Suppr超能文献

血糖监测仪:实验室及患者评估

Blood glucose monitors: a laboratory and patient assessment.

作者信息

Webb D J, Lovesay J M, Ellis A, Knight A H

出版信息

Br Med J. 1980 Feb 9;280(6211):362-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.280.6211.362.

Abstract

The four blood glucose monitors available in the United Kingdom were compared by asking the opinions of 24 patients who used each monitor for two weeks, by correlating their blood glucose results with those obtained in the laboratory, and by having the monitors examined by an electronics engineer. Of the battery-operated monitors, patients preferred the Hypocount (15) to the Glucochek (9). The mains-operated units were less popular, with little to choose between Eyetone and Reflomat. Under field conditions the blood glucose results obtained with the Glucochek correlated poorly with the standard reference method. In contrast the Hypocount, Eyetone, and Reflomat machines produced good correlations. Poor results with the Glucochek were mainly due to faulty timing systems. The patients' preference for the Hypocount was supported by tests of performance under laboratory conditions and by the electronics engineer's report.

摘要

通过询问24名使用过每种血糖仪两周的患者的意见、将他们的血糖检测结果与实验室检测结果进行对比,以及让一名电子工程师对血糖仪进行检测,对英国市面上可得的四种血糖仪进行了比较。在使用电池供电的血糖仪中,患者更喜欢Hypocount(15人选择),而不是Glucochek(9人选择)。使用 mains-operated(此处未明确其准确含义,可能是 mains-powered 市电供电之类,暂按原文翻译)的血糖仪较不受欢迎,Eyetone和Reflomat之间几乎没有什么区别。在实际使用条件下,Glucochek测得的血糖结果与标准参考方法的相关性较差。相比之下,Hypocount、Eyetone和Reflomat血糖仪的相关性较好。Glucochek的检测结果不佳主要是由于计时系统故障。实验室条件下的性能测试以及电子工程师的报告都支持了患者对Hypocount的偏好。

相似文献

1
Blood glucose monitors: a laboratory and patient assessment.血糖监测仪:实验室及患者评估
Br Med J. 1980 Feb 9;280(6211):362-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.280.6211.362.
2
Evaluation of four modern home blood glucose meters including two memory meters.
Diabet Med. 1986 Mar;3(2):187-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.1986.tb00741.x.

引用本文的文献

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