Limits...
Variable classifications of glycemic index determined by glucose meters.

Lin MH, Wu MC, Lin J - J Clin Biochem Nutr (2010)

Bottom Line: The results showed OGM yield highest postprandial glucose responses of 119.6 +/- 1.5, followed by FAA, 118.4 +/- 1.2, BGM, 117.4 +/- 1.4 and AGM, 112.6 +/- 1.3 mg/dl respectively.The results suggested that the AGM, BGM and OGM are more variable methods to determine IAUC, GI and rank GI value of food than FAA.The present result does not necessarily apply to other glucose meters.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Food Science, National Pingtung University of Science and Technology, 1, Shuefu Road, Neipu, Pingtung 91201, Taiwan.

ABSTRACT
THE STUDY EVALUATED AND COMPARED THE DIFFERENCES OF GLUCOSE RESPONSES, INCREMENTAL AREA UNDER CURVE (IAUC), GLYCEMIC INDEX (GI) AND THE CLASSIFICATION OF GI VALUES BETWEEN MEASURED BY BIOCHEMICAL ANALYZER (FUJI AUTOMATIC BIOCHEMISTRY ANALYZER (FAA)) AND THREE GLUCOSE METERS: Accue Chek Advantage (AGM), BREEZE 2 (BGM), and Optimum Xceed (OGM). Ten healthy subjects were recruited for the study. The results showed OGM yield highest postprandial glucose responses of 119.6 +/- 1.5, followed by FAA, 118.4 +/- 1.2, BGM, 117.4 +/- 1.4 and AGM, 112.6 +/- 1.3 mg/dl respectively. FAA reached highest mean IAUC of 4156 +/- 208 mg x min/dl, followed by OGM (3835 +/- 270 mg x min/dl), BGM (3730 +/- 241 mg x min/dl) and AGM (3394 +/- 253 mg x min/dl). Among four methods, OGM produced highest mean GI value than FAA (87 +/- 5) than FAA, followed by BGM and AGM (77 +/- 1, 68 +/- 4 and 63 +/- 5, p<0.05). The results suggested that the AGM, BGM and OGM are more variable methods to determine IAUC, GI and rank GI value of food than FAA. The present result does not necessarily apply to other glucose meters. The performance of glucose meter to determine GI value of food should be evaluated and calibrated before use.

No MeSH data available.


Comparison of glucose concentrations between measured by FAA and OGM (n = 420, r = 0.79, p>0.05), BGM (n = 420, r = 0.82, p = 0.06) and AGM (n = 420, r = 0.84, p<0.05). Fuji automatic analyzer (FAA); advantage glucose meter (AGM); breeze 2 glucose meter (BGM); optimum xceed glucose meter (OGM).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2901763&req=5

Figure 2: Comparison of glucose concentrations between measured by FAA and OGM (n = 420, r = 0.79, p>0.05), BGM (n = 420, r = 0.82, p = 0.06) and AGM (n = 420, r = 0.84, p<0.05). Fuji automatic analyzer (FAA); advantage glucose meter (AGM); breeze 2 glucose meter (BGM); optimum xceed glucose meter (OGM).

Mentions: Scatter plot of all 420 results of each meter and biochemistry analyzer are shown in Fig. 2. The mean ± SEM glucose concentrations (test food and reference white bread) measured by OGM reached highest glucose concentration, followed by FAA, BGM, and AGM gave lowest (Table 2). ANOVA analysis showed the differences of glucose concentrations obtained using FAA was significantly greater than AGM (r = 0.84, p<0.005), but not significantly with BGM (r = 0.82, p>0.05) and OGM (r = 0.79, p>0.05). In reference white bread, the glucose concentrations measured by FAA was significantly higher than measured by AGM (r = 0.83, p<0.005). No significant were found in FAA vs OGM (r = 0.80, p>0.05) and FAA vs BGM (r = 0.85, p>0.05) in white bread. All four methods did not reach statistical difference in brown rice and reference white bread (p>0.05). However, Chiin-Hwang mango and yogurt drink showed significant difference among four methods (p<0.05). The mean coefficient of variation (CV) of OGM was 25.9 % followed by BGM, 25.5 %, AGM, 25.0 % and FAA, 22.6 %, respectively.


Variable classifications of glycemic index determined by glucose meters.

Lin MH, Wu MC, Lin J - J Clin Biochem Nutr (2010)

Comparison of glucose concentrations between measured by FAA and OGM (n = 420, r = 0.79, p>0.05), BGM (n = 420, r = 0.82, p = 0.06) and AGM (n = 420, r = 0.84, p<0.05). Fuji automatic analyzer (FAA); advantage glucose meter (AGM); breeze 2 glucose meter (BGM); optimum xceed glucose meter (OGM).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2901763&req=5

Figure 2: Comparison of glucose concentrations between measured by FAA and OGM (n = 420, r = 0.79, p>0.05), BGM (n = 420, r = 0.82, p = 0.06) and AGM (n = 420, r = 0.84, p<0.05). Fuji automatic analyzer (FAA); advantage glucose meter (AGM); breeze 2 glucose meter (BGM); optimum xceed glucose meter (OGM).
Mentions: Scatter plot of all 420 results of each meter and biochemistry analyzer are shown in Fig. 2. The mean ± SEM glucose concentrations (test food and reference white bread) measured by OGM reached highest glucose concentration, followed by FAA, BGM, and AGM gave lowest (Table 2). ANOVA analysis showed the differences of glucose concentrations obtained using FAA was significantly greater than AGM (r = 0.84, p<0.005), but not significantly with BGM (r = 0.82, p>0.05) and OGM (r = 0.79, p>0.05). In reference white bread, the glucose concentrations measured by FAA was significantly higher than measured by AGM (r = 0.83, p<0.005). No significant were found in FAA vs OGM (r = 0.80, p>0.05) and FAA vs BGM (r = 0.85, p>0.05) in white bread. All four methods did not reach statistical difference in brown rice and reference white bread (p>0.05). However, Chiin-Hwang mango and yogurt drink showed significant difference among four methods (p<0.05). The mean coefficient of variation (CV) of OGM was 25.9 % followed by BGM, 25.5 %, AGM, 25.0 % and FAA, 22.6 %, respectively.

Bottom Line: The results showed OGM yield highest postprandial glucose responses of 119.6 +/- 1.5, followed by FAA, 118.4 +/- 1.2, BGM, 117.4 +/- 1.4 and AGM, 112.6 +/- 1.3 mg/dl respectively.The results suggested that the AGM, BGM and OGM are more variable methods to determine IAUC, GI and rank GI value of food than FAA.The present result does not necessarily apply to other glucose meters.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Food Science, National Pingtung University of Science and Technology, 1, Shuefu Road, Neipu, Pingtung 91201, Taiwan.

ABSTRACT
THE STUDY EVALUATED AND COMPARED THE DIFFERENCES OF GLUCOSE RESPONSES, INCREMENTAL AREA UNDER CURVE (IAUC), GLYCEMIC INDEX (GI) AND THE CLASSIFICATION OF GI VALUES BETWEEN MEASURED BY BIOCHEMICAL ANALYZER (FUJI AUTOMATIC BIOCHEMISTRY ANALYZER (FAA)) AND THREE GLUCOSE METERS: Accue Chek Advantage (AGM), BREEZE 2 (BGM), and Optimum Xceed (OGM). Ten healthy subjects were recruited for the study. The results showed OGM yield highest postprandial glucose responses of 119.6 +/- 1.5, followed by FAA, 118.4 +/- 1.2, BGM, 117.4 +/- 1.4 and AGM, 112.6 +/- 1.3 mg/dl respectively. FAA reached highest mean IAUC of 4156 +/- 208 mg x min/dl, followed by OGM (3835 +/- 270 mg x min/dl), BGM (3730 +/- 241 mg x min/dl) and AGM (3394 +/- 253 mg x min/dl). Among four methods, OGM produced highest mean GI value than FAA (87 +/- 5) than FAA, followed by BGM and AGM (77 +/- 1, 68 +/- 4 and 63 +/- 5, p<0.05). The results suggested that the AGM, BGM and OGM are more variable methods to determine IAUC, GI and rank GI value of food than FAA. The present result does not necessarily apply to other glucose meters. The performance of glucose meter to determine GI value of food should be evaluated and calibrated before use.

No MeSH data available.