DOI: 10.2337/diaclin.25.2.43 © 2007 by the American Diabetes Association
Evaluation of Inaccuracies in the Measurement of Glycemia in the Laboratory, by Glucose Meters, and Through Measurement of Hemoglobin A1c
IN BRIEF The accurate measurement of glucose is extremely important in the diagnosis of diabetes and pre-diabetes, where the laboratory values are crucial; in the management of diabetes, where glucose meter values are crucial; and in attainment of goals in diabetes, where hemoglobin A1c measurement is crucial. This article reviews pitfalls that may interfere with accuracy of glucose measurement in each of these three areas and how this inaccuracy may be evaluated and managed in the primary care setting. Three case presentations of disparity are discussed.
This article provides clinicians with a framework for the logical analysis of apparent disparities in glucose measurement among laboratory glucose tests, home meters, and hemoglobin A1c (A1C) tests. The accurate measurement of glucose in whole blood, serum, and plasma has achieved increased importance during the past 15 years. The concept that improvement in glucose levels results in reduced diabetes complications took firm hold in 1993 with publication of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) for type 1 diabetes,1 and the U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study for type 2 diabetes,2 and most recently with the follow-up of the DCCT.3 Targeted goals for fasting, preprandial, and postprandial glucose have become extremely important in achieving desirable A1C values. Accurate glucose values also play an important role in the diagnosis of diabetes, especially since 1997, when the Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes changed the definition of diabetes by reducing the required fasting plasma glucose (FPG) level from > 140 mg/dl (established with the National Diabetes Data Group in 1979) to > 126 mg/dl.4 This committee also established a new diagnostic category of diabetes referred to as impaired fasting glucose (IFG), representing glucose values between 110 and 125 mg/dl. In 2003, the Expert Committee further reduced the definition of the normal FPG level from 110 to 100 mg/dl,5 making the glucose levels between 100 and 126 mg/dl definitive of IFG. Subsequently, the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services coined the term "prediabetes" to represent what had previously been euphemistically called IFG and impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). Accurate laboratory glucose values are paramount in correctly defining patients with pre-diabetes. Failure to diagnose this condition has serious long-term consequences because pre-diabetes carries an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, and its treatment can result in delay or prevention of the onset of type 2 diabetes.6 Tight control of plasma glucose is now a mandate for diabetes treatment, with a general goal A1C of < 7%. This, combined with the lower diagnostic criteria for diabetes (> 126 mg/dl FPG) and the new category of pre-diabetes starting at an FPG of 100 mg/dl, our ability to rely on the accuracy of glucose measurement is clearly crucial. Thus, the stage is set for a renewed look at the accuracy of the laboratory values for proper diagnosis, of home glucose monitoring results to guide therapeutic decisions, and of A1C results to measure the success of treatment.
Since the report of the National Diabetes Data Group in 1979, plasma has been the testing agent of choice for glucose determination.7 In 1997, the aforementioned Expert Committee recommended FPG measurement as the diagnostic test of choice because it is easier to perform and more reproducible than the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).4 The National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry, in its 2002 publication "Laboratory Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus," established criteria for a proper diagnostic glucose test, including 1) an accredited laboratory determination, 2) an FPG drawn in the morning after 8 hours of fasting, 3) cells and plasma separated within 1 hour, and 4) blood placed in a tube with a glycolytic inhibitor if immediate separation cannot occur.8 The use of home glucose meters for the diagnosis of diabetes is not recommended because of their potential for imprecision.8 Likewise, the American Diabetes Association considers A1C a method of assessing long-term glucose control but not a method for diagnosis of diabetes. Although other markers, such as elevated cytokines from visceral fat, may become a future indicator for earlier diagnosis of diabetes, state-of-the-art diagnosis at this time relies on accurate laboratory glucose measurement.
Comparison with a reference gold standard is a common method for assessment of accuracy. The National Institute of Standards and Technology maintains the glucose sample materials that are the gold standard by which instrument manufacturers determine the accuracy of their glucose measurement devices.9 Clinical accuracy may be less precise but is defined by the fact that the results will lead to the same management decision.10 Clarke et al.'s grid analysis of glucose is helpful in this regard.11 A major problem with the accurate measurement of glucose is that its value continues to decrease in whole blood after specimen collection because of red blood cell glycolysis; processing time is therefore an important variable.10 The ability of individual patients to effectively become laboratory technicians is a significant variable in assessing total error with glucose meter usage. For example, in a study using five glucose meters, the coefficient of variation with the testing done by a laboratory technician was 2.5-5.9%, but it was significantly worse (7-20%) when testing was carried out by a group of patients.12 The measurement of accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices also presents challenges because the dynamics of the rate of change of glucose need to be assessed, and new techniques are needed to define this kind of accuracy.13 In addition, glucose levels as measured in interstitial fluid lag behind blood glucose by an average of 17 minutes.14 There have been > 20 different methods to measure A1C, which led to different reference ranges and confusion about goals.8,15 Since the DCCT, however, the National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program has had a 99% success rate with laboratories in the United States in establishing an A1C testing method certified as compatible with the DCCT.15 This allows all clinicians to refer to the same DCCT values when discussing A1C goals with patients.
Case Presentation A 51-year-old patient is being screened for type 2 diabetes because of family history. Morning laboratory fasting glucose values are obtained from one blood draw on 12 April 2005 at 8:30 A.M., but the blood is processed in the laboratory in two different tubes with the following results:
Question
Discussion
Causes of Laboratory Glucose Testing Variability: Analytical and Preanalytical
Analytical variation
The requirement that serum samples must be allowed to clot before serum glucose is tested significantly increases turnaround time for glucose results compared with plasma results. Thus, faster laboratory turnaround time is one reason that plasma has become the gold standard for glucose measurement. However, in most laboratory panels (i.e., the comprehensive metabolic panel), serum is the most suitable sample for all other chemistries performed, and so a "panel" glucose is usually a serum glucose. Plasma (Figure 2) is the cell-free liquid remaining after whole blood is centrifuged. The major difference from serum is that plasma contains the clotting proteins, but serum does not.16
Potential analytical problems. If plasma is used, the quickness of separation of the red blood cells from the plasma by centrifugation is a critical element, because it is estimated that plasma glucose levels are reduced 10 mg/dl per hour by consumption of glucose in the red blood
cell's glycolytic
pathway.8 Despite
the use of coagulation inhibitors in plasma testing, some studies have shown
that sodium fluoride takes time to work, so that at the end of the 1st hour,
glucose decrease in the plasma is similar regardless of whether sodium floride
was used in the
tube.9 Thus, a
plasma sample that was immediately centrifuged would be expected to have a
significantly different glucose than one centrifuged many hours later.
There is also some suggestion of an inherent difference between serum
glucose and plasma glucose; serum glucose has been found to be 2-5% higher
than plasma glucose (R Gambino, unpublished
observations).9
Either hexokinase or glucokinase enzyme analysis is used in
Preanalytical variability If fasting can include both morning and afternoon, this biological variation is even larger, because morning fasting blood glucose is higher than afternoon fasting blood glucose.18 It is important for clinicians to consider the analytical and preanalytical variation when evaluating a laboratory glucose level (Table 1). These considerations can be very important in the management and classification of diabetes.
Recommendations for Improvement in Laboratory Testing In its position paper on laboratory analysis in diabetes,8 the National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry states that, "no consensus has been achieved on goals for glucose analysis." Its recommendation is "an analytic imprecision < 3.3%, bias < 2.5%, and total error < 7.9%." To achieve this goal, it may be necessary for an expert committee to determine more specific guidelines for laboratory glucose testing, similar to those of the National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program.
Case Presentation A 56-year-old type 2 diabetic patient presents for 3-month follow-up. His medications include metformin, 1 g twice daily; rosiglitazone, 8 mg per day; and NPH insulin, 20 units at bedtime. His A1C performed yesterday is 8.1% (in accordance with the National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program), and two recent laboratory FPG values are 158 and 152 mg/dl. Home blood glucose monitoring results show consistent fasting values of 115-120 mg/dl (within the target range).
Question
Discussion
Accuracy Goals for Home Glucose Monitors The goals for glucose meter accuracy have been quite variable. Clarke et al.11 proposed an accuracy grid to establish a more expansive set of goals for glucose meter usage taking into account clinical accuracy, which was defined as within 20% of the laboratory glucose. For glucose levels > 75 mg/dl, the International Organization for Standardization recommends a goal for glucose meter error of within 20% when compared with a reference glucose sample, but for glucose levels < 75 mg/dl, the goal is for 95% of readings to be within 15 mg/dl of the reference.15 The U.S. Food and Drug Administration goal for glucose meters is within 20% of the reference value when glucose is > 100 mg/dl and within 20 mg/dl when glucose is < 100 mg/dl.10
Multiple Variables Affecting Glucose Meter Usage
Glucose meter sample: whole blood or interstitial fluid? Because acute tight control of glucose in critically ill patients has improved outcomes, point-of-care testing glucose meters are frequently used in many intensive care units (ICUs).25 A 2005 Mayo Clinic ICU study compared > 800 point-of-care glucose meter measurements to simultaneous plasma glucose measurements in the clinical laboratory and reported an important finding: "for the individual patient, bedside glucose meter measurement gives an unreliable estimate of plasma glucose."26 This is most likely related to the conditions frequently found in ICU patients that have been known to cause inaccurate results in glucose meters, including hypoxia, low hematocrit, and low systolic blood pressure.27 With CGM devices, interstitial fluid is extracted from subcutaneous tissue by electric current, and glucose is then measured in the interstitial fluid but without a disruption of the intact skin.14 A 2004 study of two CGM systems by the Diabetes Research in Children Network concluded that that they are unreliable at hypoglycemia detection.28 Nevertheless, these devices make a major contribution by demonstrating trends in blood glucose levels over time.29
Alternate site testing
Recent studies of glucose meter accuracy
A 2005 report by Clarke et
al.33 compared two
CGM systems to reference glucose as tested by the Beckman Glucose Analyzer.
Using a new method called "continuous glucose error grid
analysis," Clarke et al. determined that both of these devices were
clinically accurate during euglycemia (70-180 mg/dl), with Variables affecting glucose meter usage are summarized in Table 2.
Case Presentation A 46-year-old African-American man was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes 6 months ago. The laboratory fasting glucose values consistently average 200 mg/dl, and before-supper glucose is an average of 190 mg/dl. During this 6-month period, the A1C values have been measured at 6.8 and 6.7%.
Question
Discussion
A1C Variables
Red blood cell life span
Hemoglobinopathies The variables related to A1C measurement are summarized in Table 3.
The future for A1C
The diagnosis and management of diabetes requires accurate assessment of glucose values by laboratories, glucose meters, and by A1C. This article has summarized factors providers should assess when suspicious circumstances of accuracy arise, as highlighted in the three case studies. The importance of attaining an A1C goal has achieved great recognition, not only for patients, but also for physicians, whose reimbursement is now being tied to successful A1C goal attainment as well as quality of care.38 If there seems to be a disparity in a patient's glucose numbers, this article offers a framework with which to search for a logical explanation.
Richard J. Schrot, MD, is an associate professor in the Department of Family Medicine, and Philip Foulis, MD, MPH, is an associate professor of pathology at the University of South Florida College of Medicine in Tampa. Kirit T. Patel, MD, is medical director of Quest Diagnostics Inc., in Tampa, Fla. Note of disclosure: Dr. Patel is employed by a national laboratory that performs medical testing, including blood glucose and A1C measurements.
1 The DCCT Research Group: The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 329:977 -986, 1993 2 U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study Group: Intensive blood-glucose control with sulfonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes. Lancet 352:837 -853, 1998[Medline] 3 The DCCT/EDIC Study Research Group:
Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type
1 diabetes. N Engl J Med 353:2643
-2653, 2005 4 Report of the Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes Care20 : 1183-1197,1997 .[Medline] 5 The Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of
Diabetes Mellitus: Follow-up report on the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus.
Diabetes Care 26:3160
-3167, 2003 6 Diabetes Prevention Program Research
Group: Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with
lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med346
: 393-403,2002 7 National Diabetes Data Group: Classification and diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and other categories of glucose intolerance. Diabetes28 : 1039-1057,1979[Medline] 8 Sacks D, Bruns D,
Goldstein D, Mackaren N, McDonald J, Parrott M: Guidelines and recommendations
for laboratory analysis in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus.
Clin Chem 48:436
-472, 2002 9 Schwartz J, Reichberg S, Gambino R: Glucose testing variability and the need for an expert oversight committee [article online]. CAP Today May 2005. Available from http://www.cap.org/apps/docs/cap_today/feature_stories/0505Commentary.html 10 Nichols J: What is accuracy and how close must agreement be? Diabetes Technol Therapeut 7:558 -562, 2005[Medline] 11 Clarke L, Cox D, Goder-Frederick L, Carter W, Pohl S: Evaluating clinical accuracy of systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose. Diabetes Care10 : 622-628,1987[Abstract] 12 Skeie S, Thue G,
Nerhus K, Sandberg S: Instruments for self-monitoring of blood glucose:
comparisons of testing quality achieved by patients and a technician.
Clin Chem 48:994
-1003, 2002 13 Kollman C, Wilson D, Wysocki T, Tamborlane W, Beck R: Limitations of statistical measures of error in assessing the accuracy of continuous glucose sensors. Diabetes Technol Therapeut 7:665 -672, 2005[Medline] 14 Kulcu E, Tamada J,
Reach G, Potts R, Lesho M: Physiological differences between interstitial
glucose and blood glucose measured in human subjects. Diabetes
Care 26:2405
-2409, 2003 15 Saudek C, Derr R,
Kalyani R: Assessing glycemia in diabetes using self-monitoring of blood
glucose and hemoglobin A1C. JAMA295
: 1688-1697,2006 16 Venes D (Ed.): Taber's Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary. 19th ed. Philadelphia, PA, F.A. Davies, 2001, p.1601 -1602 and 1876. 17 Ollerton R, Playle R, Ahmed K, Dunstan F, Luzio S, Owens D: Day to day variability of fasting plasma glucose in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetic subjects. Diabetes Care 22:394 -398, 1999[Abstract] 18 Troisi R, Cowie C,
Harris M: Diurnal variation in fasting plasma glucose: implications for
diagnosis of diabetes in patients examined in the afternoon.
JAMA 284:3157
-3159, 2000 19 American Diabetes Association: Consensus statement on self-monitoring of blood glucose. Diabetes Care 10: 93-99,1987[Medline] 20 American Diabetes Association: Consensus statement on self-monitoring of blood glucose. Diabetes Care 17: 81-86,1994[Medline] 21 American Diabetes Association: Self-monitoring of blood glucose. Diabetes Care19 (Suppl. 1):S62 -S66, 1996 22 Lewandrowski K, Cheek R, Nathan D: Implementation of capillary blood glucose monitoring in a teaching hospital and determination of program requirements to maintain quality testing. Am J Med 93:419 -426, 1992[Medline] 23 Johnson R, Baker J: Error detection and measurement in glucose monitors. Clini Chim Acta 307: 61-67,2001 24 American Diabetes Association: Tests of glycemia in diabetes. Diabetes Care27 (Suppl. 1):S91 -S93, 2004[Medline] 25 American Diabetes Association: Standards
of medical care in diabetes 2006. Diabetes Care29
(Suppl. 1):S4
-S42, 2006 26 Finkielman J, Oyen L, Afessa B: Agreement between bedside blood and plasma glucose measurement in the ICU setting. Chest 127:1749 -1751, 2005[Medline] 27 Binette T, Cembrowski G: Diverse influences of blood glucose measurements in the ICU setting. Chest 128:3084 -3085, 2005 28 Diabetes Research in Children Network Study
Group: Accuracy of the GlucoWatch G2 Biographer and the
continuous glucose monitoring system during hypoglycemia. Diabetes
Care 27: 722-726,2004 29 Kovatchev B,
Gonder-Frederick L, Cox D, Clarke W: Evaluating the accuracy of continuous
glucose-monitoring sensors. Diabetes Care27
: 1922-1928,2004 30 LifeScan Corporation: FDA clears new labeling guidelines for alternate site testing option with LifeScan blood glucose monitoring products (Press Release). 17 December 2001. Available online from http://www.jnj.com/news/jnj_news/20020404_0933.htm;jsessionid=GAOK2WD2YRCOK 31 Lock J, Szuts E,
Malomo K, Anagnostopoulos A: Whole-blood glucose testing at alternate sites.
Diabetes Care 25:337
-341, 2002 32 Diabetes Research in Children Network Study Group: Accuracy of new-generation home blood glucose meters in a Diabetes Research in Children Network inpatient exercise study. Diabetes Technol Therapeut 7:675 -680, 2005[Medline] 33 Clarke W, Anderson
S, Farhy L, Breton M, Gonder-Frederick L, Cox D, Kovatchev B: Evaluating the
clinical accuracy of two continuous glucose sensors using continuous glucose
error grid analysis. Diabetes Care28
: 2412-2417,2005 34 Rohlfing C,
Wiedmeyer H, Little R, England J, Tennill A, Goldstein D: Defining the
relationship between plasma glucose and HbA1C. Diabetes
Care 25: 275-278,2002 35 Tseng C,
Brimacombe M, Xie M, Rajan M, Wang H, Kolassa J, Crystal S, Chen T, Pogach L,
Safford M: Seasonal patterns in monthly hemoglobin A1C values. Am J
Epidemiol 161:565
-574, 2005 36 Bry L, Chen P,
Sacks D: Effects of hemoglobin variants and chemically modified derivatives on
assays for glycohemoglobin. Clin Chem47
: 153-163,2001 37 Jeppsson J, Kobold U, Barr J: Approved IFCC reference method for the measurement of HbA1c in human blood. Clin Chem Lab Med40 : 78-89,2002[Medline] 38 Kilpatrick E:
HbA1c measurement. J Clin Pathol57
: 344-345,2004
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||