Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Comparison of blood specimens from plain and gel vacuum blood collection tubes.

Authors: V, Wiwanitkit;

Comparison of blood specimens from plain and gel vacuum blood collection tubes.

Abstract

This study was set in the Division of Laboratory Medicine, Chulalongkorn Hospital. All 2,000 blood specimens were randomly collected using evacuated blood collection by plain or gel vacuum tubes. After collection, each specimen was considered and judged using criteria of specimen rejection to determine how proper the specimen presentations were. All data were reviewed, collected and interpreted. It revealed that there were only 20 (1%) improper specimens and all were improper in quality. There was no significant difference between the ratio of improper specimens in both groups (P > 0.30). From this study, it revealed that efficacy of both types of vacuum tubes was not different. The new gel vacuum tube seems to be an effective tool in the evacuated blood collection system due to its advantage in reduction of time in specimen processing.

Keywords

Blood Specimen Collection, Humans

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    1
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
1
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!