Comparison of Blood Gas Analysis between Benchtop and Handheld Device

Phey Liana, Iza Netiasa Haris, Yan Effendi Hasyim


The use of blood gas analysis is to determine the Acid-base status required to treat patients with emergency conditions
such as metabolic disorders and respiratory diseases. Benchtop device is commonly used in hospitals to analyze blood gas;
however, handheld devices are recently more often used in emergency settings due to its quick and simple process. This
study was performed to compare blood gas analysis results between the i-STAT handheld device and the Nova pHox Ultra
benchtop device that were currently being used in the central laboratory. This cross-sectional study was conducted by using
42 arterial blood patients that were measured with i-STAT handheld device dan Nova pHox Ultra benchtop device. The pH,
pCO2, and pO2 parameters were then evaluated. The data were analyzed using Spearman's correlation test, Mann-Whitney
test, and Bland-Altman plots. This study showed a very strong positive correlation for all parameters. Mann-Whitney
comparison test showed that there was no significant difference between the result of the two devices (p-value > 0.05). All
parameters showed that 95% of plots were within the acceptable limit. There was no clinical significance on the mean biases
of blood gas results between both devices. The i-STAT and Nova pHox Ultra devices showed a good agreement for blood
gas measurement. Therefore, both devices can be used interchangeably with minimal effect on clinical decision-making.


Blood gas analysis, benchtop device, handheld device

Full Text:



Sherwood L. Keseimbangan asam basa. In: Fisiologi

th manusia dari sel ke sistem. 8 Ed., Jakarta, EGC, 2013;


Davis MD, Walsh BK, Sittig SE, Restrepo RD. AARC

clinical practice guideline: blood gas analysis and

hemoximetry. Respir Care, 2013; 58(10): 1694–703.

Available from:

4187/respcare.02786 (accessed 11 June, 2019)

Price CP, John A St. Point-of-care instrument. In: Burtis

CA, Bruns DE, editors. Tietz fundamental of clinical

th chemistry and molecular diagnostic. 7 Ed., Missouri,

Elsevier Saunders, 2008; 272–84.

Price C. Medical and economic outcomes of point-ofcare

testing. Clin Chem Lab Med, 2002; 40(3): 246–51.

Available from:

c g i ? T = J S & P A G E = r e f e r e n c e & D = e m e d 5 &

NEWS =N&AN=2002149645 (accessed 22 June, 2019)

The National Committee for Clinical Laboratory

Standards. Method comparison and bias estimation

nd using patient samples: Approved guideline. 2 Ed.,

NCCLS Document EP9-A2. PA: CLSI, 2002; 1-75.

Indrasari ND, Wonohutomo JP, Sukartini N.

Comparison of point-of-care and central laboratory

analyzers for blood gas and lactate measurements. J

Clin Lab Anal, 2019; 1–7.

Luukkonen AAM, Lehto TM, Hedberg PSM, Vaskivuo

TE. Evaluation of a handheld blood gas analyzer for

rapid determination of blood gases, electrolytes, and

metabolites in intensive care setting. Clin Chem Lab

Med, 2016; 54(4): 585–94.

Muller-Plathe O, Ginzbourg J, Rudolph S. Evaluation of

the i-STAT portable blood gas and electrolyte

analyzer. J Lab Med, 1997; 21(6): 325–31.

Gray TE. Determination of agreement between

laboratory instrument. Am Assoc Anim Lab Sci.

;38(2):56–9. Available from: https://www.


mimetype=app lication/pdf (accessed 5 December,

Westgard J. CLIA requirements for analytical quality.

Available from:

clia.htm (accesed 25 December, 2019).

Altman DG, Bland JM. Measurement in medicine: The

analysis of method comparison studies. Stat, 1983;

(3): 307. Available from:

s t a b l e / 2 9 8 7 9 3 7 ? o r i g i n = c r o s s r e f ( a c c e s e d

December, 2019)



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.