Laus V G, Dietz M A, Levy R P
Diabetes Care. 1984 Nov-Dec;7(6):590-4. doi: 10.2337/diacare.7.6.590.
We discovered that skilled nurses only casually trained in the use of a fingertip blood glucose reflectance meter (Glucoscan, Lifescan, Mountainview, California) had a 36% incidence of unacceptable results (greater than 15% from reference). A controlled study was undertaken and showed that with Glucoscan I (GI) 4 of 27 readings were unacceptable and with Glucoscan II (GII) 3 of 27 readings were unacceptable, a statistically nonsignificant difference. Minor deviations from the manufacturer's recommended technique had a significant effect on the results with GI. In contrast, GII was much less sensitive to variations in recommended technique. GI underestimated the reference glucose concentration by 11.7%, and GII overestimated by 6.5%, a statistically significant difference. We conclude that the health professional must be aware of interdevice and intradevice variability in self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). Patients need careful training in the method of SMBG. The results of any single value should be interpreted with caution.
我们发现，仅接受过指尖血糖反射仪（Glucoscan，Lifescan公司，加利福尼亚州山景城）使用方面临时培训的熟练护士，其结果不可接受（比参考值高15%以上）的发生率为36%。我们进行了一项对照研究，结果显示，使用Glucoscan I（GI）时，27次读数中有4次不可接受；使用Glucoscan II（GII）时，27次读数中有3次不可接受，差异无统计学意义。与制造商推荐技术的轻微偏差对GI的结果有显著影响。相比之下，GII对推荐技术的变化不太敏感。GI将参考血糖浓度低估了11.7%，而GII高估了6.5%，差异有统计学意义。我们得出结论，卫生专业人员必须意识到血糖自我监测（SMBG）中不同仪器间和同一仪器内的变异性。患者需要接受关于SMBG方法的仔细培训。任何单个值的结果都应谨慎解释。
