This study evaluated and compared the overall equipment effectiveness (OEE), sensitivity, specificity, and efficiency of the high-end hematology analyzers, Yumizen H2500, DxH 800, DxH 900 and XN-9000 (XN-10). A total of 400 anonymized left over's K2 EDTA whole blood samples were analyzed for complete blood count. Of 400 samples, 200 were tested on Yumizen H2500; DxH 800 & DxH 900 while the other 200 were tested on Yumizen H2500 & XN-9000 (XN-10), respectively. The OEE was good and comparable for all the hematology analyzers except DxH 800 showing an average status. The sensitivity (%), specificity (%) and turnaround time (in minutes) for Yumizen H2500, DxH 800, DxH 900 and XN-9000 (XN-10) were 91.67, 61.11 & 103; 66.67, 54.55, & 149; 83.33, 27.27 & 136; 83.33, 28.57 & 122, respectively. Confusion matrix highlights the difficulty for DxH 800 and DxH 900 to discriminate left shift or blasts with large hyper-segmented neutrophils. The flags triggered by Yumizen H2500 were markedly changed to large hyper-segmented neutrophils. Lymphoblast caused more confusion for XN-9000 (XN-10), as it came out to be atypical lymphocytes, or hypersegmented neutrophils. Although comparable in OEE index to other analyzers, the Yumizen H2500 seems to be more reliable in detecting the abnormal cells as it has high sensitivity, specificity and less turnaround time. Thus, analysis adding specificity, sensitivity, and efficiency parameters to the OEE index provides more reliable information of the analyzers.
Keywords: Efficiency; High-end hematology analyzers; Overall equipment effectiveness; Sensitivity; Specificity; Yumizen H2500.
© 2022 The Authors.