Validation of Point-of-Care Glucose Testing for Diagnosis of Type 2 Diabetes

Marijana Vučić Lovrenčić, Vanja Radišić Biljak, Sandra Božičević, Edita Pape-Medvidović, Spomenka Ljubić, Marijana Vučić Lovrenčić, Vanja Radišić Biljak, Sandra Božičević, Edita Pape-Medvidović, Spomenka Ljubić

Abstract

Point-of-care (POC) glucose technology is currently considered to be insufficiently accurate for the diagnosis of diabetes. The objective of this study was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of an innovative, interference-resistant POC glucose meter (StatStrip glucose hospital meter, Nova Biomedical, USA) in subjects with a previous history of dysglycaemia, undergoing a 75 g diagnostic oral glucose tolerance test (oGTT). Venous and capillary blood sampling for the reference laboratory procedure (RLP) and POC-glucose measurement was carried out at fasting and 2 h oGTT, and categories of glucose tolerance were classified according to 2006 WHO diagnostic criteria for the respective sample type. We found an excellent between-method correlation at fasting (r = 0.9681, P < 0.0001) and 2 h oGTT (r = 0.9768, P < 0.0001) and an almost perfect diagnostic agreement (weighted Kappa = 0.858). Within a total of 237 study subjects, 137 were diagnosed with diabetes with RLP, and only 6 of them were reclassified as having glucose intolerance with POC. The diagnostic performance of POC-fasting glucose in discriminating between the normal and any category of disturbed glucose tolerance did not differ from the RLP (P = 0.081). Results of this study indicate that StatStrip POC glucose meter could serve as a reliable tool for the diabetes diagnosis, particularly in primary healthcare facilities with dispersed blood sampling services.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Bland-Altman plot of differences between (a) fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and (b) plasma glucose at 2 h oGTT (2 h PG), as measured with reference laboratory procedure (RLP) and point-of-care (POC) testing.

References

    1. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes—2013. Diabetes Care. 2013;36(supplement 1):S11–S66.
    1. World Health Organization. Definition and Diagnosis of Diabetes Mellitus and Intermediate Hyperglycemia: Report of a WHO/IDF Consultation. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2006.
    1. Sacks DB, Arnold M, Bakris GL, et al. Guidelines and recommendations for laboratory analysis in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. Clinical Chemistry. 2011;57(6):e1–e47.
    1. Gambino R. Glucose: a simple molecule that is not simple to quantify. Clinical Chemistry. 2007;53(12):2040–2041.
    1. Lovrenčić MV, Božičević S, Biljak VR, et al. Implications of variable preanalytical procedures for the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus in Croatia. Biochemia Medica. 2012;22(3A92):A93 pages.
    1. Püntmann I, Wosniok W, Haeckel R. 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. Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. 2003;41(6):809–820.
    1. Savoca R, Jaworek B, Huber AR. New “plasma referenced” POCT glucose monitoring systems—are they suitable for glucose monitoring and diagnosis of diabetes? Clinica Chimica Acta. 2006;372(1-2):199–201.
    1. Rush E, Crook N, Simmons D. Point-of-care testing as a tool for screening for diabetes and pre-diabetes. Diabetic Medicine. 2008;25(9):1070–1075.
    1. Marley JV, Davis S, Coleman K, et al. Point-of-care testing of capillary glucose in the exclusion and diagnosis of diabetes in remote Australia. Medical Journal of Australia. 2007;186(10):500–503.
    1. Ritchie GE, Kengne AP, Joshi R, et al. Comparison of near-patient capillary glucose measurement and a risk assessment questionnaire in screening for type 2 diabetes in a high-risk population in rural India. Diabetes Care. 2011;34(1):44–49.
    1. Kruijshoop M, Feskens EJM, Blaak EE, de Bruin TWA. Validation of capillary glucose measurements to detect glucose intolerance or type 2 diabetes mellitus in the general population. Clinica Chimica Acta. 2004;341(1-2):33–40.
    1. D'Orazio P, Burnett RW, Fogh-Andersen N, et al. Approved IFCC recommendation on reporting results for blood glucose (abbreviated) Clinical Chemistry. 2005;51(9):1573–1576.
    1. Karon BS, Griesmann L, Scott R, et al. Evaluation of the impact of hematocrit and other interference on the accuracy of hospital-based glucose meters. Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics. 2008;10(2):111–120.
    1. Chan PCR, Rozmanc M, Seiden-Long I, Kwan J. Evaluation of a point-of-care glucose meter for general use in complex tertiary care facilities. Clinical Biochemistry. 2009;42(10-11):1104–1112.
    1. Biljak VR, Božičević S, Lovrenčić MV, Car N. Performance of the StatStrip glucose meter in inpatient management of diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia Croatica. 2010;39(3):105–110.
    1. López MÁC, de Liger Serrano JLF, Rodríguez JLR, Márquez TM. Validation of a glucose meter at an intensive care. Endocrinología y Nutrición (English Edition) 2012;59(1):28–34.
    1. Bergenstal RM. Evaluating the accuracy of modern glucose meters. Insulin. 2008;3(1):5–14.
    1. Krouwer JS, Cembrowski GS. A review of standards and statistics used to describe blood glucose monitor performance. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology. 2010;4(1):75–83.
    1. Thorpe GH. Assessing the quality of publications evaluating the accuracy of blood glucose monitoring systems. Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics. 2013;15(3):253–259.
    1. Colagiuri S, Sandbæk A, Carstensen B, et al. Comparability of venous and capillary glucose measurements in blood. Diabetic Medicine. 2003;20(11):953–956.
    1. Petersen JR, Graves DF, Tacker DH, Okorodudu AO, Mohammad AA, Cardenas VJ., Jr. Comparison of POCT and central laboratory blood glucose results using arterial, capillary, and venous samples from MICU patients on a tight glycemic protocol. Clinica Chimica Acta. 2008;396(1-2):10–13.

Source: PubMed

赞助者和合作者

医疗条件

药物干预

3
订阅