Sandra Leal1, Marisa Soto-Rowen. 1. Association of Clinicians for Underserved, El Rio Health Center, Tucson, Arizona 85745, USA. sandral@elrio.org
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this article was to communicate our experience with point-of-care testing (POCT) using Bayer's A1CNow+ device to test glycated hemoglobin (A1C) in the management of diabetes and to share the observations of our quality control efforts. METHODS: Forty-seven patients' POCT samples were compared with laboratory samples to determine the validity of the POCT sample being drawn. Data collected represent a 10-month time period that were drawn on-site with the following distribution: 36 samples were drawn the same day, 7 samples were drawn 1 day later, 3 samples were drawn within 3 days, and 1 sample was drawn 4 days later. Although all samples were collected on-site, some of the samples were sent to other local branches of nationally recognized laboratories for analysis. RESULTS: The range of A1C results for the POCT group was 5.6 to >13%. The range of A1C results for the laboratory-drawn group was 5 to 12.6%. Twenty-four patients had laboratory results that read lower than the result obtained in the clinic, with an A1C range of 5 to 12.6%, and two patients had laboratory results that read exactly the same as the result obtained in the clinic when using POCT. These two individuals had A1C results of 9.1 and 12.6%. Analysis of data collected determined an r value of 0.918 demonstrating agreement between the POCT samples and the laboratory samples. CONCLUSIONS: POCT with the A1CNow+ is an effective, economical tool for use in a pharmacist-based diabetes clinic that serves a high-risk underserved population. POCT allows the pharmacist the ability to use on-site results to inform patients of their progress, modify their therapy immediately with an immediate face-to-face opportunity to assure understanding, and provide a self-management goal. Copyright 2009 Diabetes Technology Society.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this article was to communicate our experience with point-of-care testing (POCT) using Bayer's A1CNow+ device to test glycated hemoglobin (A1C) in the management of diabetes and to share the observations of our quality control efforts. METHODS: Forty-seven patients' POCT samples were compared with laboratory samples to determine the validity of the POCT sample being drawn. Data collected represent a 10-month time period that were drawn on-site with the following distribution: 36 samples were drawn the same day, 7 samples were drawn 1 day later, 3 samples were drawn within 3 days, and 1 sample was drawn 4 days later. Although all samples were collected on-site, some of the samples were sent to other local branches of nationally recognized laboratories for analysis. RESULTS: The range of A1C results for the POCT group was 5.6 to >13%. The range of A1C results for the laboratory-drawn group was 5 to 12.6%. Twenty-four patients had laboratory results that read lower than the result obtained in the clinic, with an A1C range of 5 to 12.6%, and two patients had laboratory results that read exactly the same as the result obtained in the clinic when using POCT. These two individuals had A1C results of 9.1 and 12.6%. Analysis of data collected determined an r value of 0.918 demonstrating agreement between the POCT samples and the laboratory samples. CONCLUSIONS: POCT with the A1CNow+ is an effective, economical tool for use in a pharmacist-based diabetes clinic that serves a high-risk underserved population. POCT allows the pharmacist the ability to use on-site results to inform patients of their progress, modify their therapy immediately with an immediate face-to-face opportunity to assure understanding, and provide a self-management goal. Copyright 2009 Diabetes Technology Society.
Authors: George Rust; Morna Gailor; Elvan Daniels; Barbara McMillan-Persaud; Harry Strothers; Robert Mayberry Journal: Int J Health Care Qual Assur Date: 2008
Authors: Shiela M Strauss; Mary Rosedale; Michael A Pesce; Caroline Juterbock; Navjot Kaur; Joe DePaola; Deborah Goetz; Mark S Wolff; Dolores Malaspina; Ann Danoff Journal: Point Care Date: 2014-12
Authors: Troels Kristensen; Frans Boch Waldorff; Jørgen Nexøe; Christian Volmar Skovsgaard; Kim Rose Olsen Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Vincent DeGennaro Jr; Stuart Malcolm; Lindsay Crompton; Krishna Vaddiparti; Lazarus K Mramba; Catherine Striley; Linda Cottler; Kellee Taylor; Robert Leverence Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-04-20 Impact factor: 2.692