Radiofrequency Interference in the Clinical Laboratory
Abstract
Radiofrequency Interference in the Clinical Laboratory Badizadegan ND, Greenberg S, Lawrence H, Badizadegan K. Radiofrequency Interference in the Clinical Laboratory. Am J Clin Pathol. 2019 Apr 2;151(5):522-528. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/aqy174. Abstract OBJECTIVES: Radiofrequency interference (RFI) is a known medical device safety issue, but there are no documented cases of interference resulting in erroneous laboratory results. METHODS: We investigated unexpected failure of a hematology analyzer resulting in erroneous WBC counts. Hardware failure was initially suspected, but temporal association with increased power output from a nearby antenna prompted investigation for RFI. RESULTS: Power output from an antenna located approximately 4 feet from the analyzer was increased to ensure sufficient signal for emergency communications in the building. Interference from the antenna resulted in aberrant side scatter and abnormal WBC counts. Powering down the antenna returned the instrument to normal working conditions. CONCLUSIONS: We have shown RFI as the root cause of erroneous WBC counts in a hematology analyzer. We propose that RFI should be on the list of potential interfering mechanisms when clinical laboratory instruments generate inconsistent or unreliable results. Open access paper: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
AI evidence extraction
Main findings
An increase in power output from an antenna located ~4 feet from a hematology analyzer was temporally associated with aberrant side scatter and abnormal/erroneous WBC counts. Powering down the antenna returned the instrument to normal working conditions, and the authors conclude radiofrequency interference was the root cause.
Outcomes measured
- hematology analyzer performance
- WBC (white blood cell) count accuracy
- side scatter signal abnormalities
Limitations
- Single instrument/event; generalizability unclear
- No RF frequency or quantitative exposure measurements reported in abstract
- Potential alternative causes not fully described in abstract
Suggested hubs
-
medical-device-interference
(0.9) Reports radiofrequency interference causing erroneous results in a hematology analyzer due to a nearby antenna.
-
occupational-exposure
(0.25) Exposure source is an antenna in a building setting affecting laboratory equipment; relevance is indirect (device interference rather than health outcome).
View raw extracted JSON
{
"study_type": "case_report",
"exposure": {
"band": "RF",
"source": "nearby antenna (emergency communications)",
"frequency_mhz": null,
"sar_wkg": null,
"duration": null
},
"population": null,
"sample_size": null,
"outcomes": [
"hematology analyzer performance",
"WBC (white blood cell) count accuracy",
"side scatter signal abnormalities"
],
"main_findings": "An increase in power output from an antenna located ~4 feet from a hematology analyzer was temporally associated with aberrant side scatter and abnormal/erroneous WBC counts. Powering down the antenna returned the instrument to normal working conditions, and the authors conclude radiofrequency interference was the root cause.",
"effect_direction": "harm",
"limitations": [
"Single instrument/event; generalizability unclear",
"No RF frequency or quantitative exposure measurements reported in abstract",
"Potential alternative causes not fully described in abstract"
],
"evidence_strength": "very_low",
"confidence": 0.7399999999999999911182158029987476766109466552734375,
"peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
"keywords": [
"radiofrequency interference",
"RFI",
"clinical laboratory",
"hematology analyzer",
"white blood cell count",
"medical device safety",
"antenna",
"emergency communications"
],
"suggested_hubs": [
{
"slug": "medical-device-interference",
"weight": 0.90000000000000002220446049250313080847263336181640625,
"reason": "Reports radiofrequency interference causing erroneous results in a hematology analyzer due to a nearby antenna."
},
{
"slug": "occupational-exposure",
"weight": 0.25,
"reason": "Exposure source is an antenna in a building setting affecting laboratory equipment; relevance is indirect (device interference rather than health outcome)."
}
]
}
AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.
Comments
Log in to comment.
No comments yet.