Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: This study investigated the performance of the A1CNow(+®) test (Bayer Diabetes Care, Sunnyvale, CA) in a large population of Chinese patients with diabetes. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels in 1,618 Chinese patients with diabetes 10-94 years of age were measured with both the A1CNow(+) test, from a fingerstick blood sample, and the high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) test, using a venous blood sample, within 24 h. The reportable ranges of the HbA1c values were 4.0-13.0% (A1CNow(+)) and 4.1-16.8% (HPLC). An error grid analysis (EGA) method was developed to quantify the accuracy of the A1CNow(+) results against the HPLC reference results. RESULTS: The A1CNow(+) results were highly correlated with the HPLC reference results (r=0.945, P<0.01). Passing-Bablok regression analysis showed a good linear agreement between the two variables, and the linear regression equation fitted as y=-0.10+1.00x (P=0.21). The Bland-Altman difference plot presented that the mean bias of the A1CNow(+) results minus the HPLC reference results was -0.09% (P<0.001); the 95% confidence intervals for the limits of agreement were -1.28% to 1.09%, with 96.5% of the data points lying within this zone. The results of the EGA showed that 80.2% of the A1CNow(+) results were accurate, 17.7% were acceptable, 1.9% may lead to inappropriate treatment, and 0.3% may lead to severe clinical consequence. CONCLUSIONS: The A1CNow(+) test values demonstrated a slight negative bias from the HPLC values. The majority of A1CNow(+) test values were accurate when compared with results from the reference method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jiang et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: