论文部分内容阅读
目的探究与分析不同检验方法在丙型肝炎检验中的临床效果。方法 180例肝炎患者,采集其血清标本,分别给予酶联免疫法与胶体金法进行检测,对比两种检验方法的检出阳性率。结果酶联免疫检验法的阳性结果 4例,阳性率为2.22%,胶体金检验法的阳性结果 5例,阳性率为2.78%,组间相比差异无统计学意义(χ2=3.23,P>0.05)。结论酶联免疫法与胶体金法均可用于临床检查丙型肝炎,但相比下胶体金法更具有操作简便、结果直观的优点,可作为首选方法应用于丙型肝炎检验中。
Objective To explore and analyze the clinical effect of different test methods in hepatitis C test. Methods One hundred and eighty patients with hepatitis were collected and their serum samples were collected and tested by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and colloidal gold assay respectively. The positive rates of these two methods were compared. Results The positive results of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay were 4 cases, the positive rate was 2.22%, the positive results of colloidal gold test were 5 cases, the positive rate was 2.78%, there was no significant difference between the two groups (χ2 = 3.23, P> 0.05). Conclusions Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay and colloidal gold assay are both suitable for clinical examination of hepatitis C. However, compared with the colloidal gold assay, this method is more convenient, more intuitive and can be used as the first choice for hepatitis C test.