Observation on the application value of serum test and bacterial test in detecting Brucella infection
血清检验和细菌检验在检查布氏菌感染应用价值观察

摘要

目的 对比血清检验和细菌检验在检查布氏菌感染应用价值。方法 选择2023年1月至2025年1月在我院进行检查的600例疑似布氏菌感染患者作为研究对象，对所有患者进行血清检验和细菌检验。以实验室检验结果作为金标准，比较血清检验和细菌检验结果准确率、检验时间。结果 经实验室检验确诊有450例感染布氏菌，150例为非布氏菌感染。血清检验结果显示有430例感染布氏菌，170例为非布氏菌感染，诊断准确率为96.7%；细菌检验结果显示有410例感染布氏菌，190例为非布氏菌感染，诊断准确率为93.3%。虽然血清检验方式诊断结果准确率更高，但是两种检查方式诊断结果准确率差别不大（P＞0.05）；血清检验方式所需时间明显短于细菌检验方式，两种检验方式检验时间差异显著（P＜0.05）。结论 布氏菌感染患者以血清检验准确率更高、检验时间更短。临床上可以依据患者的具体情况选择合适的检验方式。

Abstract

Objective To compare the application value of serum test and bacterial test in detecting Brucella infection.
Methods 600 suspected Brucella infected patients who underwent examinations in our hospital from January 2023 to January 2025 were selected as the research subjects, and serum and bacterial tests were conducted on all patients. Compare the accuracy and testing time of serum and bacterial tests using laboratory test results as the gold standard.
Results After laboratory testing, 450 cases were confirmed to be infected with Brucella, and 150 cases were confirmed to be non Brucella infections. The serum test results showed 430 cases of Brucella infection and 170 cases of non Brucella infection, with a diagnostic accuracy rate of 96.7%; The bacterial test results showed 410 cases of Brucella infection and 190 cases of non Brucella infection, with a diagnostic accuracy rate of 93.3%. Although serum testing has a higher diagnostic accuracy, the difference in diagnostic accuracy between the two testing methods is not significant (P>0.05); The time required for serum testing is significantly shorter than that for bacterial testing, and the difference in testing time between the two testing methods is significant (P<0.05).
Conclusion   Patients with Brucella infection have higher accuracy and shorter testing time in serum testing. In clinical practice, appropriate testing methods can be selected based on the specific situation of the patient.