Evaluation of agreement between a noninvasive method for real-time measurement of critical blood values with a standard point-of-care device.

Abstract

The purpose of this work was to investigate the degree of agreement between two distinct approaches for measuring a set of blood values and to compare comfort levels reported by participants when utilizing these two disparate measurement methods. Radial arterial blood was collected for the comparator analysis using the Abbott i-STAT® POCT device. In contrast, the non-invasive proprietary DBC methodology is used to calculate sodium, potassium, chloride, ionized calcium, total carbon dioxide, pH, bicarbonate, and oxygen saturation using four input parameters (temperature, hemoglobin, pO2, and pCO2). Agreement between the measurement for a set of blood values obtained using i-STAT and DBC methodology was compared using intraclass correlation coefficients, Passing and Bablok regression analyses, and Bland Altman plots. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. A total of 37 participants were included in this study. The mean age of the participants was 42.4 ± 13 years, most were male (65%), predominantly Caucasian/White (75%), and of Hispanic ethnicity (40%). The Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC) analyses indicated agreement levels ranging from poor to moderate between i-STAT and the DBC's algorithm for Hb, pCO2, HCO3, TCO2, and Na, and weak agreement for pO2, HSO2, pH, K, Ca, and Cl. The Passing and Bablok regression analyses demonstrated that values for Hb, pO2, pCO2, TCO2, Cl, and Na obtained from the i-STAT did not differ significantly from that of the DBC's algorithm suggesting good agreement. The values for Hb, K, and Na measured by the DBC algorithm were slightly higher than those obtained by the i-STAT, indicating some systematic differences between these two methods on Bland Altman Plots. The non-invasive DBC methodology was found to be reliable and robust for most of the measured blood values compared to invasive POCT i-STAT device in healthy participants. These findings need further validation in larger samples and among individuals afflicted with various medical conditions.