Literature DB >> 15735263

Capillary versus venous bedside blood glucose estimations.

R Boyd1, B Leigh, P Stuart.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the mean difference and correlation between capillary and venous bedside glucose estimation in comparison to laboratory blood glucose analysis in emergency department (ED) patients.
METHODS: Blood glucose levels were synchronously analysed using a bedside blood glucometer on capillary and venous derived samples from consenting ED patients aged >12 years. The venous sample was sent for comparative testing using a laboratory based multichannel analyser. Mean difference and correlation coefficients were determined.
RESULTS: A total of 20 subjects (aged 13-88 years) were enrolled, with 100% data capture. The mean laboratory glucose was 7.075 mmol/l. The mean capillary blood glucose was 7.66 mmol/l (mean difference compared with mean laboratory glucose 0.58 mmol/l; 95% confidence interval 0.3 to 0.9). The mean venous derived blood glucometer glucose was 7.99 mmol/l (mean difference compared with mean laboratory glucose 0.91 mmol/l; 95% CI 0.6 to 1.2). The correlation coefficient for the laboratory blood glucose versus the capillary blood glucometer glucose was 0.97 mmol/l (p<0.001). The correlation coefficient for the laboratory blood glucose and the venous blood glucometer glucose was 0.96 (p<0.001). Variation occurred between the glucometer and the laboratory blood glucose results.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a small but significant difference in the blood glucose results analysed on a bedside glucometer when the samples are taken from capillary or venous sources. Although good correlation is the norm between venous and capillary derived samples, caution must be exercised in accepting the results as equivalent or using either as substitutes for a laboratory blood glucose result.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15735263      PMCID: PMC1726696          DOI: 10.1136/emj.2003.011619

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Med J        ISSN: 1472-0205            Impact factor:   2.740


  7 in total

1.  Comparison of capillary and venous glucose measurements in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  D L Funk; L Chan; N Lutz; V P Verdile
Journal:  Prehosp Emerg Care       Date:  2001 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 3.077

2.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Accuracy of fingerstick glucose values in shock patients.

Authors:  H F Sylvain; M E Pokorny; S M English; N H Benson; T W Whitley; C J Ferenczy; J G Harrison
Journal:  Am J Crit Care       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 2.228

Review 4.  50% dextrose: antidote or toxin?

Authors:  R G Browning; D W Olson; H A Stueven; J R Mateer
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 5.721

5.  Fingerstick glucose determination in shock.

Authors:  S H Atkin; A Dasmahapatra; M A Jaker; M I Chorost; S Reddy
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1991-06-15       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Spurious hyperglycaemia--a hazard of finger prick blood glucose estimation.

Authors:  E McInnes; H Cohen
Journal:  Arch Emerg Med       Date:  1984-06

7.  Accuracy of fingerstick glucose determination in patients receiving CPR.

Authors:  S H Thomas; J E Gough; N Benson; P E Austin; C K Stone
Journal:  South Med J       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 0.954

  7 in total
  27 in total

Review 1.  Glycemic control in the burn intensive care unit: focus on the role of anemia in glucose measurement.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Mann; Alejandra G Mora; Heather F Pidcoke; Steven E Wolf; Charles E Wade
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2009-11-01

2.  Glycemic control and the outcomes of Hispanic patients with diabetes admitted to the general ward of a community hospital in Puerto Rico.

Authors:  Nancy Torres-Torres; Miguel A Maldonado-Rodríguez; Shirley Pérez-López; Kassandra Sierra-Martínez; Astrid J García
Journal:  P R Health Sci J       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 0.705

3.  Accuracy of Human and Veterinary Point-of-Care Glucometers for Use in Rhesus Macaques (Macaca mulatta), Sooty Mangabeys (Cercocebus atys), and Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes).

Authors:  Elizabeth A Clemmons; Melissa I Stovall; Devon C Owens; Jessica A Scott; Amelia C Jones-Wilkes; Doty J Kempf; Kelly F Ethun
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 1.232

Review 4.  Before you analyze a human specimen, think quality, variability, and bias.

Authors:  Mark David Lim; Anthony Dickherber; Carolyn C Compton
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  2010-11-29       Impact factor: 6.986

5.  Performance of an Optimized Paper-Based Test for Rapid Visual Measurement of Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) in Fingerstick and Venipuncture Samples.

Authors:  Sidhartha Jain; Radha Rajasingham; Farzad Noubary; Erin Coonahan; Ryan Schoeplein; Rachel Baden; Michael Curry; Nezam Afdhal; Shailendra Kumar; Nira R Pollock
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-05-28       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  The Acute Metabolic and Vascular Impact of Interrupting Prolonged Sitting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Travis J Saunders; Hayden F Atkinson; Jamie Burr; Brittany MacEwen; C Murray Skeaff; Meredith C Peddie
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 11.136

7.  Comparison of Point of Care (POC) Testing of Glucose by B Braun Glucometer and Hemocue Glucose 201+ Analyser Versus Centralised Testing in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU).

Authors:  Sudha Reddy V R; Sumathi M E; Beere Gowda Y C; Mohamed Suhail S
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2014-07-20

8.  Accuracy of the StatStrip versus SureStep Flexx glucose meter in neonates at risk of hypoglycemia.

Authors:  Ratchada Kitsommart; Sopapan Ngerncham; Pimol Wongsiridej; Tharatip Kolatat; Kriang-Sak Jirapaet; Bosco Paes
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2013-05-05       Impact factor: 3.183

9.  Analytical Performance Evaluation of Infopia Element™ Auto-coding Blood Glucose Monitoring System for Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose.

Authors:  Hae-Il Park; Seong-Su Lee; Jang-Won Son; Hee-Sun Kwon; Sung Rae Kim; Hyojin Chae; Myungshin Kim; Yonggoo Kim; Soonjib Yoo
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2016-04-13       Impact factor: 2.352

10.  Is serum zinc level associated with prediabetes and diabetes?: a cross-sectional study from Bangladesh.

Authors:  Md Rafiqul Islam; Iqbal Arslan; John Attia; Mark McEvoy; Patrick McElduff; Ariful Basher; Waliur Rahman; Roseanne Peel; Ayesha Akhter; Shahnaz Akter; Khanrin P Vashum; Abul Hasnat Milton
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-17       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.