2种便携式血糖仪与生化分析仪检测血糖结果的比较

目的:比较鱼跃医疗设备股份有限公司生产的悦优血糖仪Ⅱ型、强生医疗器材有限公司生产的稳豪倍优型血糖仪检测末梢血糖与罗氏生化分析仪测定静脉血浆血糖的一致性,评价悦优血糖仪Ⅱ型检测血糖结果的准确性。方法:对48例住院患者同时用悦优血糖仪Ⅱ型和稳豪倍优型血糖仪检测手指末梢血,罗氏生化分析仪检测同时间点的血浆葡萄糖。对2种血糖仪检测末梢血血糖与生化静脉血浆血糖进行比对和偏差分析。结果:悦优血糖仪Ⅱ型以及稳豪倍优型血糖仪检测的血糖值均与生化所测血糖值高度吻合,三者检测血糖值的均值分别为(10.11±5.23)、(10.25±4.94)、(9.83±4.49)mmol/L。3种方式检测的血糖差异无统计学意义。结论:2种血糖仪检测血糖结果与生化静脉血糖检测结果基本一致。检测血糖可以在悦优Ⅱ型和稳豪倍优型2种血糖仪中任意选择。     

糖尿病患者静脉血与末梢血血糖检测结果比较研究

目的对比分析糖尿病患者静脉血与末梢血血糖检测结果 ,指导临床工作。方法选取该院2013年5月—2014年5月收治的60例糖尿病患者,分别检测空腹、餐后2 h的静脉血(使用生化分析仪)和末梢血血糖(使用快速血糖仪),并对结果进行比较分析。结果末梢血和静脉血血糖检测结果基本一致,两组数据比较,其差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论在快速血糖仪测定范围内,通过进行末梢血血糖检验可以较为准确、迅速地得到患者的血糖值,临床价值重要,值得在临床推广和应用。     

便携式血糖仪测定不同时间段血糖值可靠性研究

目的 探讨便携式血糖仪测定不同时间段血糖值的可靠性,分析第一滴末梢血用于便携式血糖仪测血糖的可行性.方法 该院选取2012年2月-2013年12月用便携式血糖仪测定120例患者不同时间段（空腹、餐后1h、餐后2h）第一滴、第二滴末梢血及肘静脉全血血糖值,同时用生化仪测静脉血清血糖值,比较便携式血糖仪测定不同时间段第一滴、第二滴末梢血、肘静脉全血血糖值与生化测定静脉血浆血糖值的差异,分析第一滴末梢血用于便携式血糖仪测血糖的可行性.结果 分别在三个时间段血糖检测时第一滴、第二滴末梢血、肘静脉全血便携式血糖仪检测值及生化仪测静脉血清血糖值四者差异无统计学意义,且同一时间段内每两组检测值间差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）;不同检测方法测定不同时间段血糖值结果相似性较好.结论 便携式血糖仪测量末梢全血血糖快速、准确、简便、可靠性强,可直接选取第一滴末梢血作血糖测定.     

优越血糖仪与日立7020全自动生化分析仪检测血糖的比较

目的:评估末梢法及静脉法血糖测定与己糖激酶法血糖测定结果的相关性,便于临床血糖监测。方法:60例老年糖尿病(DM)人用优越血糖仪末梢血微量法(AdvCG)、静脉血微量法(AdvVG),日立7020全自动生化分析仪静脉血己糖激酶法(VG)测定血糖浓度。结果:各测定法血糖浓度分别为:AdvCO 9.68±4.66 mmol/L,AdvVG9.74±4.67 mmol/L,VG 9.37±4.62 mmol/L,3组间无显著差异,P>0.05。结论:优越血糖仪体积小,携带方便,测定血糖准确、快速、简单、需血量小、无痛苦,同时可存储200个数据,非常适合于临床监测。     

快速血糖仪与全自动生化分析仪血糖检验结果分析

目的比较分析快速血糖仪与全自动生化分析仪血糖检验结果是否具有差异。方法选取大安市安北社区卫生服务中心2013年6月—12月100例门诊就诊或体检者作为研究对象,以其静脉抗凝空腹血（全血无脂血、溶血及黄疸）作为检验标本,按照随机化原则将研究对象分为具有可比性的快速血糖仪组和生化分析仪组各50例,按照仪器说明书的操作要点,分别检测血糖水平。结果快速血糖仪组的血糖检测值为（7.74±3.29）mmol/L,全自动生化分析仪的血糖检测值为（7.27±3.12）mmol/L,两种检测方法平均值之间的差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。结论快速血糖仪与全自动生化分析仪用于血糖检测结果基本一致,但前者使用方便,简便、快速且经济,可减轻患者负担,有利于医生诊断和治疗,值得临床推广应用。     

即时检验血糖仪检测指尖血与静脉全血的血糖结果比较探讨

目的比较即时检验血糖仪检测指尖血与静脉全血的血糖结果。方法 2013年9月—2014年9月,从该院收治的糖尿病患者中抽取80例患者作为研究对象,对这80例患者先使用强生的血糖仪检测指尖血的血糖,归为实验组;然后使用雅培的全自动生化仪器检验患者的静脉全血的血糖,归为研究组。将两次检测的结果进行对比分析。结果两次检验的血糖结果差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论即时检验血糖仪检测糖尿病患者的指尖血与静脉全血的血糖结果并没有显著的差别,在临床治疗时,可以针对患者的不同情况选择血糖的检测方式。     

三诺血糖仪与自动生化分析仪测定血糖结果的对比分析

随机筛选受试者75名，分别用三诺安稳、安准型血糖仪（测手指尖血）和生化分析仪（测静脉血）测试血糖。结果：三诺安稳（r=0．969）及安准型血糖仪（r=0．984）测指尖血结果与生化仪相关性好，配对t检验示差别无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。行CLARK误差分析，两者准确性良好。安稳血糖仪97．3％的数据位于A区内，安准血糖仪98．7％的数据位于A区内，两者均无数据位于C、D、E区。结论：三诺安稳及安准血糖仪具有准确性好，性价比高的优点，适合医护人员进行床旁检测和患者自我监测使用。     

Medisafe快速血糖仪性能的评价

目的评价Medisafe血糖仪的性能。方法应用Medisafe血糖仪检测220例静脉全血葡萄糖浓度,与全自动生化分析仪测定的静脉血浆葡萄糖结果进行比较;并检测该仪器的精密度和线性范围,分析不同红细胞压积（HCT）水平对测定结果的影响。结果血糖仪测定值（Y）与生化分析仪测定值（X）的回归方程为Y=0．9731X（r^2=0．9851）。误差分析显示二者之间的检测误差在0％～18％之间。该血糖仪测定结果的批内变异系数（CV）为2．3％～3．6％;不同批号试纸间和不同仪器间的批间CV分别为2．8％～3．5％和3．1％～3．9％。HCT在20％～60％范围内的5个样本的检测结果显示,血糖仪与生化分析仪之间的检测误差为0％～18．4％。结论该血糖仪具有良好的准确度、精密度、线性范围及抗HCT水平变化干扰的能力,且操作简便,适合医院病房检测和糖尿病患者家中自我监测使用。     

健康体检联合末梢血糖检测在糖尿病中筛查的作用探究

目的:探究健康体检联合末梢血糖检测在糖尿病中筛查的作用.方法:研究时间2020年4月-2020年12月,接受健康体检的疑似糖尿病140名为研究对象,所有研究人员均进行指尖末梢血检测和外周静脉血检查;比较两种检查糖尿病检出率,及空腹血糖、餐后2h血糖指标.结果:末梢血糖检测糖尿病检出率85.71％(121/140),外周...     

更新血糖仪 更高准确性

血糖监测已是当今糖尿病筛查、治疗和管理的重要环节，血糖仪的准确性和精确性也一直受到临床医生和广大糖尿病患者的关注。上海交通大学附属第一人民医院、中国人民解放军北京总医院、同济大学附属同济医院三所医院，对欧姆龙最新推出的两款新型血糖仪HEA-214、HEA-215及配套的血糖试纸检测的毛细血管全血葡萄糖，与实验室全自动生化仪检测的静脉血浆葡萄糖浓度，进行了比较。     

空腹和餐后手指末梢血糖与静脉血糖浓度差异的比较分析

目的分析比较空腹和餐后2h手指末梢全血、血浆与静脉全血、血浆4种不同血样葡萄糖浓度之间的差异。方法2010年8月至12月共140例1型或2型糖尿病患者纳入试验。其中男56例、女84例,年龄（54±10）岁。空腹血糖82例．餐后2h血糖58例,每例患者采集手指末梢全血、血浆以及静脉全血、血浆4种血样。用OneTouchVerio血糖监测系统和YSI2300葡萄糖测定仪,分别检测末梢血血糖（CBG）、静脉血糖（VBG）与末梢血浆血糖（CPG）、静脉血浆血糖（VPG）。并对Verio血糖监测系统的精准性进行评估。血糖数值差异分析采用配对t检验法。结果Verio血糖监测系统的精准性符合IS015197（2003）标准要求。空腹状态下血糖仪检测的CBG与VBG分别为（6．7±2．4）、（6．7±2．3）mmol／L,相对误差为0．40％（t=0．62,P〉0．05）,YSI检测的CPG与VPG分别为（6．4±2．5）、（6．4±2．4）mmol／L,相对误差为0．25（t=0．39,P〉0．05）,CBG略高于VPG5．89％（P〈0．05）;餐后2hCBG明显高于VBG,分别为（8．5±3．6）、（7．9±3．6）mmol／L,相对误差为7．58％（t=9．55,P〈0．05）;CPG亦明显高于VPG水平,分别为（8．1±3．8）、（7．6±3．8）mmol／L,相对误差为6．08％（t=10．9,P〈0．05）,CBG高于VPG11．6％（P〈0．05）。结论OneTouchVerio血糖监测系统适合临床对患者进行日常血糖检测,其检测的空腹CBG与VPG值较为接近,餐后CBG高于VPG值。     

The validity of the Medisafe self-monitoring blood glucose system

Self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) meters are widely used in the management of diabetes. The new SMBG meter Medisafe, which is based on the optoelectric colorimetry method, has been introduced. The objective of this study was to validate the Medisafe SMBG meters in comparison with the reference autoanalyzer (Hitachi 717) and to assess the repeatability of the instrument as well as variations of tip replacement. Samples of capillary and venous blood from 299 patients were tested. The correlation coefficients between the Medisafe-measured capillary and venous blood glucose levels and the reference autoanalyzer venous plasma glucose levels were 0.976 and 0.975, respectively. The range of differences from the reference value was examined; only 4% was in excess of +/- 20% of the reference laboratory value, and more than 40% of the values were within 5% of the reference laboratory value. Moreover, repeatability of the Medisafe capillary blood samples measured in three patients with three different blood glucose levels was determined. The coefficients of variation of blood glucose values are within 5%. In addition, the results of mean and SEM from each replication in three patients and glucose measurement from different lots of tips showed no significant difference (p > 0.05). It is concluded that the Medisafe SMBG meter has shown good results in terms of validity and repeatability. Furthermore, it provides safety from blood contamination, which is recommended in countries with a high prevalence of human immunodeficiency virus.     

血糖浓度对普罗帕酮转复阵发性心房颤动患者疗效的影响简

目的 探讨血糖浓度对普罗帕酮转复阵发性心房颤动（房颤）患者疗效的影响.方法 回顾性分析2010年1月至2012年12月在复旦大学附属中山医院青浦分院住院患者中的阵发性房颤（房颤持续时间＜24 h）108例的临床资料.依据患者就诊时的血糖浓度分为3组：Ⅰ组（血糖浓度＜7.0 mmol/L）52例;Ⅱ组（血糖浓度7.0～11.0 mmol/L） 33例;Ⅲ组（血糖浓度≥11.1 mmol/L）23例.所有患者转复前完成糖化血红蛋白检测、超声心动图检查,采用盐酸普罗帕酮药物转复.结果 Ⅰ、Ⅱ两组转复率分别为94.2％（49/52）、84.8％（28/33）,与Ⅲ组69.6％（16/23）比较,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）.Ⅰ、Ⅱ两组糖化血红蛋白水平明显低于Ⅲ组,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）.各组左心房内径比较,差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）.结论 血糖浓度≥11.1 mmol/L的阵发性房颤患者使用普罗帕酮的转复率低.     

Evaluation of the quality of blood glucose meters using the HemoCue B glucose system

Analytical evaluation three models of blood glucose meters (Glucometer IV (Bayer), Glucotrend (Roche Diagnostics) and One touch (Life Scan, Johnson & Johnson)) were compared within a central laboratory to an analyzer (Hitachi 747, Boehringer-Mannheim, Grenoble, France) and to a photometric device (HemoCue B-glucose). Each glucose meters met the criteria of within-run precision defined by the Association Fran?aise d'Etudes du Diabète et des Maladies Métaboliques (ALFEDIAM). Furthermore, HemoCue B-glucose met criteria defined by the French Society of Biological Chemistry (SFBC). In the study realized within laboratory, 28 to 66% of glucose tests realized with meters differed by more than 10% from plasma values and 43% of glucose assays realized with different meters differed by more than 10% from HemoCue B-glucose value. Within clinical departments, 46 glucose meters from 5 different models were evaluated. Answers to a questionnaire stored in HemoCue B-glucose underlined the weak development of glucose meters quality assurance. Within clinical departments, 65% of glucose values realized with meters differed by more than 10% from reference values. Development in clinical departments of glucose meters quality assurance programs can be monitored by HemoCue B-glucose, and must allowed improvement of glucose meter quality.     

床旁监测血糖仪葡萄糖氧化酶法及脱氢酶法准确度评估

以生化分析仪检测为参照,比较葡萄糖氧化酶法及脱氢酶法血糖仪的准确度.检测新鲜肝素锂化静脉血临床样本.根据ISO15197,血糖仪的两种方法检测结果偏倚100%在±0.56 mmol/L内(＜4.2mmol/L),≥99.7%在±20%内(≥4.2 mmol/L);根据EF9-A2,两种方法的预期误差＜10%,略＞5%;低、高血糖症界值处(＜3.89 mmol/L或＞6.11mmol/L),两种方法的κ＞0.6.两种方法间的κ＜0.6.血糖仪葡萄糖氧化酶法、脱氢酶法准确度符合ISO15197要求,与生化分析仪检测方法的差异不影响临床应用,其结果用于低、高血糖症判读一致性好.

Abstract：

Blood samples were detected by 24 blood-glucose meters using glucose oxidase and another 18 glucose meters using glucose dehydrogenase. The plasma glucose was detected by the auto-chemistry analyzer as control. According to ISO1 5197 and EF9-A2, the bias of results from both glucose meters 100% fall in the range of ±0. 56 mmol/L( ＜4. 2 mmol/L) and ≥99. 7% in the range of ±20% ( ≥4. 2 mmol/L), predicted bias were all less than the true bias(Bc). As κ＞0. 6, the results from both glucose meters were in accordance with the results from autochemistry analyzer in judging hyperglycemia ( ＞6. 11 mmol/L) and hypoglycemia ( ＜ 3.89 mmol/L). Between the results from the two blood-glucose meters, κ＜0. 6. The accuracy of both glucose-meters are accepted for the purpose of clinical diagnosis and treatment.     

老年男性人群腰围与血糖的相关性研究

目的探讨上海老年人群中心性肥胖与血糖的关系。方法选择2006年5月-2006年12月在上海交通大学医学院附属第六人民医院干部体检中心接受健康体检的2000例上海地区离退休干部，男性，平均年龄（73．9±5）岁。对其中资料完整且对调查内容及检查项目知情同意的1921例进行分析。（1）以受检者腰部肋下缘与髂前上棘连线中点处做水平测量腰围。（2）采用日立-7600-020型全自动生化分析仪测定血糖。分析腰围〈90cm，90≤腰围〈100cm，100≤腰围〈110cm，腰围≥110cm4个切点的血糖差异。结果资料完整的1921例对象进入结果分析：（1）受试对象中中心性肥胖的患病率为79．96％；该组患者中空腹血糖异常和糖尿病的患病率高于非中心性肥胖组（P值分别为0．002，0．001）；（2）与腰围〈90cm组比较，90≤WL〈100cm，100≤WL〈110cm，WL≥110cm三个组血糖差异有统计学意义（P值分别为0．0112，0．0001，0．0009）；与≥110cm组比较，90≤WL〈100cm，100≤WL〈110cm组血糖差异无统计学意义（P值分别为0．5661，0.073）；而90≤WL〈100cm，100≤wL〈110cm两组间血糖差别有差异有统计学意义（P值为0．0001）。（3）腰围〈90cm，90≤WL〈100cm，100≤WL〈110cm，≥110cm4个切点，空腹血糖异常的比率分别为10．13％，13．80％，18．53％，26．53％，而糖尿病的发生比率分别为5．45％，9．46％，15．33％，21．42％。结论（1）老年男性人群中中心性肥胖患者糖代谢异常发生率高，且随着腰围的增加而升高。（2）腰围是预测老年人群高血糖危险的有效指标之一。     

Capillary blood glucose measurements in hospital inpatients using portable glucose meters

Background: The use of portable glucose meters by nursing staff to perform bedside capillary blood glucose measurements is standard practice in the management of diabetic hospital inpatients. Few studies, however, have examined the practical limitations or the cost of this technology. Aim: To investigate the performance and cost of capillary blood glucose measurements using portable glucose meters in a hospital inpatient population being managed for diabetes mellitus. Methods: The setting was a 500 bed metropolitan University Teaching hospital, with 22 meters (Glucometer-M) in routine use by about 450 accredited nursing staff. The Glucometer-M was also compared with an operator-independent meter (Hemocue) to assess the effect of operator bias on the overall efficacy and cost of the programme. Results: Retrospective analysis of Glucometer-M reagent strips and comparison of measurements (n = 72) with the Hemocue revealed a marked operator bias which diminished accuracy and increased costs. The significant proportion of low haematocrits (< 30%) in the hospital population limited the applicability of the Glucometer-M which only operates reliably over the haematocrit range 35–50%. The excess of blood glucose measurements was highlighted by both a hospital ward audit and the frequency which exceeded that of routine electrolyte assays. Conclusions: Reliable bedside estimation of capillary blood glucose levels in hospitals requires a meter which is accurate, has negligible operator bias, is largely unaffected by haematocrit, and has insignificant risk of cross-contamination. At present only the Hemocue fulfils these specifications. Irrespective of meter choice, it is necessary to develop criteria for glucose measurements and monitor adherence. (Aust NZ J Med 1993; 23: 667–671.)     

床边血糖监测系统监测睡前血糖预测住院2型糖尿病患者夜间低血糖发生情况的观察

目的 利用床边血糖监测系统回顾性分析住院T2DM患者睡前血糖与夜间低血糖的主要特点及危险因素. 方法 收集2008年1月至2011年12月接受稳步医院用（SureStep Flexx）床边血糖管理系统连续监测睡前及夜间血糖的2505例T2DM患者共14827次血糖数据行回顾性分析,探讨睡前血糖与夜间低血糖的关系. 结果 （1）夜间低血糖发生率10.8％（271/2505）,总夜间低血糖事件393次,其中严重低血糖发生率15.3％（60/393）,轻度低血糖84.7％（333/393）.（2）睡前血糖＜9.0 mmol/L时,预测夜间低血糖敏感性57.7％,特异性62.3％.（3）男性、≥60岁、胰岛素治疗且睡前血糖＜9.0mmol/L的住院T2DM患者,夜间低血糖发生风险升高（P＜0.05）. 结论 住院T2DM患者睡前血糖＜9.0 mmol/L时,夜间低血糖发生风险升高,应重视睡前血糖监测,预防夜间低血糖发生.     

Performance evaluation of blood glucose monitoring devices

Many new technologies are being applied to measure blood glucose concentrations, but there is a lack of a standardized approach to evaluate performance of these devices. We sought to identify the key elements in evaluating the performance of devices for measuring blood glucose. We examined these elements in a multicenter study of four brands of glucose meters that are commonly used by diabetic patients. We tested control materials, spiked whole blood specimens, and 461 heparinized whole blood specimens in triplicate by each of the four brand glucose meters, and analyzed the plasma glucose concentrations of these specimens by a hexokinase (HK) method that incorporated reference materials developed by National Institute of Standards and Technology. Testing with glucose meters was performed at three sites, with multiple operators, meters, and representative lots of reagents. We evaluated the systematic bias, random error, and clinical significance of glucose meters. Meters were precise with a coefficient of variation of <4% across a wide range of glucose concentrations. Slopes significantly different from 1.0 were observed for two meters with 11-13% and -11% to -13% at the 95% confidence interval level by the linear regression of meter results versus the HK method from 33 to 481 mg/dL (correlation coefficient >0.98 and standard error of estimation S(y/x) <13 mg/dL for both meters). Analysis of the clinical significance of bias by Clarke Error Grid showed that results of the four meters were outside the accurate zone (26.5%, 2.4%, 1.5%, and 5.6%). Only a small number of the results showed clinically significant bias, mostly in the hypoglycemic range. Meters performed consistently throughout the study and, generally, were precise, although precision varied at extremely high or low glucose concentrations. Two of the glucose meters had substantial systematic bias when compared with an HK method, indicating a need for improving calibration and standardization. Analytical performance varied over the physiological range of glucose values so that separate accuracy and precision goals should be defined for hypoglycemic, normoglycemic, and hyperglycemic ranges. This study describes the current state of performance of blood glucose monitoring devices and points out those factors that should be assessed during evaluation of new devices.