2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2005.08.019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Concordance between qualitative and quantitative cultures in burned patients

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These differences in sensitivity among RT-LAMP and RT-qPCR are in agreement with our own observations, as well as with those from other authors. Likewise, if the analysis of the results was limited to those samples with average Cq values below 35, as described in previous studies [9,34,37], only three samples would be classified as ND; thus, with this threshold set, the SP would remain at 99.0%, while the SE would increase up to 90.9%, the AC to 97.0%, the PPV and NPV to 96.8 and 97.1%, respectively, rendering a k of 0.92 that is interpreted as "very good concordance" among the reference and the alternative method [33]. The evaluation of the methodology focused on individuals with an active infection provided better results than those previously reported, where the analysis of a similar group of samples only provided sensitivity results of 72.7%, but it must be kept in mind that the type of clinical samples analyzed was not the same, saliva against nasopharyngeal swabs [35].…”
Section: Clinical Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These differences in sensitivity among RT-LAMP and RT-qPCR are in agreement with our own observations, as well as with those from other authors. Likewise, if the analysis of the results was limited to those samples with average Cq values below 35, as described in previous studies [9,34,37], only three samples would be classified as ND; thus, with this threshold set, the SP would remain at 99.0%, while the SE would increase up to 90.9%, the AC to 97.0%, the PPV and NPV to 96.8 and 97.1%, respectively, rendering a k of 0.92 that is interpreted as "very good concordance" among the reference and the alternative method [33]. The evaluation of the methodology focused on individuals with an active infection provided better results than those previously reported, where the analysis of a similar group of samples only provided sensitivity results of 72.7%, but it must be kept in mind that the type of clinical samples analyzed was not the same, saliva against nasopharyngeal swabs [35].…”
Section: Clinical Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…k: index kappa of concordance. Interpretation of k: 0.4-0.6 "moderate concordance"; 0.61-0.8 "good concordance"; 0.81-1.00 "very good concordance" according to[33].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The superficial swab was chosen to collect samples, in order to identify the commonly isolated microorganisms from the burn wound. This method was simple, inexpensive and less painful [19]. A previous study had shown no significant differences in bacterial counts between full thickness and partial thickness burns, whether by surface swab or by biopsy [20].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies, including work performed in our laboratory and in a clinical setting, have consistently shown that careful quantitative cultures are reproducible, more reliable, and more accurate than the traditional qualitative approaches (Danilla et al, 2005). The superiority of quantitative cultures is related to specimen acquisition and standardization.…”
Section: Clinical Approaches To Samplingmentioning
confidence: 97%