Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study compares the diagnostic performance (in routine urinalysis) of three URiSCAN devices and three Roche analyzers to manual microscopy and quantitative assays. METHODS: We analyzed eight dipstick tests using three URiSCAN devices. The results were compared to those of the tests performed using three Roche analyzers. The results of leukocyte and erythrocyte screens were compared to those obtained using manual microscopy. Protein, glucose, pH, and specific gravity (SG) assays performed on the URiSCAN devices were compared with the results of corresponding quantitative assays. RESULTS: The rates of agreement within one grade difference were found to be more than 94.3%. When compared with manual microscopy, the Optima provided better diagnostic performance for the detection of leukocytes compared with the Urisys 1100. Compared to the Urisys 2400, the Super plus provided better diagnostic performance with regard to both leukocytes and erythrocytes. There was good correlation between the three URiSCAN devices and each quantitative assay, except for SG detection. CONCLUSION: There were well correlated results between those of the three URiSCAN devices and those obtained using the corresponding Roche analyzers, quantitative assays, and manual microscopy. URiSCAN series devices are therefore suitable for routine urinalysis in clinical laboratories.