常规及直接药敏试验在血液细菌检验中的应用对照分析  

Contrast Analysis of Routine and Direct Drug Sensitivity Test in the Detection of Blood Bacteria

作　　者：陈刚[1] 

机构地区：[1]郑州大学第四附属医院检验科,河南郑州450003

出　　处：《中国继续医学教育》2016年第20期28-30,共3页China Continuing Medical Education

摘　　要：目的 分析对比常规及直接药敏试验在血液细菌检验中的应用效果。方法 选择2014年12月-2015年12月我院收治的发热并感染者320例作为标本采集对象,以无菌操作方式采集本组患者的血液标本,30 ml/人,冷储样本,并送至检验科检验。结果 直接药敏与常规药敏试验鉴别革兰阳性球菌与革兰阴性杆菌的符合率分别为98.24%、96.67%。两种方法对革兰阳性菌与革兰阴性的鉴定结果对比,差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。直接药敏试验所需要的操作时间低于常规药敏试验（P〈0.05）。结论 常规及直接药敏试验在血液细菌检验中的应用效果相当,但直接药敏操作时间较短,便于尽早指导患者用药与治疗。Objective To analyze and compare the effect of routine and direct drug sensitivity test in the detection of blood bacteria. Methods From December 2014 to December 2015, our hospital were fever and infection of 320 cases as specimen collection object, collect blood samples of this group of patients by means of aseptic operation, 30 ml in one cases, cold storage sample and sent to laboratory tests. Results The coincidence rate between the direct drug sensitivity and the conventional drug sensitivity test was 98.24% and 96.67% respectively. There was no significant difference between the two methods in the identification of gram positive bacteria and gram negative bacteria （P〉0.05）. The operation time of direct drug sensitivity test was significantly lower than that of routine drug sensitivity test （P〈0.05）. Conclusion Conventional and direct drug sensitivity test in the blood bacterial test results are quite, but the direct drug sensitivity operation time is short, easy to guide patients to use drugs and treatment as soon as possible, suitable for clinical promotion.

关 键 词：常规药敏 直接药敏 血液细菌检验 

分 类 号：R446.1[医药卫生—诊断学]