Suppr超能文献

糖化血红蛋白和其他血糖测量指标不一致时的初级保健糖尿病评估。

Primary care diabetes assessment when HbA1c and other measures of glycemia disagree.

机构信息

Department of Internal Medicine, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA; Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism, and Molecular Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL USA.

Department of Internal Medicine, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA.

出版信息

Prim Care Diabetes. 2024 Apr;18(2):151-156. doi: 10.1016/j.pcd.2023.12.005. Epub 2024 Jan 3.

Abstract

AIMS

Although diabetes management decisions in primary care are typically based largely on HbA1c, mismatches between HbA1c and other measures of glycemia that are increasingly more available present challenges to optimal management. This study aimed to assess a systematic approach to identify the frequency of mismatches of potential clinical significance amongst various measures of glycemia in a primary care setting.

METHODS

Following screening to exclude conditions known to affect HbA1c interpretation, HbA1c, and fructosamine were obtained and repeated after ∼90 days on 53 adults with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes. A subset of 13 participants with repeat labs wore continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for 10 days.

RESULTS

As expected, HbA1c and fructosamine only modestly correlated (initial R = 0.768/repeat R = 0.655). The HbA1c/fructosamine mismatch frequency of ± 0.5% (using the following regression HbA1c = 0.015 *fructosamine + 2.994 calculated from the initial sample) was 27.0%. Of the 13 participants with CGM data, HbA1c and CGM-based Glucose Management Indicator correlated at R = 0.786 with a mismatch frequency of ± 0.5% at 46.2% compared to a HbA1c/fructosamine mismatch frequency of ± 0.5% at 30.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

HbA1c is frequently mismatched with fructosamine and CGM data. As each of the measures has strengths and weaknesses, the utilization of multiple different measures of glycemia may be informative for diabetes assessment in the clinical setting.

摘要

目的

尽管初级保健中的糖尿病管理决策通常主要基于 HbA1c,但 HbA1c 与其他血糖测量值之间的不匹配,这些测量值越来越多,这给最佳管理带来了挑战。本研究旨在评估一种系统方法,以确定在初级保健环境中各种血糖测量值之间潜在临床意义的不匹配频率。

方法

在排除已知影响 HbA1c 解释的疾病后进行筛选,然后在 53 名患有前驱糖尿病或 2 型糖尿病的成年人中获得并在大约 90 天后重复测量 HbA1c 和果糖胺。在有重复实验室的 13 名参与者中,有一部分人佩戴了连续血糖监测仪 (CGM) 10 天。

结果

正如预期的那样,HbA1c 和果糖胺仅中度相关(初始 R = 0.768/重复 R = 0.655)。使用以下回归方程 HbA1c = 0.015 * fructosamine + 2.994 计算出的 ± 0.5%(从初始样本中计算得出)的 HbA1c/fructosamine 不匹配频率为 27.0%。在有 CGM 数据的 13 名参与者中,HbA1c 和基于 CGM 的葡萄糖管理指标的相关性为 R = 0.786,± 0.5%的不匹配频率为 46.2%,而 HbA1c/fructosamine 的不匹配频率为 30.8%。

结论

HbA1c 与果糖胺和 CGM 数据经常不匹配。由于每种方法都有其优点和缺点,因此在临床环境中评估糖尿病时,利用多种不同的血糖测量值可能会提供信息。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验