Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite recent advances in capillary blood collection technologies for implementation in a patient centric healthcare world, a direct comparison of various technologies has yet to be performed. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional comparative study was performed by recruiting healthy subjects (n = 41) to participate in a collection comparison study consisting of four upper arm capillary collection technologies, a traditional fingerstick, and a venous collection. User experience (e.g. pain, preference), collection performance (e.g. sample volume and quality, collection time), and clinical accuracy with respect to venipuncture results were compared across technologies. In addition, healing was assessed by reaching out to subjects at two different time points following collection. RESULTS: User experience and collection performance results varied across the different capillary collection technologies and a single collection technology did not stand out as superior among those investigated. As correlative results were similar across all technologies, selection of a technology may be based on the intended use population and/or other factors. CONCLUSIONS: Although there are still advancements to be made as well as additional studies to further evaluate the analyte equivalency of capillary and venous specimens, these technologies present a promising patient-centric option to provide clinical results and improve patient care.