Evaluating the Bias of Two Point-of-Care Glucometers for Calves and Ewes: Awareness for Ruminant Practitioners

Ruminants Pub Date : 2024-07-02 DOI:10.3390/ruminants4030022
Ryan Flynn, Haley Cremerius, Lisa Ebner, P. Mulon, Jessica Garcia, Kailee Bennett, Jessica Gerbert, Lainey Harvill, Olivia G Escher, Channing Cantrell, Windy Soto-Gonzalez, Rebecca R. Rahn, Jeff D. Olivarez, L. Yuan, J. Mochel, A. Kreuder, Joe Smith
{"title":"Evaluating the Bias of Two Point-of-Care Glucometers for Calves and Ewes: Awareness for Ruminant Practitioners","authors":"Ryan Flynn, Haley Cremerius, Lisa Ebner, P. Mulon, Jessica Garcia, Kailee Bennett, Jessica Gerbert, Lainey Harvill, Olivia G Escher, Channing Cantrell, Windy Soto-Gonzalez, Rebecca R. Rahn, Jeff D. Olivarez, L. Yuan, J. Mochel, A. Kreuder, Joe Smith","doi":"10.3390/ruminants4030022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"(1) Background: Multiple point-of-care (POC) glucometers are in use in veterinary medicine, but few are compared to each other. This leaves the potential for clinicians to be unaware of the effect of bias when comparing results from different POC glucometers. (2) Methods: Samples from healthy calves and ewes were simultaneously compared with two POC veterinary glucometers, the Precision Xtra and the AlphaTrak2, under both the “canine” and “feline” settings. The results of each sample were statistically analyzed with linear regression and Bland–Altman analysis. (3) Results: 170 samples from healthy calves and 108 samples from healthy ewes were available for comparison. Calves: The AT2 consistently overestimated blood glucose concentrations when compared to the PX device with the calves. Correlationt with the PX was r = 0.8496 (canine setting) and r = 0.8861 (feline setting). Both the canine and feline settings demonstrated a consistent bias (41.11 and 33.64 mg/dL, respectively). Ewes: The AT2 consistently overestimated blood glucose concentrations when compared to the PX device with the ewes. Correlation with the PX was R = 0.4710 (canine setting) and R = 0.7269 (feline setting). Both the canine and feline settings demonstrated a consistent bias (21.23 and 14.54 mg/dL, respectively). (4) Clinicians should be aware of the potential for consistent bias when evaluating calf and sheep blood glucose concentrations as the AT2 device, at both settings, overestimated blood glucose compared to the previously validated PX. This reliability appears to change when the values are farther from the normal ranges, which should be considered when making clinical decisions based on data from these devices.","PeriodicalId":508508,"journal":{"name":"Ruminants","volume":"23 24","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ruminants","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ruminants4030022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

(1) Background: Multiple point-of-care (POC) glucometers are in use in veterinary medicine, but few are compared to each other. This leaves the potential for clinicians to be unaware of the effect of bias when comparing results from different POC glucometers. (2) Methods: Samples from healthy calves and ewes were simultaneously compared with two POC veterinary glucometers, the Precision Xtra and the AlphaTrak2, under both the “canine” and “feline” settings. The results of each sample were statistically analyzed with linear regression and Bland–Altman analysis. (3) Results: 170 samples from healthy calves and 108 samples from healthy ewes were available for comparison. Calves: The AT2 consistently overestimated blood glucose concentrations when compared to the PX device with the calves. Correlationt with the PX was r = 0.8496 (canine setting) and r = 0.8861 (feline setting). Both the canine and feline settings demonstrated a consistent bias (41.11 and 33.64 mg/dL, respectively). Ewes: The AT2 consistently overestimated blood glucose concentrations when compared to the PX device with the ewes. Correlation with the PX was R = 0.4710 (canine setting) and R = 0.7269 (feline setting). Both the canine and feline settings demonstrated a consistent bias (21.23 and 14.54 mg/dL, respectively). (4) Clinicians should be aware of the potential for consistent bias when evaluating calf and sheep blood glucose concentrations as the AT2 device, at both settings, overestimated blood glucose compared to the previously validated PX. This reliability appears to change when the values are farther from the normal ranges, which should be considered when making clinical decisions based on data from these devices.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估用于犊牛和母羊的两种定点血糖仪的偏差:反刍动物从业人员的认识
(1) 背景:兽医学中使用多种护理点(POC)血糖仪,但很少进行相互比较。这使得临床医生在比较不同 POC 血糖仪的结果时,有可能无法意识到偏差的影响。(2) 方法:在 "犬科 "和 "猫科 "设置下,同时使用 Precision Xtra 和 AlphaTrak2 这两种 POC 兽用血糖仪对健康小牛和母羊的样本进行比较。通过线性回归和 Bland-Altman 分析对每个样本的结果进行了统计分析。(3) 结果:170 份健康犊牛样本和 108 份健康母羊样本可供比较。犊牛与 PX 设备相比,AT2 始终高估了小牛的血糖浓度。与 PX 的相关性为 r = 0.8496(犬类设置)和 r = 0.8861(猫类设置)。犬科和猫科设置均显示出一致的偏差(分别为 41.11 和 33.64 mg/dL)。母羊:与 PX 设备相比,AT2 始终高估了母羊的血糖浓度。与 PX 的相关性为 R = 0.4710(犬类设置)和 R = 0.7269(猫类设置)。犬科和猫科设置均显示出一致的偏差(分别为 21.23 和 14.54 mg/dL)。(4) 临床医生在评估小牛和绵羊血糖浓度时应注意可能存在一致的偏差,因为与之前验证的 PX 相比,AT2 设备在两种设置下都高估了血糖。当数值偏离正常范围较远时,这种可靠性似乎会发生变化,因此在根据这些设备的数据做出临床决策时应考虑到这一点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Metabolomic Profiling, Volatile Fatty Acids, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Beef Cattle Infused with Different Essential Oil Blends The Effects of Breed, Lactation Number, and Lameness on the Behavior, Production, and Reproduction of Lactating Dairy Cows in Central Texas Evaluating the Bias of Two Point-of-Care Glucometers for Calves and Ewes: Awareness for Ruminant Practitioners A Novel Direct-Fed Microbial Impacts Growth Performance and Supports Overall Health of Feedlot Cattle Estimation of Genetic Parameters for Litter Size and Growth Traits in a Prolific Line of Tunisian Barbarine Sheep
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1