A comparative study of glycaemic variability using four different Point-of-Care Testing (POCT) devices

P. Dapare
{"title":"A comparative study of glycaemic variability using four different Point-of-Care Testing (POCT) devices","authors":"P. Dapare","doi":"10.51374/annalsmls.2021.1.2.0037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Blood glucose measurement is a way of monitoring changes in glycaemia. Different point-of-care testing (POCT) glucose meters are on the market and hence there is an increase in variability of the results given by these meters. This study sought to measure the glycaemic variability using four different point-of-care glucose meters Methods: Four point of care glucometers namely; Accu-chek performer nano, OneTouch select plus flex, OneTouch Ultra 2 and Easy Check were used test blood samples from a total of 100 patients visiting the collection point of the Tamale Teaching Hospital Laboratory. A chemistry analyzer (Mindray BS 240 fully automated) was used as the reference method. Results: The median (interquartile range), Bland Altman Plot and Regression Equation were used to assess the agreement between the various meters and the reference method. The OneTouch Select plus had the least bias (-0.85) and the the OneTouch Ultra 2 had the highest bias (1.49). The OneTouch select had the best limits of agreement (-2.51 – 0.82) and the OneTouch Ultra 2 had the widest limits of agreement (-1.91 – 4.89) when compared to the reference method. Conclusion: OneTouch Select plus had the best agreement with the reference method and the OneTouch Ultra 2 had the least agreement with the reference method. Blood glucose meters should be used for the monitoring of blood glucose however, it should not be used as a diagnostic tool. Annals of Medical Laboratory Science (2021) 1(2), 1 - 8 Keywords: glucometer, point-of-care, blood glucose, glycaemia","PeriodicalId":160210,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Medical Laboratory Science","volume":"52 13","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Medical Laboratory Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51374/annalsmls.2021.1.2.0037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Blood glucose measurement is a way of monitoring changes in glycaemia. Different point-of-care testing (POCT) glucose meters are on the market and hence there is an increase in variability of the results given by these meters. This study sought to measure the glycaemic variability using four different point-of-care glucose meters Methods: Four point of care glucometers namely; Accu-chek performer nano, OneTouch select plus flex, OneTouch Ultra 2 and Easy Check were used test blood samples from a total of 100 patients visiting the collection point of the Tamale Teaching Hospital Laboratory. A chemistry analyzer (Mindray BS 240 fully automated) was used as the reference method. Results: The median (interquartile range), Bland Altman Plot and Regression Equation were used to assess the agreement between the various meters and the reference method. The OneTouch Select plus had the least bias (-0.85) and the the OneTouch Ultra 2 had the highest bias (1.49). The OneTouch select had the best limits of agreement (-2.51 – 0.82) and the OneTouch Ultra 2 had the widest limits of agreement (-1.91 – 4.89) when compared to the reference method. Conclusion: OneTouch Select plus had the best agreement with the reference method and the OneTouch Ultra 2 had the least agreement with the reference method. Blood glucose meters should be used for the monitoring of blood glucose however, it should not be used as a diagnostic tool. Annals of Medical Laboratory Science (2021) 1(2), 1 - 8 Keywords: glucometer, point-of-care, blood glucose, glycaemia
四种不同的POCT设备对血糖变异性的比较研究
背景:血糖测量是监测血糖变化的一种方法。市场上有不同的即时检测(POCT)血糖仪,因此这些仪给出的结果的可变性增加了。本研究试图使用四种不同的护理点血糖仪来测量血糖变异性。使用accu - Check performer nano、OneTouch select plus flex、OneTouch Ultra 2和Easy Check对访问塔马勒教学医院实验室采集点的总共100名患者的血液样本进行检测。采用迈瑞bs240全自动化学分析仪作为参考方法。结果:采用中位数(四分位间距)、Bland Altman图和回归方程来评估各种计量方法与参考方法的一致性。OneTouch Select plus的偏差最小(-0.85),OneTouch Ultra 2的偏差最大(1.49)。与参考方法相比,OneTouch select具有最佳的一致性限制(-2.51 - 0.82),OneTouch Ultra 2具有最宽的一致性限制(-1.91 - 4.89)。结论:OneTouch Select plus与参考方法的一致性最好,OneTouch Ultra 2与参考方法的一致性最差。血糖仪应用于监测血糖,但不应作为诊断工具。医学检验年鉴(2021)1(2),1 - 8关键词:血糖仪,即时护理,血糖,血糖
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信