使用血气分析仪和中心实验室化学分析仪测量新生儿静脉血糖的准确性比较

IF 0.2 Q4 PEDIATRICS
W. Janjindamai, Nichanan Tiwawatpakorn, A. Thatrimontrichai, S. Dissaneevate, G. Maneenil, Manapat Phatigomet
{"title":"使用血气分析仪和中心实验室化学分析仪测量新生儿静脉血糖的准确性比较","authors":"W. Janjindamai, Nichanan Tiwawatpakorn, A. Thatrimontrichai, S. Dissaneevate, G. Maneenil, Manapat Phatigomet","doi":"10.4103/jcn.jcn_110_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Hypoglycemia is a serious problem in infants at risk and creates long-term consequences. Therefore, rapid and accurate measurement of blood glucose is of clinical importance. Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the agreement of venous blood glucose measurements from hypoglycemic high-risk neonates, using blood gas analyzer (BGA), compared to central laboratory chemistry analyzer (CL). Methods: A prospective study of all high-risk neonates for hypoglycemia and neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) was enrolled. Point-of-care glucose was performed, and if <40 mg/dL, venous blood would be collected for CL and ABG. For analysis of the agreement of CL and BGA, Bland–Altman (BA) analysis, with multiple observations per individual, including limits of agreement (limits of agreement [LOA] ±1.96 standard deviation [SD]), was used. Results: One hundred and forty-five paired glucose values were analyzed. There were strong correlations between CL and BGA in all glucose measurements and hypoglycemic range (r = 0.81, P < 0.001, and 0.73, P < 0.01, respectively). A weak correlation was demonstrated in hyperglycemic ranges (r = 0.35, P = 0.15). For BA analysis of all glucose measurements and hypoglycemic ranges, LOA (±1.96 SD) of CL and BGA were −9.5 (±46.5) mg/dL and −11.1 (±10.9) mg/dL, respectively. The hyperglycemic range illustrated higher LOA, with LOA (±1.96 SD) of −32.9 (±124) mg/dL. Conclusions: In NICU settings where normoglycemic and hypoglycemic ranges are targeted, venous BGA glucose could be used as a reliable test instead of CL. No similar correlation was found in the hyperglycemic range.","PeriodicalId":45332,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Neonatology","volume":"11 1","pages":"7 - 12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy of neonatal venous blood glucose measurements using blood gas analyzer compared with central laboratory chemistry analyzer\",\"authors\":\"W. Janjindamai, Nichanan Tiwawatpakorn, A. Thatrimontrichai, S. Dissaneevate, G. Maneenil, Manapat Phatigomet\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jcn.jcn_110_21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Hypoglycemia is a serious problem in infants at risk and creates long-term consequences. Therefore, rapid and accurate measurement of blood glucose is of clinical importance. Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the agreement of venous blood glucose measurements from hypoglycemic high-risk neonates, using blood gas analyzer (BGA), compared to central laboratory chemistry analyzer (CL). Methods: A prospective study of all high-risk neonates for hypoglycemia and neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) was enrolled. Point-of-care glucose was performed, and if <40 mg/dL, venous blood would be collected for CL and ABG. For analysis of the agreement of CL and BGA, Bland–Altman (BA) analysis, with multiple observations per individual, including limits of agreement (limits of agreement [LOA] ±1.96 standard deviation [SD]), was used. Results: One hundred and forty-five paired glucose values were analyzed. There were strong correlations between CL and BGA in all glucose measurements and hypoglycemic range (r = 0.81, P < 0.001, and 0.73, P < 0.01, respectively). A weak correlation was demonstrated in hyperglycemic ranges (r = 0.35, P = 0.15). For BA analysis of all glucose measurements and hypoglycemic ranges, LOA (±1.96 SD) of CL and BGA were −9.5 (±46.5) mg/dL and −11.1 (±10.9) mg/dL, respectively. The hyperglycemic range illustrated higher LOA, with LOA (±1.96 SD) of −32.9 (±124) mg/dL. Conclusions: In NICU settings where normoglycemic and hypoglycemic ranges are targeted, venous BGA glucose could be used as a reliable test instead of CL. No similar correlation was found in the hyperglycemic range.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45332,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Neonatology\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"7 - 12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Neonatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jcn.jcn_110_21\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Neonatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jcn.jcn_110_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:低血糖是高危婴儿的一个严重问题,会造成长期后果。因此,快速准确地测量血糖具有重要的临床意义。目的:本研究的目的是评估使用血气分析仪(BGA)与中心实验室化学分析仪(CL)测量低血糖高危新生儿静脉血糖的一致性。方法:对所有低血糖高危新生儿和新生儿重症监护室(NICU)进行前瞻性研究。进行护理点葡萄糖检查,如果<40 mg/dL,则采集CL和ABG的静脉血。为了分析CL和BGA的一致性,使用了Bland–Altman(BA)分析,每个个体有多个观察结果,包括一致性极限(一致性极限[LOA]±1.96标准差[SD])。结果:分析了145对葡萄糖值。CL和BGA在所有血糖测量和低血糖范围中都有很强的相关性(分别为r=0.81,P<0.001和0.73,P<0.01)。在高血糖范围内表现出弱相关性(r=0.35,P=0.15)。对于所有血糖测量和低血糖范围的BA分析,CL和BGA的LOA(±1.96 SD)分别为−9.5(±46.5)mg/dL和−11.1(±10.9)mg/dL。高血糖范围显示LOA较高,LOA(±1.96 SD)为−32.9(±124)mg/dL。结论:在以血糖正常和低血糖范围为目标的新生儿重症监护室环境中,静脉BGA葡萄糖可以代替CL作为可靠的测试。在高血糖范围内没有发现类似的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Accuracy of neonatal venous blood glucose measurements using blood gas analyzer compared with central laboratory chemistry analyzer
Background: Hypoglycemia is a serious problem in infants at risk and creates long-term consequences. Therefore, rapid and accurate measurement of blood glucose is of clinical importance. Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate the agreement of venous blood glucose measurements from hypoglycemic high-risk neonates, using blood gas analyzer (BGA), compared to central laboratory chemistry analyzer (CL). Methods: A prospective study of all high-risk neonates for hypoglycemia and neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) was enrolled. Point-of-care glucose was performed, and if <40 mg/dL, venous blood would be collected for CL and ABG. For analysis of the agreement of CL and BGA, Bland–Altman (BA) analysis, with multiple observations per individual, including limits of agreement (limits of agreement [LOA] ±1.96 standard deviation [SD]), was used. Results: One hundred and forty-five paired glucose values were analyzed. There were strong correlations between CL and BGA in all glucose measurements and hypoglycemic range (r = 0.81, P < 0.001, and 0.73, P < 0.01, respectively). A weak correlation was demonstrated in hyperglycemic ranges (r = 0.35, P = 0.15). For BA analysis of all glucose measurements and hypoglycemic ranges, LOA (±1.96 SD) of CL and BGA were −9.5 (±46.5) mg/dL and −11.1 (±10.9) mg/dL, respectively. The hyperglycemic range illustrated higher LOA, with LOA (±1.96 SD) of −32.9 (±124) mg/dL. Conclusions: In NICU settings where normoglycemic and hypoglycemic ranges are targeted, venous BGA glucose could be used as a reliable test instead of CL. No similar correlation was found in the hyperglycemic range.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The JCN publishes original articles, clinical reviews and research reports which encompass both basic science and clinical research including randomized trials, observational studies and epidemiology.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信