This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Eigner, U. Articles by Fahr, A.-M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Eigner, U. Articles by Fahr, A.-M.

Analysis of the Comparative Workflow and Performance Characteristics of the VITEK 2 and Phoenix Systems

Department of Microbiology, Laboratory Group Heidelberg, D-69126 Heidelberg, Germany

Received 24 November 2004/ Returned for modification 4 January 2005/ Accepted 2 May 2005

The VITEK 2 (bioMérieux, Marcy L'Ètoile, France) and the Phoenix systems (BD Diagnostic Systems, Sparks, Md.) are automated instruments for rapid organism identification and susceptibility testing. We evaluated the workflow, the time to result, and the performance of identification and susceptibility testing of both instruments. A total of 307 fresh clinical isolates were tested: 141 Enterobacteriaceae, 22 nonfermenters, 93 Staphylococcus spp., and 51 Enterococcus spp. Manipulation time was measured in batches, each with seven isolates, for a total of 39 batches. The mean (± standard deviation [SD]) manipulation time per batch was 20.9 ± 1.8 min for Phoenix and 10.6 ± 1.0 min for VITEK 2 (P < 0.001). Mean (±SD) time to result for all bacterial groups was 727 ± 162 min for Phoenix and 506 ± 120 min for VITEK 2 (P < 0.001). Concerning identification, Phoenix and VITEK 2 yielded the same results for nonfermenters (100%), staphylococci (97%), and enterococci (100%). For 140 Enterobacteriaceae strains evaluated, 135 (96%) were correctly identified by Phoenix and 137 (98%) by VITEK 2 (P = 0.72). The overall category agreement for all isolates was 97.0% for both instruments. The minor error rate, major error rate, and very major error rate for all bacterial isolates tested were 3.0, 0.3, and 0.6 and 2.8, 0.2, and 1.7 for Phoenix and VITEK 2, respectively (P values of 0.76, 0.75, and 0.09). The VITEK 2 system required less manual manipulation time and less time than the Phoenix system to yield results.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Juretschko, S., LaBombardi, V. J., Lerner, S. A., Schreckenberger, P. C., and the Pseudomonas AST Study Group, (2007). Accuracies of {beta}-Lactam Susceptibility Test Results for Pseudomonas aeruginosa with Four Automated Systems (BD Phoenix, MicroScan WalkAway, Vitek, and Vitek 2). J. Clin. Microbiol. 45: 1339-1342 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Menozzi, M. G., Eigner, U., Covan, S., Rossi, S., Somenzi, P., Dettori, G., Chezzi, C., Fahr, A.-M. (2006). Two-Center Collaborative Evaluation of Performance of the BD Phoenix Automated Microbiology System for Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Gram-Negative Bacteria. J. Clin. Microbiol. 44: 4085-4094 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Carroll, K. C., Glanz, B. D., Borek, A. P., Burger, C., Bhally, H. S., Henciak, S., Flayhart, D. (2006). Evaluation of the BD Phoenix Automated Microbiology System for Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Enterobacteriaceae.. J. Clin. Microbiol. 44: 3506-3509 [Abstract] [Full Text]