The Accuracy of Point-of-Care Creatinine Testing in the Emergency Department

Table 3

(a) The changes in risk categories when comparing GFR obtained initially from PoCT to the IMDS central lab. (b) This table is a summary of Table 3(a). The number of patients who had a change in GFR risk stratification when using PoCT i-Stat versus IDMS central lab. Of the 47 significant discrepancies, 80.6% would have underclassified the risk of CIN (80.9%, 99% CI 66.1 to 95.6%).

(a)

PoCT i-Stat	IDMS central lab (control)
	Resulted in high	Resulted in intermediate	Resulted in low	Resulted in negligible
Initially high	30	0	0	0
Initially intermediate	4	8	1	1
Initially low	2	11	3	7
Initially negligible	0	3	18	68

PoCT: point-of-care testing; GFR: glomerular filtration rate; IDMS: isotope dilution mass spectrometry.

(b)

PoCT i-Stat GFR values compared to actual IDMS central lab GFR values
Risk decreased	Risk increased	Risk remained the same
9	38	109

PoCT: point-of-care testing; GFR: glomerular filtration rate; IDMS: isotope dilution mass spectrometry; CIN: contrast-induced nephropathy.