Effectiveness of the international consensus group criteria for manual peripher

While the manual technique is more effective identifying nuances in cell shapes, it incurs a substantial time and cost burden on laboratory staff. Also, it requires a high degree of technical skill. An International Consensus Group published guidelines to assist laboratories in establishing criteria for action, including result reporting without further review (Barnes et al., 2005). The most common follow up action is microscopic visual review of a peripheral blood film and blood films are made only from those samples meeting criteria for Effectiveness of the International Consensus Group criteria for manual peripheral smear review. Palur K, Arakeri SU. Indian J Pathol Microbiol, 61(3):360-365, 01 Jul 2018 Cited by: 0 articles | PMID: 30004055 The efficiency of the Left Shift flag was 0.86 (sensitivity 0.53 and specificity 0.92). When the combination Left Shift plus neutrophilia was applied, there was a significant increase in the efficiency (0.92), sensitivity (0.83) and specificity (0.92). The work of Barnes et al.,4 which represents the core of the criteria for blood smear review (BSR) recommended by the International Society for Laboratory Hematology (ISLH), emanates from an international consensus among 20 experts in 2002 during a conference in Indian Wells, CA, USA. The microscopic smear review rate was 47.56% and efficiency was 83.14%. Using our laboratory criteria, sensitivity was 98.80%, specificity was 41.40%, positive predictive value of 61.46%, and negative predictive value of 97.34%. The microscopic smear review rate was 78.14% and efficiency 69.30%. This work proposes a cost-sensitive Lasso-penalised additive logistic regression combined with stability selection, adapted to the peculiarities of data and context: class-imbalance, categorisation of continuous predictors, required stability and enhanced interpretability. Expand 1 PDF Save Alert Compared with that of our laboratory criteria, the efficiency of the consensus group criteria was higher (83.63% versus 78.86%, P < .001), the review rate was higher (29.33% versus 22.37%, P < Effectiveness of the International Consensus Group criteria for manual peripheral smear review more by DR Surekha Arakeri Context: The International Consensus Group for Hematology Review (ICGHR) are essentially review criteria designed to reduce the number of manual smear reviews following analysis in automated hematology analyzers (AHAs). Although the guidelines established by the international consensus group for haematology to identify samples where peripheral smear review may be omitted 1 have considerably reduced the workload on the morphology bench, manual smear review remains necessary in a substantial proportion of cases. In the median institution (50th percentile), manual reviews of peripheral smears were performed on 26.7% of specimens. Manual differential count review rates were inversely associated with the magnitude of platelet counts that were required by laboratory policy to trigger smear reviews and with the efficiency of generating CBC reports. All hematology laboratories are encouraged to establish their own locally valid protocols indicating when should they review the smear and when to perform manual differentia