Blood glucose measurements in arterial blood of intensive care unit patients submitted to tight glycemic control: Agreement between bedside tests

34Citations
Citations of this article
41Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Implementing tight glycemic control (TGC) in intensive care unit (ICU) patients requires accurate blood glucose (BG) monitoring. We evaluated the performance of two commercially available bedside glucometers, Accu-Chek® and HemoCue®, in patients admitted to the ICU and in whom TGC was applied. Methods: Thirty-seven adult ICU patients were prospectively included. During 48 hours, BG was determined simultaneously on the same arterial blood sample using the two point-of-care testing (POCT) glucometers as compared with the standard technique. Data of 452 paired measurements were analyzed using linear regression, Clark error grid analysis (EGA), the method of Bland-Altman, and the GLYCENSIT procedure. Results: Both tested glucometers showed satisfactory results when evaluated with linear regression and EGA. Correlation coeffcients were above 0.9, and 100% of all the glucose readings were within the safe zones A and B using EGA. However, when applying more appropriate tests, both sensors failed to provide sufficient accuracy in the setting of TGC in ICU patients. The Hemocue revealed a bias of >10 mg/dl with a trend to systematically overestimate the actual BG value. The bias for the Accu-Chek was 6 mg/dl with wide limits of agreement and a variable over- and underestimation of the actual BG value depending on the level of BG (hypo-, normo-, or hyperglycemia). © Diabetes Technology Society.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Vlasselaers, D., Van Herpe, T., Milants, I., Eerdekens, M., Wouters, P. J., De Moor, B., & Van Den Berghe, G. (2008). Blood glucose measurements in arterial blood of intensive care unit patients submitted to tight glycemic control: Agreement between bedside tests. In Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology (Vol. 2, pp. 932–938). SAGE Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.1177/193229680800200603

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free