Modernizing a Classic Test: Validation and Clinical Utility of Infrared-Barrier and Near-Infrared Photometry for Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate Determination
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37275/bsm.v9i9.1394Keywords:
Erythrocyte sedimentation rate, Laboratory automation, Method validation, Near-infrared photometry, WestergrenAbstract
Background: The erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is a cornerstone laboratory test for monitoring inflammation. The manual Westergren method, while the established gold standard, is slow and hazardous, prompting a shift towards automation. This study provides a rigorous, head-to-head validation of two mechanistically distinct automated technologies—infrared-barrier photometry (IBP) and near-infrared photometry (NIP)—to assess their analytical performance and operational utility in a tertiary care setting.
Methods: A cross-sectional method comparison study was conducted on 59 outpatient samples at Adam Malik General Hospital, Indonesia. Each sample was analyzed for ESR using the manual Westergren method, the Caretium XC-A30 analyzer (IBP), and the Mindray BC-760 hematology analyzer (NIP). Method agreement was assessed using Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman analysis. Clinical concordance was evaluated using categorized results.
Results: Both automated methods demonstrated excellent agreement with the Westergren reference. Passing-Bablok regression showed no significant proportional or constant bias for either method. The NIP method exhibited a near-perfect regression equation (y = 1.01x - 0.58), while the IBP method also performed well (y = 0.98x + 1.25). Bland-Altman analysis revealed a clinically insignificant mean bias of +0.44 mm/hr for NIP and -4.47 mm/hr for IBP. Clinical concordance was high, with 96.6% of NIP results and 91.5% of IBP results falling within the same clinical category as the Westergren method.
Conclusion: Both automated methods are valid and reliable alternatives to the Westergren method. The NIP technology, in particular, offers a substantial leap in laboratory efficiency by providing results in under two minutes from a standard EDTA sample. Its superior workflow integration and strong analytical performance support its adoption to drastically reduce turnaround times and enhance modern patient care pathways.
Authors
- Ester Maduma Napitupulu1*
- Malayana Rahmita Nasution1
- Ricke Loesnihari1
- 1Department of Clinical Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Sumatera Utara/Adam Malik General Hospital, Medan, Indonesia
Corresponding author Ester Maduma Napitupulu — estermaduma@gmail.com
Article history
- Submitted
- Accepted
- Published
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
As our aim is to disseminate original research article, hence the publishing right is a necessary one. The publishing right is needed in order to reach the agreement between the author and publisher. As the journal is fully open access, the authors will sign an exclusive license agreement.
The authors have the right to:
- Share their article in the same ways permitted to third parties under the relevant user license.
- Retain copyright, patent, trademark and other intellectual property rights including research data.
- Proper attribution and credit for the published work.
For the open access article, the publisher is granted to the following right.
- The non-exclusive right to publish the article and grant right to others.
- For the published article, the publisher applied for the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
