We have located links that may give you full text access.
Are point-of-care measurements of glycated haemoglobin accurate in the critically ill?
Australian Critical Care : Official Journal of the Confederation of Australian Critical Care Nurses 2018 December 25
INTRODUCTION: Critically ill patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and chronic hyperglycaemia may benefit from a more liberal approach to glucose control than patients with previously normal glucose tolerance. It may therefore be useful to rapidly determine HbA1c concentrations. Point-of-care (POC) analysers offer rapid results but may be less accurate than laboratory analysis.
AIM(S): The aim of this study was to determine agreement between POC and laboratory HbA1c testing in critically ill patients with T2DM.
METHODS: Critically ill patients with T2DM had concurrent laboratory, capillary-, and arterial-POC HbA1c measurements performed. Data are presented as mean (standard deviation) or median [interquartile range]. Measurement agreement was assessed by Lin's concordance correlation coefficient, Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement, and classification by Cohen's kappa statistic.
RESULTS: HbA1c analysis was performed for 26 patients. The time to obtain a result from POC analysis took a median of 9 [7, 10] minutes. Laboratory analysis took a median of 328 [257, 522] minutes from the time of test request to the time of report. Lin's correlation coefficient showed almost perfect agreement (0.99%) for arterial- vs capillary-POC and both POC methods vs arterial laboratory analysis. Bland-Altman plots showed a mean difference of 2.0 (3.7) with 95% limits of agreement of -5.4 to 9.3 for capillary vs laboratory, 1.6 (3.4) and -5.1 to 8.4 for arterial vs laboratory, and -0.137 (2.6) and -5.2 to 4.9 for capillary vs arterial. Patient classification as having inadequately controlled diabetes (>53 mmol/mol) showed 100% agreement across all tests.
CONCLUSIONS: HbA1c values can be accurately and rapidly obtained using POC testing in the critically ill.
AIM(S): The aim of this study was to determine agreement between POC and laboratory HbA1c testing in critically ill patients with T2DM.
METHODS: Critically ill patients with T2DM had concurrent laboratory, capillary-, and arterial-POC HbA1c measurements performed. Data are presented as mean (standard deviation) or median [interquartile range]. Measurement agreement was assessed by Lin's concordance correlation coefficient, Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement, and classification by Cohen's kappa statistic.
RESULTS: HbA1c analysis was performed for 26 patients. The time to obtain a result from POC analysis took a median of 9 [7, 10] minutes. Laboratory analysis took a median of 328 [257, 522] minutes from the time of test request to the time of report. Lin's correlation coefficient showed almost perfect agreement (0.99%) for arterial- vs capillary-POC and both POC methods vs arterial laboratory analysis. Bland-Altman plots showed a mean difference of 2.0 (3.7) with 95% limits of agreement of -5.4 to 9.3 for capillary vs laboratory, 1.6 (3.4) and -5.1 to 8.4 for arterial vs laboratory, and -0.137 (2.6) and -5.2 to 4.9 for capillary vs arterial. Patient classification as having inadequately controlled diabetes (>53 mmol/mol) showed 100% agreement across all tests.
CONCLUSIONS: HbA1c values can be accurately and rapidly obtained using POC testing in the critically ill.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app