Comparison of three hematocrit measurement methods in the southern white rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum simum)

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Steyrer, Christof
dc.contributor.author Pohlin, Friederike
dc.contributor.author Meyer, Leith Carl Rodney
dc.contributor.author Buss, Peter
dc.contributor.author Hooijberg, Emma Henriette
dc.date.accessioned 2022-12-06T12:10:40Z
dc.date.available 2022-12-06T12:10:40Z
dc.date.issued 2022-06
dc.description.abstract BACKGROUND: Hematocrit (HCT) determination is an integral part of health and disease assessments in captive and wild white rhinoceroses. Several affordable automated hematology analyzers have been developed for in-clinic and field use and have the advantage of being able to measure a large number of additional measurands. However, the accuracy of these analyzers for rhinoceros HCT measurements has not yet been investigated. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the HCT results generated by the EPOC portable analyzer system and the Abaxis VetScan HM5 with the gold standard of a manual packed cell volume (PCV) measured using the microhematocrit method. METHODS: Hematocrits were measured with the EPOC and the Abaxis VetScan HM5 (bovine setting) and compared with the PCVs of 69 white rhinoceros whole blood samples. Results were compared using Bland–Altman difference plots and PassingBablok regression analysis. A total allowable analytical error of 10% was set as the performance goal. RESULTS: A significant positive bias, with a mean of 7.7% for the EPOC and 17.9% for the Abaxis, was found compared with the manual PCV method. CONCLUSIONS: The allowable error goal of 10% was not exceeded with the EPOC analyzer. Although not analytically equivalent to the gold standard, the EPOC results could therefore be used as approximations in critical situations where manual measurements cannot be performed. The Abaxis exceeded this allowable error and overestimated HCTs in rhinoceroses. Therefore, method-specific reference intervals should be used. en_US
dc.description.department Centre for Veterinary Wildlife Studies en_US
dc.description.department Companion Animal Clinical Studies en_US
dc.description.department Paraclinical Sciences en_US
dc.description.librarian dm2022 en_US
dc.description.sponsorship International Rhino Foundation; Veterinary Wildlife Services, Kruger National Park; Zebra Foundation for Veterinary Zoological Education; South African National Parks; University of Pretoria en_US
dc.description.uri http://www.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/vcp en_US
dc.identifier.citation Steyrer, C., Miller, M., Hewlett, J., Buss, P. & Hooijberg, E.H. Comparison of three hematocrit measurement methods in the southern white rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum simum). Veterinary Clinical Pathology 2022;51:225– 230. doi: 10.1111/vcp.13076. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 1939-165X (online)
dc.identifier.issn 0275-6382 (print)
dc.identifier.other 10.1111/vcp.13076
dc.identifier.uri https://repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/88658
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Wiley en_US
dc.rights © 2022 The Authors. Veterinary Clinical Pathology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Veterinary Clinical Pathology. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License. en_US
dc.subject Abaxis HM5 en_US
dc.subject EPOC en_US
dc.subject Method comparison en_US
dc.subject Packed cell volume en_US
dc.subject Point-of-care en_US
dc.subject White rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum) en_US
dc.subject Hematocrit (HCT) en_US
dc.title Comparison of three hematocrit measurement methods in the southern white rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum simum) en_US
dc.type Article en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record