See the published version of this preprint at BMC Research Notes.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research note
Uday Sharma
Universal College of Medical Sciences
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8651-777X
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Objectives: The study was carried out with the aim to find out the frequency of Glucose 6 phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency among the patients attending the hospital and to rationalize the qualitative methemoglobin reduction test in reference to the quantitative spectrophotometric assay. Timely screening of the patients for G6PD with appropriate screening method can play an important role in preventing hemolytic crisis that arises from therapeutic use of oxidative drugs like primaquine.
Result: The frequency of G6PD deficient cases was 3% by both of the employed tests. The mean ± SD of G6PD activity in the patients under study was 15.34 ± 4.7 IU/g Hb in males and 16.01 ± 3.74 IU/g Hb in females. G6PD activity was positively associated with reticulocyte count (r = 0.289, p-value = 0.004) and negatively with mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (r = -0.220, p-value = 0.028). The correlation of red blood corpuscular count and G6PD was statistically significant (p-value = 0.048).
Keywords
Glucose 6 phosphate dehydrogenase, hemolytic disorders, methemoglobin reduction test, spectrophotometric assay.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Research Notes.
Version 2
Posted 26 May, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 16 Jun, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 10 Jun, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 05 Jun, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 02 Jun, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 02 Jun, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 01 Jun, 2020
Editor assigned
On 16 May, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 15 May, 2020
Editor invited
On 15 May, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 24 Apr, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 22 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 19 Apr, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 19 Apr, 2020
Editor assigned
On 14 Apr, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 14 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 14 Apr, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 13 Apr, 2020
Editor invited
On 13 Apr, 2020
First submitted
On 10 Apr, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Learn more about our company.
See the published version of this preprint at BMC Research Notes.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research note
Uday Sharma
Universal College of Medical Sciences
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8651-777X
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Published
View the published article at BMC Research Notes.
Version 2
Posted 26 May, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Accept
On 16 Jun, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 10 Jun, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 05 Jun, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 02 Jun, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 02 Jun, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 01 Jun, 2020
Editor assigned
On 16 May, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 15 May, 2020
Editor invited
On 15 May, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 24 Apr, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 22 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 19 Apr, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 19 Apr, 2020
Editor assigned
On 14 Apr, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 14 Apr, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 14 Apr, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 13 Apr, 2020
Editor invited
On 13 Apr, 2020
First submitted
On 10 Apr, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
View the published article at BMC Research Notes.
Objectives: The study was carried out with the aim to find out the frequency of Glucose 6 phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency among the patients attending the hospital and to rationalize the qualitative methemoglobin reduction test in reference to the quantitative spectrophotometric assay. Timely screening of the patients for G6PD with appropriate screening method can play an important role in preventing hemolytic crisis that arises from therapeutic use of oxidative drugs like primaquine.
Result: The frequency of G6PD deficient cases was 3% by both of the employed tests. The mean ± SD of G6PD activity in the patients under study was 15.34 ± 4.7 IU/g Hb in males and 16.01 ± 3.74 IU/g Hb in females. G6PD activity was positively associated with reticulocyte count (r = 0.289, p-value = 0.004) and negatively with mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (r = -0.220, p-value = 0.028). The correlation of red blood corpuscular count and G6PD was statistically significant (p-value = 0.048).
Loading...