2013
DOI: 10.1177/193229681300700311
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impact of Glucose Measurement Processing Delays on Clinical Accuracy and Relevance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Recent literature has suggested that blood glucose measurements can be affected by the duration of time from when a blood sample is drawn from the patients to the time it is analyzed, with delays of 15 minutes or more possibly affecting outcomes. 14,38 In an effort to assess the potential impact of this effect, a secondary subgroup analysis was performed of paired values in our data set that were drawn within 15 minutes of each other. Thirty-one of the 46 paired glucose values (67.4%) were drawn within 15 minutes of each another, with the mean time between paired values in this subgroup of 5.4 minutes (SD = 4.8).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent literature has suggested that blood glucose measurements can be affected by the duration of time from when a blood sample is drawn from the patients to the time it is analyzed, with delays of 15 minutes or more possibly affecting outcomes. 14,38 In an effort to assess the potential impact of this effect, a secondary subgroup analysis was performed of paired values in our data set that were drawn within 15 minutes of each other. Thirty-one of the 46 paired glucose values (67.4%) were drawn within 15 minutes of each another, with the mean time between paired values in this subgroup of 5.4 minutes (SD = 4.8).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Again [21] in their study reported a result inconsistent with this present study, that the decline in serum glucose concentration for all samples stored at 25°C was found to be statistically significant with the Mean glucose value of 1 hour statistically different from baseline value and that at 25°C, serum glucose concentration was found to be decreasing with mean of 10.8% per hour. One of the studies, [22] Jangam et al observed that delays of 15 min or more in analysis reduce clinical accuracy below the ISO 15197:2003(E) recommendation of 95% and that in their study the accuracy was less than 65% for delays of 60 min. The relative stability of the glucose in these samples up to 24 hours as is reported in this study is not similar with the results of the study of the other authors [19][20][21][22] as stated above but seems to be in line with findings of Mingoas et al [23].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…One of the studies, [22] Jangam et al observed that delays of 15 min or more in analysis reduce clinical accuracy below the ISO 15197:2003(E) recommendation of 95% and that in their study the accuracy was less than 65% for delays of 60 min. The relative stability of the glucose in these samples up to 24 hours as is reported in this study is not similar with the results of the study of the other authors [19][20][21][22] as stated above but seems to be in line with findings of Mingoas et al [23]. The relative low atmospheric (room) temperature in the study location which sometimes are as low as the 17 o C among other things may be responsible for the stability of the glucose in the sample up to 24hours.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…During an acute admission, patients often receive rapid intravenous infusions of therapies that may alter concentrations of blood constituents. This is particularly relevant to glucose where delays of 15 min or more have been shown to reduce clinical accuracy to below the ISO standards [29]. The effect of the timing of the samples, however, is unlikely to be as significant for sodium or potassium as they do not have the same degree of post-prandial peaks and troughs as glucose and have a more stable diurnal variation [30].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%