3.9 Article

Comparison of Blood Glucose Measurements Using Samples Obtained from the Forearm, Finger Skin Puncture, and Venous Serum

期刊

KOREAN JOURNAL OF LABORATORY MEDICINE
卷 30, 期 3, 页码 264-275

出版社

KOREAN SOC LABORATORY MEDICINE
DOI: 10.3343/kjlm.2010.30.3.264

关键词

Blood glucose test; Alternative blood sampling site; Regression analysis

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [2010-0001733]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background : Blood glucose testing (BGT) at the forearm minimizes the pain experienced during sampling of capillary blood. We compared the BGT results for forearm sampling with those for standard finger skin puncture and venous serum to evaluate the clinical validity of forearm BGT. Methods : BGT was performed on the finger (OF) and forearm (GA) with a portable glucometer in 555 subjects, including 61 diabetic patients, under fasting conditions. BGT with venous serum (Gv) was followed within an hour in 514 subjects. Simple linear regression, intraclass correlation, and Passing-Bablok regression analyses were performed using the GA-GF and GA-GV data. Results : GA showed an excellent linear relationship with both OF and Gv with a Pearson correlation coefficient (r) of 0.97 (P<0.0001) in the patient group, which was similar to the findings in the normal group except for the lower r values. The mean bias between GA and GF and between GA and Gv were within +/- 10 mg/dL in both groups. The intraclass correlation coefficients were slightly smaller than the corresponding r values, but they showed the same tendency in both groups. In the Passing-Bablok analyses, the 95% confidence intervals of the slope and intercept parameters were <+/- 20% of unity and <+/- 20 mg/dL, respectively, which were within the acceptable ranges. All 3 statistical analyses supported the satisfactory agreement of GA with OF or Gv. Conclusions : BGT at the forearm was highly consistent with the standard BGT, thereby confirming its applicability in clinical practice for self-testing under steady fasting conditions. (Korean J Lab Med 2010;30:264-75)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据