Begin main content

Three- versus Five-Part Differential Complete Blood Count Testing for Patients in the Emergency Department: A Review of Comparative Diagnostic Accuracy, Safety, and Evidence-Based Guidelines

Published on: August 9, 2016
Project Number: RC0800-000
Product Line: Rapid Response
Research Type: Other Diagnostics
Report Type: Summary with Critical Appraisal
Result type: Report

Question

  1. What is the comparative diagnostic accuracy of three-part versus five-part differentials complete blood cell count tests for patients presenting to the emergency department?
  2. What is the comparative risk of performing a three-part versus a five-part differentials complete blood cell count test for patients presenting to the emergency department?
  3. What are the evidence-based guidelines regarding the use of three-part differentials CBC tests for patients presenting to emergency departments?

Key Message

The use of Chempaq XBC in the emergency room setting showed good agreement with laboratory-based analyzers results for the granulocyte and the lymphocyte counts but not for the monocytes. This points to the potential risk of misdiagnosis for conditions where monocyte counts may be high (monocytosis) or low (monocytopenia). There are no evidence-based guidelines found regarding the use of three-part differentials CBC tests for patients presenting to emergency departments.

Tags

blood cell count, emergency medical services, emergency medicine, point-of-care systems, trauma, laboratory tests, point of care, 3 part, 3 point, CBC, CBC diff, ER, Emergency Service, Hospital, WBC, complete blood count, diff, differential, emergency, three part, three point, whole blood count