Suppr超能文献

一项血糖仪的上市后监测研究在 1 型或 2 型糖尿病患者的大样本中并未发现对临床准确性有干扰的证据。

Post-Market Surveillance of a Blood Glucose Test Strip Demonstrates No Evidence of Interference on Clinical Accuracy in a Large Cohort of People with Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes.

机构信息

LifeScan Scotland Ltd, Inverness, UK.

出版信息

J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2023 Jan;17(1):141-151. doi: 10.1177/19322968211042352. Epub 2021 Sep 4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Regulations and industry guidance relating to testing for interference in blood glucose monitoring (BGM) systems continue to focus on in vitro laboratory bench tests. Post-market surveillance (PMS) in a clinical setting allows for BGM accuracy assessments to evaluate the impact of real-world exposure to polypharmacy in people with diabetes. This study evaluated the OneTouch Select Plus® BGM test-strip accuracy with respect to polypharmacy using a clinical registry dataset.

METHODS

Medication profiles were analysed for 1023 subjects (425 with type 1 (T1D) and 598 with type 2 diabetes (T2D)) attending 3 UK hospitals. Blood samples were analysed to determine clinical accuracy of the BGM test-strip against a laboratory comparator.

RESULTS

538 different medications (48 diabetes and 490 non-diabetes) were recorded across the 1023 subjects. Patients took on average 6.9 ( = 1-36) individual medications and 4.1 ( = 1-13) unique medication classes. Clinical accuracy to EN ISO 15197:2015 criteria were met irrespective of increasing average number of individual medications, categorized from 1-3, 4-6, 7-9, 10-12 and >12 taken per subject (97.7%, 97.7%, 97.8%, 97.8%, and 98.4%, respectively). Clinical accuracy criteria were met across 15 classes of medication using the combined dataset (97.9%; 29784/30433). Surveillance Error Grid (SEG) analysis showed 98.7% (29959/30368) of readings presented no clinical risk. No individual class or combination of medication classes impacted clinical accuracy of the BGM test-strip.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical performance for the test strip under assessment demonstrated no evidence of interference from over 500 prescription medications, with clinical accuracy maintained across a range of polypharmacy conditions in people with diabetes.

摘要

背景

与血糖监测(BGM)系统干扰测试相关的法规和行业指南继续侧重于体外实验室台式测试。在临床环境中的上市后监测(PMS)允许对 BGM 准确性进行评估,以评估糖尿病患者实际接触多种药物对 BGM 准确性的影响。本研究使用临床注册数据集评估了 OneTouch Select Plus®BGM 测试条在多种药物方面的准确性。

方法

对 3 家英国医院就诊的 1023 名受试者(425 名 1 型糖尿病(T1D)和 598 名 2 型糖尿病(T2D))的用药情况进行了分析。分析血样以确定 BGM 测试条相对于实验室对照品的临床准确性。

结果

在 1023 名受试者中记录了 538 种不同的药物(48 种糖尿病药物和 490 种非糖尿病药物)。患者平均服用 6.9(=1-36)种单一药物和 4.1(=1-13)种独特的药物类别。根据 EN ISO 15197:2015 标准,无论个体用药数量的增加情况如何(从每个受试者服用 1-3、4-6、7-9、10-12 和>12 种药物进行分类),临床准确性均得到满足(分别为 97.7%、97.7%、97.8%、97.8%和 98.4%)。使用组合数据集,15 类药物的临床准确性标准均得到满足(97.9%;29784/30433)。监测误差网格(SEG)分析显示,98.7%(29959/30368)的读数没有临床风险。没有任何单个药物类别或多种药物类别的组合对 BGM 测试条的临床准确性产生影响。

结论

评估用测试条的临床性能未显示出受 500 多种处方药干扰的证据,在糖尿病患者的多种药物治疗条件下,临床准确性得到维持。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dc8c/9846393/03f95edb4255/10.1177_19322968211042352-fig1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验