Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Refractometry”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5Linked to original sources
PubMed1989

Comparison of urine specific gravity values from total-solids refractometry and reagent strip method.

The comparison of specific gravity values of 561 urine samples from TS meter and reagent strip was made. The data were divided into two groups: group 1-less than 2+ protein contained urine samples and group 2--equal or more than 2+ protein contained urine samples. The results revealed that the specific gravity values from both methods in both groups were statistically different (p less than 0.01) but they were correlated at r = 0.84 (p less than 0.001) and r = 0.73 (p less than 0.001) in group 1 and group 2, respectively. It was concluded that the reagent strip is suitable for use as a screening test but it should not be considered when precise measurement is necessary.

Humans↗
PubMed1987

[Determination of urine density: comparison of refractometry and measurement of the period of oscillation using the protocols of the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards].

Two methods for the determination of urine density (relative density or specific mass) have been evaluated and compared using NCCLS protocols: the refractometric method and a new method based on the measure of shifts in harmonic oscillation (SHO). Within the range investigated (from 1,000 up to 1,034) the methods were linear. Total imprecision, including the carry-over, was the same for both: the 95% confidence limits, at the level of 1,003, 1,013 and 1,030, were 1,001-1,005, 1,011-1,015 and 1,028-1,032 respectively. In analysing urines having known density, the SHO method was always accurate, while the refractometric method was affected by a significant bias at protein and haemoglobin concentrations greater than 4 and 2 g/L respectively. A direct comparison of the results obtained by the two methods was made on 300 untimed specimens of urine with density ranging from 1,002 to 1,034; the equation of regression line (refractometric method on the x axis, SHO on the y axis), calculated with a non-parametric statistical method, was SHO = refractometric method + 0,001. Despite some urine specimens (24, i.e. 8%) showed density differences (absolute value) of more than 0,003 (between 0,004 and 0,007 relative density units), the good mean agreement observed allows to conclude that both methods give clinically useful analytical results.

Densitometry↗