Gram Staining: a Comparison of Two Automated Systems and Manual Staining
Various Gram staining automated systems are available to accelerate and standardize the staining process, but a systematic comparison of different systems is largely lacking. The objective of this study was to evaluate two devices in comparison to manual Gram staining. Clinical samples ( = 500; Uni...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of clinical microbiology 2020-11, Vol.58 (12) |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Various Gram staining automated systems are available to accelerate and standardize the staining process, but a systematic comparison of different systems is largely lacking. The objective of this study was to evaluate two devices in comparison to manual Gram staining. Clinical samples (
= 500; University Hospital Münster, Germany; May to June 2020) were simultaneously Gram stained manually and with two automated Gram stainers (Previ Color Gram, bioMérieux, and ColorAX2, Axonlab). The quality was assessed based on four criteria: (i) homogeneous staining of bacteria/fungi, (ii) uniform staining of the background, (iii) absence of staining artifacts, and (iv) congruency between culture and microscopy. Each criterion was rated with 0 (absence) or 1 (presence) point to calculate a quality score (0 to 4 points). The costs for each staining procedure were calculated based on consumables and hands-on time (applying the average wage of a laboratory technician in the public service for Germany and the United States). The mean (± standard deviation [SD]) quality scores were comparable for manual staining (3.06 ± 0.91) and Previ Color Gram (3.04 ± 0.90;
= 0.6), while significantly lower scores were achieved by ColorAX2 (2.57 ± 1.09;
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 0095-1137 1098-660X |
DOI: | 10.1128/JCM.01914-20 |