PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

J J Bradna

Publications and source records attributed to J J Bradna.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Identification of Neisseria spp., Haemophilus spp., and other fastidious gram-negative bacteria with the MicroScan Haemophilus-Neisseria identification panel.

The Haemophilus-Neisseria identification (HNID) panel (American MicroScan, Sacramento, Calif.) is a 4-h microdilution format system for identification of Haemophilus and Neisseria spp., Branhamella (Moraxella) catarrhalis, and Gardnerella vaginalis. The HNID panel was evaluated by using 423 clinical isolates and stock strains of these organisms, and HNID identifications were compared with those obtained by conventional methods. In addition, 32 isolates representing six genera not included in the HNID data base were tested to determine whether these organisms would produce unique biotype numbers for possible inclusion in the data base. The HNID panel correctly identified 95.3% of 86 Neisseria gonorrhoeae strains, 96% of 25 G. vaginalis strains, and 100% of 28 Neisseria lactamica strains and 48 B. catarrhalis strains. Only 64.7% of 68 Neisseria meningitidis isolates were identified correctly owing to false-negative or equivocal carbohydrate and/or aminopeptidase reactions. Among the Haemophilus spp., 98.8% of 83 H. influenzae strains, 97.1% of 34 H. parainfluenzae strains, and 80% of 15 H. aphrophilus and H. paraphrophilus strains were correctly identified. Eight strains of Neisseria cinerea, a species not included in the data base, produced profiles identical with those for B. catarrhalis and N. gonorrhoeae. Isolates of other species not included in the data base, including Eikenella corrodens, Kingella spp., and Cardiobacterium hominis, produced unique biochemical reaction patterns on the panel. Modification of interpretative criteria for certain tests, expansion of the data base to include other species, and suggestions for additional confirmatory tests will increase the accuracy and utility of the HNID panel.

Gardnerella vaginalis↗

API QuadFERM+ with rapid DNase for identification of Neisseria spp. and Branhamella catarrhalis.

The QuadFERM+ system (Analytab Products, Plainview, N.Y.), a 2-h carbohydrate degradation method for the identification of Neisseria spp., was evaluated along with a rapid DNase test for confirmation of Branhamella catarrhalis. QuadFERM+ identified 100% of 82 N. gonorrhoeae and 96% of 54 N. meningitidis strains. The two misidentified meningococcal strains were biochemically atypical and were also misidentified by the conventional method. Of 26 N. lactamica strains, 25 (96%) were correctly identified. Of 21 Neisseria spp., 14 (67%) produced carbohydrate reactions in agreement with the conventional procedure, and 7 strains produced detectable acid in the QuadFERM+ from maltose and sucrose but not glucose. All 9 N. cinerea and 30 B. catarrhalis strains were asaccharolytic by QuadFERM+. The rapid DNase test was positive for all B. catarrhalis strains and negative for all other organisms. Two beta-lactamase-positive N. gonorrhoeae strains and 25 (93%) of 27 beta-lactamase-positive B. catarrhalis strains were detected by the 2-h acidometric beta-lactamase test on the strip. QuadFERM+ with rapid DNase is a simple and easily interpretable method for identification of these organisms in the clinical laboratory.

Bacteriological Techniques↗

Uniform admissions system for a medical laboratory sciences program.

A system for selection of medical technology students has been developed that features numerical ranking of applicants according to a uniform point system. Each applicant is quantitatively evaluated on achievement of academic and non-academic criteria identified as predictors of success in the student program and in clinical practice. This admissions system has been statistically evaluated by comparing admissions data for 59 graduates with subsequent measures of success during the program and in their first professional employment. The academic and non-academic predictors used in this system describe separate sets of applicant characteristics and appear to be effective as predictors of success. Academic and non-academic predictors are found to function independently of each other as predictors of success in the academic aspects of the program and in the clinical, non-cognitive aspects of both the student program and subsequent professional practice, respectively.

Educational Measurement↗