Weitgasser R, Straberger A, Schnöll F, Sailer S
II. Medizinische Abteilung, LKA Salzburg.
Wien Klin Wochenschr. 1994;106(23):738-41.
New small, light-weight and fast-acting meters for measuring blood glucose have been developed recently. To determine their accuracy and precision we compared Accutrend, Companion 2, Glucometer 3 and One Touch II with the reference glucose oxidase method. For determination of accuracy 150 measurements were performed on two meters of each brand, together with measurement on the Beckman 2 Analyzer, which served as our reference. Capillary blood samples were obtained from patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes attending our outpatient clinic. All measurements were performed by one experienced technician. Precision in series was determined by 15 measurements of venous EDTA samples. The coefficient of variance was used for statistical analysis. Accuracy was evaluated according to recommendations of the American Diabetes Association and clinically useful criteria such as the error grid analysis. We found that One Touch II performed best overall, followed by Accutrend. Companion 2 and Glucometer 3 showed higher deviations in both accuracy and precision, but nonetheless met the clinical criteria of accuracy and reliability measured by error grid analysis in 87% and 90.5% of measurements, respectively. In conclusion, all four blood glucose meters can safely be used, after proper training, by patients and medical staff for self-measurement of blood glucose.
最近开发出了新型的用于测量血糖的小型、轻便且快速起效的血糖仪。为了确定它们的准确性和精密度，我们将Accutrend、Companion 2、Glucometer 3和One Touch II与参考葡萄糖氧化酶法进行了比较。为了测定准确性，对每个品牌的两台血糖仪进行了150次测量，并同时在作为我们参考的贝克曼2分析仪上进行测量。毛细血管血样取自到我们门诊就诊的1型和2型糖尿病患者。所有测量均由一名经验丰富的技术人员进行。通过对静脉EDTA样本进行15次测量来确定系列精密度。采用方差系数进行统计分析。根据美国糖尿病协会的建议以及诸如误差网格分析等临床实用标准来评估准确性。我们发现One Touch II总体表现最佳，其次是Accutrend。Companion 2和Glucometer 3在准确性和精密度方面均表现出较高的偏差，但尽管如此，分别在87%和90.5%的测量中达到了通过误差网格分析测量的准确性和可靠性的临床标准。总之，经过适当培训后，所有这四种血糖仪患者和医护人员都可以安全地用于自我血糖测量。
