Department of Applied Health Science, Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois, USA.
BMJ Open. 2013 Feb 27;3(2). doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001899. Print 2013.
The aims of this study were to: (1) determine the validity and reliability of the Nova Biomedical Lactate Plus portable analyzer, and quantify any fixed or proportional bias; (2) determine the effect of any bias on the determination of the lactate threshold and (3) determine the effect that blood sampling methods have on validity and reliability.
In this method comparison study we compared blood lactate concentration measured using the Lactate Plus portable analyzer to lactate concentration measured by a reference analyzer, the YSI 2300.
University campus in the USA.
Fifteen active men and women performed a discontinuous graded exercise test to volitional exhaustion on a motorised treadmill. Blood samples were taken via finger prick and collected in microcapillary tubes for analysis by the reference instrument at the end of each stage. Duplicate samples for the portable analyzer were either taken directly from the finger or from the micro capillary tubes. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Ordinary least products regressions were used to assess validity, reliability and bias in the portable analyzer. Lactate threshold was determined by visual inspection.
Though measurements from both instruments were correlated (r=0.91), the differences between instruments had large variability (SD=1.45 mM/l) when blood was sampled directly from finger. This variability was reduced by ∼95% when both instruments measured blood collected in the capillary tubes. As the proportional and fixed bias between instruments was small, there was no difference in estimates of the lactate threshold between instruments. Reliability for the portable instrument was strong (r=0.99, p<0.05) with no proportional bias (slope=1.02) and small fixed bias (-0.19 mM/l).
The Lactate Plus analyzer provides accurate and reproducible measurements of blood lactate concentration that can be used to estimate workloads corresponding to blood lactate transitions or any absolute lactate concentrations.
本研究旨在:(1)确定 Nova Biomedical Lactate Plus 便携式分析仪的有效性和可靠性,并量化任何固定或比例偏差;(2)确定任何偏差对乳酸阈测定的影响;(3)确定采血方法对有效性和可靠性的影响。
在这项方法比较研究中,我们将 Lactate Plus 便携式分析仪测量的血乳酸浓度与参考分析仪 YSI 2300 测量的血乳酸浓度进行了比较。
美国大学校园。
15 名活跃的男性和女性在电动跑步机上进行不连续递增负荷运动试验直至力竭。在每个阶段结束时,通过指尖刺破采血,并将血液收集在微毛细管管中,用参考仪器进行分析。便携式分析仪的重复样本直接从手指或微毛细管管中采集。
采用普通最小二乘法回归评估便携式分析仪的有效性、可靠性和偏差。通过肉眼观察确定乳酸阈。
尽管两种仪器的测量结果相关(r=0.91),但当直接从指尖采集血液时,两种仪器之间的差异具有较大的变异性(SD=1.45 mM/l)。当两种仪器都测量收集在毛细管管中的血液时,这种变异性降低了约 95%。由于仪器之间的比例和固定偏差较小,因此两种仪器估计的乳酸阈没有差异。便携式仪器的可靠性很强(r=0.99,p<0.05),没有比例偏差(斜率=1.02),固定偏差较小(-0.19 mM/l)。
Lactate Plus 分析仪可提供准确且可重复的血乳酸浓度测量值,可用于估计与血乳酸转换或任何绝对血乳酸浓度相对应的工作量。