Kirkham P, Watkins A
Mercy Hospital for Women, Victoria, Australia.
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1995 Nov;73(3):F170-3. doi: 10.1136/fn.73.3.f170.
To assess the accuracy and reliability of reflectance photometers in estimating blood glucose concentrations, two were assessed: the Ames Glucometer 3 (Bayer Diagnostics) with Glucofilm Test strips; and the Reflolux S (Boehringer Mannheim) with BM Test Glycemia 20-800 strips. These were compared with laboratory blood glucose estimations in 100 assays (50 comparisons for each machine, measuring the difference (d) between the glucose reading and the mean of the reflectance photometer and the laboratory value). The Ames Glucometer 3 (mean d = + 0.7 mmol/l, (SD 1.1) mmol/l) was less accurate than the Boehringer Reflolux S (mean d = 0.2 mmol/l, (SD (0.7) mmol/l). The range of error of both machines is wide (Ames 2 SD range + 2.9 mmol/l to -1.5 mmol/l true readings; Boehringer + 1.8 mmol/l to -1.2 mmol/l of true readings). Because of this, any reflectance photometer readings that are even slightly low should be checked with laboratory estimations. The clinical value of such machines is limited in infants with low blood glucose concentrations.
为评估反射式血糖仪在估算血糖浓度方面的准确性和可靠性,对两款血糖仪进行了评估:配备葡萄糖测试条的艾姆斯血糖仪3型(拜耳诊断公司);以及配备BM血糖测试条20 - 800型的雷弗洛克斯S型血糖仪(勃林格殷格翰公司)。在100次检测中,将这些血糖仪与实验室血糖估算值进行比较(每台机器进行50次比较,测量葡萄糖读数与反射式血糖仪和实验室值的平均值之间的差值(d))。艾姆斯血糖仪3型(平均d = + 0.7毫摩尔/升,标准差1.1毫摩尔/升)的准确性低于勃林格雷弗洛克斯S型血糖仪(平均d = 0.2毫摩尔/升,标准差0.7毫摩尔/升)。两款机器的误差范围都很宽(艾姆斯血糖仪2个标准差范围,真实读数为 + 2.9毫摩尔/升至 - 1.5毫摩尔/升;勃林格血糖仪真实读数为 + 1.8毫摩尔/升至 - 1.2毫摩尔/升)。因此,任何哪怕略低的反射式血糖仪读数都应通过实验室估算进行核对。此类血糖仪在低血糖浓度婴儿中的临床价值有限。