Flavel Matthew, Jois Markandeya, Kitchen Barry
Bioactive Division, The Product Makers, Keysborough 3173, Victoria, Australia.
School of Life Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora 3086, Australia.
World J Diabetes. 2021 Feb 15;12(2):108-123. doi: 10.4239/wjd.v12.i2.108.
Glycaemic index (GI) testing provides a useful point of comparison between carbohydrate sources. For this comparison to be meaningful, the methods used to determine GI values need to be rigorous and consistent between testing events. This requirement has led to increasing standardization of the GI methodology, with an international standard developed in joint consultation with FAO/WHO (ISO 26642:2010 currently the most up to date document. The purpose of this review is to compare the international standard to methods of published studies claiming to have performed a GI test. This analysis revealed that the international standard permits a wide range of choices for researchers when designing a GI testing plan, rather than a single standardized protocol. It has also been revealed that the literature contains significant variation, both between studies and from the international standard for critical aspects of GI testing methodology. The primary areas of variation include; what glucose specification is used, which reference food is used, how much reference food is given, what drink is given during testing, the blood sampling site chosen and what assay and equipment is used to measure blood glucose concentration. For each of these aspects we have explored some of the methodological and physiological implications of these variations. These insights suggest that whilst the international standard has assisted with framing the general parameters of GI testing, further stan-dardization to testing procedures is still required to ensure the continued relevance of the GI to clinical nutrition.
血糖生成指数(GI)测试为比较不同碳水化合物来源提供了一个有用的参照点。为使这种比较有意义,用于确定GI值的方法需要严谨且在不同测试中保持一致。这一要求促使GI方法日益标准化,与粮农组织/世界卫生组织联合协商制定了一项国际标准(ISO 26642:2010,目前是最新文件)。本综述的目的是将该国际标准与声称进行了GI测试的已发表研究方法进行比较。分析表明,国际标准在设计GI测试方案时允许研究人员有广泛的选择,而非单一的标准化方案。研究还发现,文献中在GI测试方法的关键方面,不同研究之间以及与国际标准相比都存在显著差异。主要差异领域包括:使用何种葡萄糖规格、使用哪种参考食物、给予多少参考食物、测试期间饮用何种饮品、选择的采血部位以及用于测量血糖浓度的检测方法和设备。对于这些方面中的每一个,我们都探讨了这些差异的一些方法学和生理学影响。这些见解表明,虽然国际标准有助于确定GI测试的一般参数,但仍需要进一步对测试程序进行标准化,以确保GI在临床营养中的持续相关性。