An Evaluation of Point-of-Care HbA1c, HbA1c Home Kits, and Glucose Management Indicator: Potential Solutions for Telehealth Glycemic Assessments.

IF 2.4 Q3 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM Diabetology Pub Date : 2022-09-01 Epub Date: 2022-09-13 DOI:10.3390/diabetology3030037
Dessi P Zaharieva, Ananta Addala, Priya Prahalad, Brianna Leverenz, Nora Arrizon-Ruiz, Victoria Y Ding, Manisha Desai, Amy B Karger, David M Maahs
{"title":"An Evaluation of Point-of-Care HbA1c, HbA1c Home Kits, and Glucose Management Indicator: Potential Solutions for Telehealth Glycemic Assessments.","authors":"Dessi P Zaharieva, Ananta Addala, Priya Prahalad, Brianna Leverenz, Nora Arrizon-Ruiz, Victoria Y Ding, Manisha Desai, Amy B Karger, David M Maahs","doi":"10.3390/diabetology3030037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>During the COVID-19 pandemic, fewer in-person clinic visits resulted in fewer point-of-care (POC) HbA1c measurements. In this sub-study, we assessed the performance of alternative glycemic measures that can be obtained remotely, such as HbA1c home kits and Glucose Management Indicator (GMI) values from Dexcom Clarity. Home kit HbA1c (<i>n</i> = 99), GMI, (<i>n</i> = 88), and POC HbA1c (<i>n</i> = 32) were collected from youth with T1D (age 9.7 ± 4.6 years). Bland-Altman analyses and Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (<i>ρ</i><sub>c</sub>) were used to characterize the agreement between paired HbA1c measures. Both the HbA1c home kit and GMI showed a slight positive bias (mean difference 0.18% and 0.34%, respectively) and strong concordance with POC HbA1c (<i>ρ</i><sub>c</sub> = 0.982 [0.965, 0.991] and 0.823 [0.686, 0.904], respectively). GMI showed a slight positive bias (mean difference 0.28%) and fair concordance (<i>ρ</i><sub>c</sub> = 0.750 [0.658, 0.820]) to the HbA1c home kit. In conclusion, the strong concordance of GMI and home kits to POC A1c measures suggest their utility in telehealth visits assessments. Although these are not candidates for replacement, these measures can facilitate telehealth visits, particularly in the context of other POC HbA1c measurements from an individual.</p>","PeriodicalId":72798,"journal":{"name":"Diabetology","volume":"3 3","pages":"494-501"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10166120/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/diabetology3030037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/9/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic, fewer in-person clinic visits resulted in fewer point-of-care (POC) HbA1c measurements. In this sub-study, we assessed the performance of alternative glycemic measures that can be obtained remotely, such as HbA1c home kits and Glucose Management Indicator (GMI) values from Dexcom Clarity. Home kit HbA1c (n = 99), GMI, (n = 88), and POC HbA1c (n = 32) were collected from youth with T1D (age 9.7 ± 4.6 years). Bland-Altman analyses and Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (ρc) were used to characterize the agreement between paired HbA1c measures. Both the HbA1c home kit and GMI showed a slight positive bias (mean difference 0.18% and 0.34%, respectively) and strong concordance with POC HbA1c (ρc = 0.982 [0.965, 0.991] and 0.823 [0.686, 0.904], respectively). GMI showed a slight positive bias (mean difference 0.28%) and fair concordance (ρc = 0.750 [0.658, 0.820]) to the HbA1c home kit. In conclusion, the strong concordance of GMI and home kits to POC A1c measures suggest their utility in telehealth visits assessments. Although these are not candidates for replacement, these measures can facilitate telehealth visits, particularly in the context of other POC HbA1c measurements from an individual.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
对护理点 HbA1c、HbA1c 家庭试剂盒和血糖管理指标的评估:远程健康血糖评估的潜在解决方案。
在 COVID-19 大流行期间,亲自到诊所就诊的人数减少,导致护理点 (POC) HbA1c 测量值减少。在本子研究中,我们评估了可远程获取的其他血糖测量方法的性能,如家用 HbA1c 套件和 Dexcom Clarity 血糖管理指标 (GMI) 值。家用试剂盒 HbA1c(99 人)、GMI(88 人)和 POC HbA1c(32 人)的采集对象是患有 T1D 的青少年(年龄为 9.7 ± 4.6 岁)。使用 Bland-Altman 分析和 Lin 一致性相关系数 (ρc)来描述配对 HbA1c 测量之间的一致性。HbA1c 家用试剂盒和 GMI 均显示出轻微的正偏差(平均差分别为 0.18% 和 0.34%),与 POC HbA1c 的一致性很强(ρc = 0.982 [0.965, 0.991] 和 0.823 [0.686, 0.904])。GMI 与 HbA1c 家庭试剂盒显示出轻微的正偏差(平均差为 0.28%)和较好的一致性(ρc = 0.750 [0.658, 0.820])。总之,GMI 和家用试剂盒与 POC A1c 测量结果的一致性很高,这表明它们在远程健康访问评估中很有用。虽然它们不能取代其他测量方法,但这些方法可以促进远程健康访问,尤其是在个人进行其他 POC HbA1c 测量的情况下。
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
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Improved Diabetic Foot Ulcer Outcomes in Medicaid Beneficiaries with Podiatric Care Access. Outcomes for Patients with Diabetic Foot Ulcers Following Transition from Medicaid to Commercial Insurance. Does the Efficacy of Semaglutide Treatment Differ between Low-Risk and High-Risk Subgroups of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Obesity Based on SCORE2, SCORE2-Diabetes, and ASCVD Calculations? Diet Supplementation with Rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis L.) Leaf Powder Exhibits an Antidiabetic Property in Streptozotocin-Induced Diabetic Male Wistar Rats A Comparative Analysis of Machine Learning Models for the Detection of Undiagnosed Diabetes Patients
×
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