Accuracy and Reproducibility of BiliCare™ Transcutaneous Bilirubin Device.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the analytical performance of a new transcutaneous bilirubin (TcB) device - BiliCareTM (Gerium Medical, Yavne, Israel). METHODS: The neonatal TcB measurements were compared between BiliCareTM and the existing BiliChekTM systems (n = 40). TcB measured by BiliCareTM were also compared with total serum bilirubin (TSB) using a Roche Cobas702 chemistry analyzer (n = 31) and whole blood bilirubin using a Radiometer ABL 835 (n = 11). Reproducibility was assessed by repeating TcB measurements with 2 BiliCareTM devices on a normal neonate, two with borderline jaundice, and one with overt jaundice 10 to 20 times respectively within 30 minutes. RESULTS: Compared with BiliChekTM, BiliCareTM demonstrated an average bias of -35.9 µmol/L (-20.6%) (Bili-CareTM = 0.6724 BiliChekTM +20.984, r = 0.8414). BiliCareTM had a better agreement with Cobas702 (BiliCareTM = 0.8356 Cobas702 +31.884, r = 0.8576, average bias 8.0 µmol/L (5.3%)). Similarly, BiliCareTM had a -12.7 µmol/L (-7.2%) average bias compared with ABL835 (BiliCareTM = 0.6166 ABL835 +54.464, r = 0.8287). At TcB 94.5, 155.2, 182.7, and 269.3 µmol/l levels, BiliCareTM had demonstrated imprecision as 8.9%, 9.8%, 5.4%, and 6.9% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The new BiliCareTM correlates with total serum bilirubin as measured on laboratory chemistry analyzer Cobas702 and is acceptable for neonatal transcutaneous bilirubin testing.

Prevalence and reporting of near-point binocular convergence and acuity vision deficits in potential research participants.

Visual abilities at near-point distances of 200 self-reported normal vision college students were assessed. Results show that normal visual functioning with no deficits is the exception. The most common visual deficits observed involved binocular lateral posture and fusion convergence deficits. Binocular and monocular acuity deficits also had high prevalence rates, although not as prevalent as the binocular convergence deficits. In addition, 1,340 articles published in four major journals from the years 1997-2004 were examined to ascertain the extent to which authors report the visual capabilities of their participants. Reporting of research participant visual abilities by authors using visual stimuli in experiments appears to be lacking. The results are discussed in terms of the potential impact that visual deficits may have on results obtained in experiments in which visual stimuli are used and the importance of reporting the visual assessment tests and procedures used to assess the visual abilities of potential participants.