Literature DB >> 29783898

A Real-World Setting Study: Which Glucose Meter Could Be the Best for POCT Use? An Easy and Applicable Protocol During the Hospital Routine.

Alessio Mancini1,2, Giampaolo Esposto3, Silvana Manfrini4, Silvia Rilli4, Gessica Tinti4, Giuseppe Carta2, Laura Petrolati2, Matteo Vidali5, Simone Barocci2.   

Abstract

The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the reliability and robustness of six glucose meters for point-of-care testing in our wards using a brand-new protocol. During a 30-days study period a total of 50 diabetes patients were subjected to venous blood sampling and glucose meter blood analysis. The results of six glucose meters were compared with our laboratory reference assay. GlucoMen Plus (Menarini) with the 82% of acceptable results was the most robust glucose meter. Even if the Passing-Bablok analysis demonstrates the presence of constant systematic errors and the Bland-Altman test highlighted a possible overestimation, the surveillance error grid analysis showed that this glucose meter can be used safely. We proved that portable glucose meters are not always reliable in routinely clinical settings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bland-Altman; Passing-Bablok; blood glucose; diabetes; glycemic control; self-monitoring

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29783898      PMCID: PMC6134620          DOI: 10.1177/1932296818774077

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol        ISSN: 1932-2968


  16 in total

1.  Comparison of several point-of-care testing (POCT) glucometers with an established laboratory procedure for the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes using the discordance rate. A new statistical approach.

Authors:  Isabel Püntmann; Werner Wosniok; Rainer Haeckel
Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.694

Review 2.  Review of glucose oxidases and glucose dehydrogenases: a bird's eye view of glucose sensing enzymes.

Authors:  Stefano Ferri; Katsuhiro Kojima; Koji Sode
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2011-09-01

3.  Standards of medical care in diabetes--2011.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 19.112

4.  Studies of arteriovenous differences in blood sugar; effect of hypoglycemia on the rate of extrahepatic glucose assimilation.

Authors:  M SOMOGYI
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  1948-06       Impact factor: 5.157

Review 5.  Factors affecting blood glucose monitoring: sources of errors in measurement.

Authors:  Barry H Ginsberg
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2009-07-01

6.  The surveillance error grid.

Authors:  David C Klonoff; Courtney Lias; Robert Vigersky; William Clarke; Joan Lee Parkes; David B Sacks; M Sue Kirkman; Boris Kovatchev
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2014-06-13

7.  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

8.  Differences between capillary and venous blood glucose during oral glucose tolerance tests.

Authors:  U Larsson-Cohn
Journal:  Scand J Clin Lab Invest       Date:  1976-12       Impact factor: 1.713

9.  Evaluation of point-of-care glucose testing accuracy using locally-smoothed median absolute difference curves.

Authors:  Gerald J Kost; Nam K Tran; Victor J Abad; Richard F Louie
Journal:  Clin Chim Acta       Date:  2007-12-03       Impact factor: 3.786

10.  Comparison of glucometers used in hospitals and in outpatient settings with the laboratory reference method in a tertiary care hospital in Mumbai.

Authors:  Aarti Ullal; Girish M Parmar; Phulrenu H Chauhan
Journal:  Indian J Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2013-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.