A Comparative Study of Blood Viscometers of 3 Different Types

Author:

Oh Ju Seok1ORCID,Prabhakaran Prem1,Seo Dong Kil2,Kim Do Yeon3,Lee Woonhyoung4,Ahn Kyung Hyun5

Affiliation:

1. Hannam University

2. Youngjin DNT

3. Seoul National University Bundang Hospital

4. Kosin University College of Medicine

5. Seoul National University College of Engineering

Abstract

Abstract The greater the viscosity of the blood is, the more difficult the flow of theblood becomes, and the incidence of diseases caused by blood circulation disorders increases. Diseases related to increased viscosity are commonly associated with the cardiovascular and cerebrovascular system. [1,2] High blood viscosity is the cause of circulatory system diseases. Studies showing that blood viscosity can be accurately measured and applied in clinical trials to prevent diseases of the circulatory system can be found in the literature. [3] Viscosity data can exhibit variations depending on the viscosity measurement methods, even if the methods are rooted in hydrodynamic principles. Even though it is an approved blood viscometer, the results of blood viscosity often differ depending on the type of viscometer. This has the potential to create confusion within the medical field. Informing whether measurement results differ depending on the viscometer and what the level of error is for each measurement method will help reduce confusion in the medical community. To our knowledge, the degree of difference in viscosity measurement results due to differences in these measurement methods and the cause of the difference have not yet been explored. In this study, three blood viscosity measurement methods registered with the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety of Korea were selected to study the same canine blood. The viscosity measurements were carried out using each device and compared. The parallel plate and scanning capillary methods had similar viscosity values, while the cone plate method had lower viscosity values. The viscosity of blood, as measured by the three viscometers, differed, and more experimental data must be accumulated to evaluate the cause of the difference between these methods. In this paper, we pointed out several causes of inconsistency and suggested some measures for people to avoid this confusion. However, confirming that the test results show systematic differences is expected to help clinicians who diagnose and prescribe patients using blood viscosity results. The results of this comparative study are expected to be the starting point for the establishment of guidelines or standards for blood measurement methods.

Funder

National Research Foundation of Korea

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3