Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 14, 2026

Observational Study Protocol for Repeated Clinical Examination and Critical Care Ultrasonography Within the Simple Intensive Care Studies
Published on: January 16, 2019
Discrepancies Between Point of Care and Central Laboratory Sodium and Potassium Measurements in ICU: Analytical
Nadia Nakhil1,2, Samer Najem1, Rania Driss3
1Service de Réanimation Médico-Chirurgicale, Hôpital NOVO, Site de Pontoise, Pontoise, France.
Objectives:
Blood electrolyte panels, especially sodium ion (Na + ) and potassium ion (K + ), are fundamental and routine tests. In critical care settings, these measurements are typically performed by central laboratories using indirect potentiometry (IP) or via point-of-care blood gas analyzers using direct potentiometry (DP). Discrepancies between the two methods exist, and clinicians often have limited knowledge regarding the strengths and weaknesses of each technique. We wanted to quantify these observations.
Design:
We compared prospectively Na + and K + measurements obtained from the same blood draw using both IP and DP (including analyses of correlation, agreement, and discrepancies). We also conducted a brief survey among physicians to assess their knowledge regarding IP and DP.
Settings:
A tertiary hospital.
Patients:
A total of 501 paired measurements were prospectively collected from an ICU population.
Interventions:
None.
Measurements And Main Results:
We assessed the degree of agreement between the two methods. We also examined the impact of proteinemia and hemolysis on Na + and K + values, respectively. Only 31.1% of the 103 responding physicians were aware of the analytical bias in Na + measurements obtained by IP, and 45.6% considered K + measurements from DP to be as reliable or more reliable than those obtained by IP. The agreement between the two methods was moderate (Lin's concordance correlation coefficient: 0.90 for Na + and 0.93 for K + ). The 95% limit of agreement for Na + was particularly large (10.48 mmol/L). The divergence between the two methods, defined as a discrepancy in classification (within, below, or above the normal range), occurred in approximately 10% of cases, for both Na + and K + .
Conclusions:
IP and DP were not interchangeable, each exhibiting distinct strengths and limitations. Enhancing physician awareness of the differences between these methods could improve the quality of care.
Related Concept Videos
Errors occurring during blood pressure monitoring
Several factors...
Acute Kidney Injury IV: Diagnostic Studies and Prevention
Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS): Interferences
Diagnosing Acidosis and Alkalosis
First, the pH level is assessed to determine whether the blood pH is normal (7.35–7.45), low (acidosis), or high (alkalosis).
Next, the PCO2 and...
Special considerations while measuring blood pressure
Monitoring Both Arms:
Monitoring BP in both arms during the initial assessment is advisable, as the systolic value may differ by five to ten mm Hg between arms. For subsequent BP assessments, use the arm with the higher reading.
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...

