Determinación de glucosa
IF 0.3
Q4 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Peggy Brenda Gygliola-Ormachea, Gabriela Tarquino-Flores, Edgar Chambi-Gutierrez, Kattia Averanga-Conde, Lily Salcedo-Ortiz
{"title":"Determinación de glucosa","authors":"Peggy Brenda Gygliola-Ormachea, Gabriela Tarquino-Flores, Edgar Chambi-Gutierrez, Kattia Averanga-Conde, Lily Salcedo-Ortiz","doi":"10.36610/j.jsars.2020.110100038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"J. Selva Andina Res. Soc. 2020; 11(1):38-48. In The objective of this study was to determine the usefulness of glucometers in relation to the standard laboratory method (MEL) in blood samples: healthy, diabetic, erythrocytic and anemic. The glucometers (GM) evaluated were ACCU CHEK Active in its two procedures (ACCU I and ACCU II), ONE TOUCH Ultra (ONETu) and Easy TRUEread (TRUEf). The ANOVA analysis of variance, p<0.005, was used. Of 54 healthy samples with hematocrit 49±4, ONETu did not show a significant difference with MEL, ACCU I, ACCU II and TRUEf showed significant differences, being TRUEf the one that revealed the greatest difference with over-estimated values in more than 30 mg / dL. Of 60 diabetic samples with hematocrit 48 ± 8, there were no significant differences between GM and MEL, however incongruous results were detected 2 to 3 times overestimated (13%) and 2 to 3 times undervalued (12%) with GM ONETu and TRUEf; ACCU I and ACCU II exposed slight inconsistencies. Of 54 erythrocyte samples with hematocrit 66 ± 6, underestimated values were detected in 20 mg / dL with ONETu and TRUEf (10%), ACCU I (18%); ACCU II reported overestimated values between 15-25 mg / dL (40%) with significant statistical difference. Of 40 anemic samples with hematocrit 29 ± 9, overestimated values were reported, 20% (ONETu), 35% (TRUEf), 45% (ACCU II) and 55% (ACCU I), with a difference greater than 20 mg / dL. The GM evaluated present different degrees of interference by diabetic, anemic and erythrocytic samples, in the case of erythrocytic samples, undervalued values are observed, in anemic samples overvalued values, these data should be considered for a better use of GM. © 2020. Journal of the Selva Andina Research Society. Bolivia. All rights reserved. Historial del artículo. Recibido octubre 2019. Devuelto noviembre 2019. Aceptado diciembre 2019. Disponible en línea, febrero 2020. Editado por: Selva Andina Research Society","PeriodicalId":53763,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Selva Andina Research Society","volume":"11 1","pages":"38-48"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Selva Andina Research Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36610/j.jsars.2020.110100038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
J. Selva Andina Res. Soc. 2020; 11(1):38-48. In The objective of this study was to determine the usefulness of glucometers in relation to the standard laboratory method (MEL) in blood samples: healthy, diabetic, erythrocytic and anemic. The glucometers (GM) evaluated were ACCU CHEK Active in its two procedures (ACCU I and ACCU II), ONE TOUCH Ultra (ONETu) and Easy TRUEread (TRUEf). The ANOVA analysis of variance, p<0.005, was used. Of 54 healthy samples with hematocrit 49±4, ONETu did not show a significant difference with MEL, ACCU I, ACCU II and TRUEf showed significant differences, being TRUEf the one that revealed the greatest difference with over-estimated values in more than 30 mg / dL. Of 60 diabetic samples with hematocrit 48 ± 8, there were no significant differences between GM and MEL, however incongruous results were detected 2 to 3 times overestimated (13%) and 2 to 3 times undervalued (12%) with GM ONETu and TRUEf; ACCU I and ACCU II exposed slight inconsistencies. Of 54 erythrocyte samples with hematocrit 66 ± 6, underestimated values were detected in 20 mg / dL with ONETu and TRUEf (10%), ACCU I (18%); ACCU II reported overestimated values between 15-25 mg / dL (40%) with significant statistical difference. Of 40 anemic samples with hematocrit 29 ± 9, overestimated values were reported, 20% (ONETu), 35% (TRUEf), 45% (ACCU II) and 55% (ACCU I), with a difference greater than 20 mg / dL. The GM evaluated present different degrees of interference by diabetic, anemic and erythrocytic samples, in the case of erythrocytic samples, undervalued values are observed, in anemic samples overvalued values, these data should be considered for a better use of GM. © 2020. Journal of the Selva Andina Research Society. Bolivia. All rights reserved. Historial del artículo. Recibido octubre 2019. Devuelto noviembre 2019. Aceptado diciembre 2019. Disponible en línea, febrero 2020. Editado por: Selva Andina Research Society
葡萄糖测定
J. Selva Andina Res. Soc. 2020;38 - 48。11 (1):本研究的目的是确定血糖仪与标准实验室方法(MEL)在血液样本中的有用性:健康、糖尿病、红细胞和贫血。评估的血糖仪(GM)在其两个程序(ACCU I和ACCU II)中为ACCU check Active, ONE TOUCH Ultra (ONETu)和Easy TRUEread (TRUEf)。采用方差分析,p<0.005。在54例红细胞比容为49±4的健康样本中,ONETu与MEL无显著差异,ACCU I、ACCU II和TRUEf有显著差异,其中TRUEf与30 mg / dL以上的高估值差异最大。在60例红细胞压积为48±8的糖尿病样本中,GM和MEL之间无显著差异,但GM ONETu和TRUEf的结果不一致,分别被高估2 ~ 3倍(13%)和低估2 ~ 3倍(12%);ACCU I和ACCU II显示出轻微的不一致。在54份红细胞比容为66±6的红细胞样本中,ONETu和TRUEf在20 mg / dL时检测到低估值(10%),ACCU I (18%);ACCU II报告的高估值在15 ~ 25 mg / dL之间(40%),差异有统计学意义。在40份红细胞比容为29±9的贫血样本中,报告的高估值为20% (ONETu), 35% (TRUEf), 45% (ACCU II)和55% (ACCU I),差异大于20 mg / dL。所评估的转基因对糖尿病、贫血和红细胞样本存在不同程度的干扰,在红细胞样本中观察到低估值,在贫血样本中观察到高估值,这些数据应被考虑以更好地使用转基因。©2020。塞尔瓦·安迪纳研究学会杂志。玻利维亚。版权所有。历史del artículo。2019年10月。Devuelto 2019年11月。接受2019年。一次性材料línea, 2020年2月。Editado poror: Selva Andina研究协会
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。