Background and Objectives
To determine the accuracy of fingerstick hemoglobin assessment in blood donors, the performance of a portable hemoglobinometer (HemoCue Hb 201+) was prospectively compared with that of an automated hematology analyzer (Cell-Dyn 4000). Hemoglobin values obtained by the latter were used as the “true” result.
Material and Methods
Capillary fingerstick samples were assayed by HemoCue in 150 donors. Fingerstick samples from two sites, one on each hand, were obtained from a subset of 50 subjects. Concurrent venous samples were tested using both HemoCue and Cell-Dyn devices.
Results
Capillary hemoglobin values (HemoCue) were significantly greater than venous hemoglobin values (HemoCue), which in turn were significantly greater than venous hemoglobin values by Cell-Dyn (mean ± SD: 14.05 ± 1.51, 13.89 ± 1.31, 13.62 ± 1.23, respectively; p<0.01 for all comparisons among groups). Nine donors (6%) passed hemoglobin screening criteria (≥12.5 g/dL) by capillary HemoCue, but were deferred by Cell-Dyn values (false-pass). Five donors (3%) were deferred by capillary sampling, but passed by Cell-Dyn (false-fail). Substantial variability in repeated fingerstick HemoCue results was seen (mean hemoglobin 13.72 vs. 13.70 g/dL, absolute mean difference between paired samples 0.76 g/dL). Hand dominance was not a factor.
Conclusions
Capillary samples assessed via a portable device yielded higher hemoglobin values than venous samples assessed on an automated analyzer. False-pass and false-fail rates were low and acceptable in the donor screening setting, with “true” values not differing by a clinically significant degree from threshold values used to assess acceptability for blood donation.