method)with that of Hydride generation atomic fluorescence spectrometry method(HG-AFS) for detection of arsenic content in drinking water of endemic arsenixm areas.Methods The arsenic content of 708 samples were detected by rapid method and HG-AFS,respectively.Comparing the detection results of the two methods and SPSS10.0 for Windows soft ware was used for analyzing the date.Results As a whole there was no significance difference for the arsenic content between rapid method and HG-AFS(u=1.27,P>0.05).However,there was sifference for the arsenic for the arsenic contents of 0.01 to 0.10 mg/L(u=2.12,P<0.05).Conclusions HG-AFS is stable and then reliable.As rapid method is simple and can be used in scene.Rapid method is initially used to sereening and then HG-AFS is used to detect the samples the samples the arsenic content of which is above 0.01 mg/L.Thus it can diminish the work and ensure the reliablity of the results so that it satisfy the demand of prevention and treatment of the endemic arsenism.

关 键 词：砷 地方性砷中毒 速测法 原子荧光法 

分 类 号：R599.9[医药卫生—内科学]