ArticleCureus2025
Reliability of Point-of-Care Venous Blood Gas Testing for Potassium and Sodium Compared to Central Laboratory Results in Emergency Patients: A Clinical Audit.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cryoprotective strategies for frozen erythrocytes in POCT whole blood reference materials progress and challenges.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Review
- Comparison of sodium and potassium measurements in the emergency department by point-of-care vs. central laboratory testing : A retrospective analysis.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Point-of-care testing (POCT) is widely employed in emergency departments (EDs) for rapid clinical decision-making. However, the reliability of POCT for assessing critical electrolytes like potassium (K⁺) and sodium (Na⁺), compared to central laboratory methods, remains under scrutiny. Objective This quality improvement (QI) study aimed to evaluate and improve the reliability of POC venous blood gas (VBG) testing for K⁺ and Na⁺ by comparing results with central laboratory values. Structured within a Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle, the objectives included quantifying the analytical concordance using Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman methods, identifying systematic bias or clinical outliers, and assessing turnaround time (TAT) to inform iterative improvements in POCT protocol integration within the ED. Methods A retrospective audit was conducted on 120 patients (N = 120, 100%) at Fakeeh University Hospital, Dubai, from March to May 2023. Paired K⁺ and Na⁺ values from POCT VBG analyzers and laboratory reports were compared. Statistical analysis included scatter plots, Pearson correlation, and Bland-Altman agreement. Results Of the 120 patients, 65 (54.2%) were male and 55 (45.8%) were female, with a mean age of 47.3 years (SD = 16.1). Chief presentations included chest pain (N = 38, 31.7%), dyspnea (N = 32, 26.7%), vomiting (N = 23, 19.2%), and signs of dehydration (N = 27, 22.5%). POCT K⁺ and Na⁺ values showed strong correlation with laboratory values (r = 0.91 and r = 0.88, respectively). The mean bias for K⁺ was +0.12 mmol/L, and for Na⁺ it was -1.2 mmol/L. TAT was significantly shorter for POCT (mean = 2.4 minutes) versus laboratory results (mean = 12.3 minutes), with a median delay of 10 minutes. Conclusion POCT demonstrated high reliability for K⁺ and Na⁺ evaluation in EDs. However, caution is advised when interpreting extreme values, especially hyperkalemia (> 5.5 mmol/L). Central laboratory confirmation should be considered in borderline or critical cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.