Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Tests Measuring Glycosylated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) for Glycemic Control: A Field Study in India

Overview

Journal Cureus

Specialty Biomedical Engineering

Date 2021 Oct 18

PMID 34660113

Citations 1

Authors

Sagar Khadanga

Gyanendra Singh

Abhijit P Pakhare

Rajnish Joshi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives This study was performed to estimate diagnostic accuracy of the two commercially available point-of-care tests to identify poor glycemic control defined by HbA1c levels, with high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) as a reference. Settings The study was carried at two locations, general medical outpatient department of a teaching medical college in Bhopal (urban), and a primary health care centre in a rural area in the state of Madhya Pradesh, India. Participants All individuals with diabetes mellitus who presented to the health care facility for assessment of glycemic control. We compared HbA1c estimated from two index tests (Hemocue Hb 501, Sweden; SD Biosensor, South Korea) from capillary blood samples with HPLC performed from venous blood, as a reference standard. Primary and secondary outcome measures Diagnostic properties of index tests such as sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy for identifying poor glycemic control were primary outcome measures. Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) was secondary outcome measure. Results Out of 114 patients, all received reference standard - 103 patients received Hemocue A1C test and 110 patients received SD Biosensor test. Overall both the index tests had similar diagnostic accuracy estimates. The area under the Receiver Operating Curve for SDA1c device was 0.935 (95% CI 0.886-0.983), and for Hemocue device was 0.938 (95% CI 0.893-0.984). The Hemocue device HbA1c value of above 7.0 (positive) correctly predicted poor glycemic control 92% times (81.58% for SD device). There were 4 vs. 11 device failures and 14 vs. 12 failures with SD and Hemocue, respectively. Ambient air temperatures were no different for the device test failures. Conclusions Commercially available point-of-care tests evaluated in this study are comparable and an acceptable alternative to HPLC-based measurements for the assessment of glycemic control. Tests and device failure rates of both the index tests are similar.

Citing Articles

A Comparative Evaluation of Point-of-Care and Laboratory HbA1c Testing in Diabetes Care: An Indian Perspective.

Rathod L, Khan S, Shubham S, Bisne N, Singh S, Kumar M Cureus. 2024; 16(9):e69956.

PMID: 39445250 PMC: 11496592. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.69956.

References

Karnchanasorn R, Huang J, Ou H, Feng W, Chuang L, Chiu K . Comparison of the Current Diagnostic Criterion of HbA1c with Fasting and 2-Hour Plasma Glucose Concentration. J Diabetes Res. 2016; 2016:6195494. PMC: 4997021. DOI: 10.1155/2016/6195494. View

Little R, Roberts W . A review of variant hemoglobins interfering with hemoglobin A1c measurement. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2010; 3(3):446-51. PMC: 2769887. DOI: 10.1177/193229680900300307. View

Sicard D, Taylor J . Comparison of point-of-care HbA1c test versus standardized laboratory testing. Ann Pharmacother. 2005; 39(6):1024-8. DOI: 10.1345/aph.1E504. View

Petersen J, Omoruyi F, Mohammad A, Shea T, Okorodudu A, Ju H . Hemoglobin A1c: assessment of three POC analyzers relative to a central laboratory method. Clin Chim Acta. 2010; 411(23-24):2062-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.cca.2010.09.004. View

. Effect of intensive blood-glucose control with metformin on complications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 34). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Lancet. 1998; 352(9131):854-65. View

Buderer N . Statistical methodology: I. Incorporating the prevalence of disease into the sample size calculation for sensitivity and specificity. Acad Emerg Med. 1996; 3(9):895-900. DOI: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.1996.tb03538.x. View

Karami A, Baradaran A . Comparative evaluation of three different methods for HbA1c measurement with High-performance liquid chromatography in diabetic patients. Adv Biomed Res. 2014; 3:94. PMC: 4007341. DOI: 10.4103/2277-9175.129364. View

Marley J, Oh M, Hadgraft N, Singleton S, Isaacs K, Atkinson D . Using glycated haemoglobin testing to simplify diabetes screening in remote Aboriginal Australian health care settings. Med J Aust. 2015; 203(1):28-32. DOI: 10.5694/mja14.01575. View

Villar-Del-Campo M, Rodriguez-Caravaca G, Gil-Yonte P, Cidoncha-Calderon E, Garcia-Cruces Mendez J, Donnay-Perez S . [Diagnostic agreement between two glycosylated a1b hemoglobin methods in Primary Care]. Semergen. 2014; 40(8):431-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.semerg.2014.01.012. View

10.

Alberti K, Zimmet P . Definition, diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus and its complications. Part 1: diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus provisional report of a WHO consultation. Diabet Med. 1998; 15(7):539-53. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9136(199807)15:7<539::AID-DIA668>3.0.CO;2-S. View

11.

Berbudi A, Rahmadika N, Tjahjadi A, Ruslami R . Performance of Point-of-Care Testing Compared with the Standard Laboratory Diagnostic Test in the Measurement of HbA1c in Indonesian Diabetic and Nondiabetic Subjects. J Diabetes Res. 2020; 2020:2037565. PMC: 7369652. DOI: 10.1155/2020/2037565. View

12.

Arrendale J, Cherian S, Zineh I, Chirico M, Taylor J . Assessment of glycated hemoglobin using A1CNow+ point-of-care device as compared to central laboratory testing. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2009; 2(5):822-7. PMC: 2769784. DOI: 10.1177/193229680800200512. View

13.

Nathan D, Genuth S, Lachin J, Cleary P, Crofford O, Davis M . 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. 1993; 329(14):977-86. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199309303291401. View

14.

John A, Price C . Existing and Emerging Technologies for Point-of-Care Testing. Clin Biochem Rev. 2014; 35(3):155-67. PMC: 4204237. View

15.

Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, Sicree R, King H . Global prevalence of diabetes: estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030. Diabetes Care. 2004; 27(5):1047-53. DOI: 10.2337/diacare.27.5.1047. View

16.

Little R . Glycated hemoglobin standardization--National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP) perspective. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2003; 41(9):1191-8. DOI: 10.1515/CCLM.2003.183. View

17.

Knaebel J, Irvin B, Xie C . Accuracy and clinical utility of a point-of-care HbA1c testing device. Postgrad Med. 2013; 125(3):91-8. DOI: 10.3810/pgm.2013.05.2664. View

18.

Herman W, Ye W, Griffin S, Simmons R, Davies M, Khunti K . Early Detection and Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Reduce Cardiovascular Morbidity and Mortality: A Simulation of the Results of the Anglo-Danish-Dutch Study of Intensive Treatment in People With Screen-Detected Diabetes in Primary Care.... Diabetes Care. 2015; 38(8):1449-55. PMC: 4512138. DOI: 10.2337/dc14-2459. View

19.

Gomez-Peralta F, Abreu C, Andreu-Urioste L, Antoli A, Rico-Fontsare C, Martin-Fernandez D . Point-of-care capillary HbA1c measurement in the emergency department: a useful tool to detect unrecognized and uncontrolled diabetes. Int J Emerg Med. 2016; 9(1):7. PMC: 4760960. DOI: 10.1186/s12245-016-0107-6. View

20.

Klenk D, Hermanson G, Krohn R, Fujimoto E, Mallia A, Smith P . Determination of glycosylated hemoglobin by affinity chromatography: comparison with colorimetric and ion-exchange methods, and effects of common interferences. Clin Chem. 1982; 28(10):2088-94. View