Technical note: Glucose concentration in dairy cows measured using 6 handheld meters designed for human use

R. B. Lopes, A. Valldecabres, Noelia Silva Del Rio

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The objective was to evaluate the precision and accuracy of 6 handheld glucose meters, designed for human use [Accu-Chek Aviva Plus (AC), Roche Diabetes Care, Mannheim, Germany; Aga Matrix (AM), AgaMatrix Inc., Salem, NH; Contour Next (CT), Bayer HealthCare LLC, Leverkusen, Germany; FreeStyle Precision Neo (FS), Abbott Diabetes Care Ltd., Alameda, CA; Nova Max Plus (NM), Nova Biomedical Corporation, Waltham, MA; and Precision Xtra (PX), Abbott Diabetes Care Ltd., Witney, UK] to measure blood glucose concentration in dairy cows. Blood samples from Jersey and Jersey × Holstein crossbreed cows (n = 97 for all; except CT, n = 71) were collected and analyzed in triplicate using the 6 handheld glucose meters evaluated. Plasma glucose was also measured with the laboratory reference method (hexokinase glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase). Based on the intra-assay coefficient of variation (CV), precision varied across handheld glucose meters: AC (2.2%), CT (4.0%), PX (4.7%), FS (5.6%), AM (6.2%), and NM (6.7%). Lin's concordance correlation coefficients between handheld glucose meters and the reference method were 0.75 for FS, 0.74 for PX, 0.62 for AC, 0.55 for CT, 0.53 for NM, and 0.48 for AM. Based on Passing-Bablok regression, the AM and PX meters showed bias in the measurements of blood glucose. Bland-Altman plots indicated a negative bias (FS = −0.25 mmol/L; CT = −0.60 mmol/L) or a positive bias (AM = 0.29 mmol/L; PX = 0.33 mmol/L; NM = 0.52 mmol/L; AC = 0.65 mmol/L) between handheld glucose meters and the reference method. All handheld glucose meters evaluated had wide limits of agreement (LoA) ranging from −0.18 to 1.47 mmol/L (AC, narrowest LoA) to −1.25 to 1.82 mmol/L (AM, widest LoA). Bias was the major contributor to the total observed error (TEobs), accounting for 81.5% of the TEobs in AC, 72.0% in CT, 64.9% in AM, 61.1% in NM, 57.8% in PX, and 56.2% in FS. Overall, although some handheld meters (AC, CT, and PX) showed satisfactory precision, none were accurate measuring glucose. Future studies should evaluate whether incorporating algorithms designed for cattle can improve accuracy and precision of handheld glucose meters.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Dairy Science
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

dairy cows
Glucose
glucose
diabetes
Germany
Blood Glucose
Jersey
blood glucose
Hexokinase
Glucosephosphate Dehydrogenase
hexokinase
corporations
glucose-6-phosphate 1-dehydrogenase
health services
Delivery of Health Care
crossbreds
Holstein
methodology
cows
cattle

Keywords

  • dairy cow
  • glucose
  • handheld meter

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Food Science
  • Animal Science and Zoology
  • Genetics

Cite this

Technical note : Glucose concentration in dairy cows measured using 6 handheld meters designed for human use. / Lopes, R. B.; Valldecabres, A.; Silva Del Rio, Noelia.

In: Journal of Dairy Science, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{14cf6815f8a94e57961ceaeab4d07f73,
title = "Technical note: Glucose concentration in dairy cows measured using 6 handheld meters designed for human use",
abstract = "The objective was to evaluate the precision and accuracy of 6 handheld glucose meters, designed for human use [Accu-Chek Aviva Plus (AC), Roche Diabetes Care, Mannheim, Germany; Aga Matrix (AM), AgaMatrix Inc., Salem, NH; Contour Next (CT), Bayer HealthCare LLC, Leverkusen, Germany; FreeStyle Precision Neo (FS), Abbott Diabetes Care Ltd., Alameda, CA; Nova Max Plus (NM), Nova Biomedical Corporation, Waltham, MA; and Precision Xtra (PX), Abbott Diabetes Care Ltd., Witney, UK] to measure blood glucose concentration in dairy cows. Blood samples from Jersey and Jersey × Holstein crossbreed cows (n = 97 for all; except CT, n = 71) were collected and analyzed in triplicate using the 6 handheld glucose meters evaluated. Plasma glucose was also measured with the laboratory reference method (hexokinase glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase). Based on the intra-assay coefficient of variation (CV), precision varied across handheld glucose meters: AC (2.2{\%}), CT (4.0{\%}), PX (4.7{\%}), FS (5.6{\%}), AM (6.2{\%}), and NM (6.7{\%}). Lin's concordance correlation coefficients between handheld glucose meters and the reference method were 0.75 for FS, 0.74 for PX, 0.62 for AC, 0.55 for CT, 0.53 for NM, and 0.48 for AM. Based on Passing-Bablok regression, the AM and PX meters showed bias in the measurements of blood glucose. Bland-Altman plots indicated a negative bias (FS = −0.25 mmol/L; CT = −0.60 mmol/L) or a positive bias (AM = 0.29 mmol/L; PX = 0.33 mmol/L; NM = 0.52 mmol/L; AC = 0.65 mmol/L) between handheld glucose meters and the reference method. All handheld glucose meters evaluated had wide limits of agreement (LoA) ranging from −0.18 to 1.47 mmol/L (AC, narrowest LoA) to −1.25 to 1.82 mmol/L (AM, widest LoA). Bias was the major contributor to the total observed error (TEobs), accounting for 81.5{\%} of the TEobs in AC, 72.0{\%} in CT, 64.9{\%} in AM, 61.1{\%} in NM, 57.8{\%} in PX, and 56.2{\%} in FS. Overall, although some handheld meters (AC, CT, and PX) showed satisfactory precision, none were accurate measuring glucose. Future studies should evaluate whether incorporating algorithms designed for cattle can improve accuracy and precision of handheld glucose meters.",
keywords = "dairy cow, glucose, handheld meter",
author = "Lopes, {R. B.} and A. Valldecabres and {Silva Del Rio}, Noelia",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3168/jds.2018-15688",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Dairy Science",
issn = "0022-0302",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Technical note

T2 - Glucose concentration in dairy cows measured using 6 handheld meters designed for human use

AU - Lopes, R. B.

AU - Valldecabres, A.

AU - Silva Del Rio, Noelia

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - The objective was to evaluate the precision and accuracy of 6 handheld glucose meters, designed for human use [Accu-Chek Aviva Plus (AC), Roche Diabetes Care, Mannheim, Germany; Aga Matrix (AM), AgaMatrix Inc., Salem, NH; Contour Next (CT), Bayer HealthCare LLC, Leverkusen, Germany; FreeStyle Precision Neo (FS), Abbott Diabetes Care Ltd., Alameda, CA; Nova Max Plus (NM), Nova Biomedical Corporation, Waltham, MA; and Precision Xtra (PX), Abbott Diabetes Care Ltd., Witney, UK] to measure blood glucose concentration in dairy cows. Blood samples from Jersey and Jersey × Holstein crossbreed cows (n = 97 for all; except CT, n = 71) were collected and analyzed in triplicate using the 6 handheld glucose meters evaluated. Plasma glucose was also measured with the laboratory reference method (hexokinase glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase). Based on the intra-assay coefficient of variation (CV), precision varied across handheld glucose meters: AC (2.2%), CT (4.0%), PX (4.7%), FS (5.6%), AM (6.2%), and NM (6.7%). Lin's concordance correlation coefficients between handheld glucose meters and the reference method were 0.75 for FS, 0.74 for PX, 0.62 for AC, 0.55 for CT, 0.53 for NM, and 0.48 for AM. Based on Passing-Bablok regression, the AM and PX meters showed bias in the measurements of blood glucose. Bland-Altman plots indicated a negative bias (FS = −0.25 mmol/L; CT = −0.60 mmol/L) or a positive bias (AM = 0.29 mmol/L; PX = 0.33 mmol/L; NM = 0.52 mmol/L; AC = 0.65 mmol/L) between handheld glucose meters and the reference method. All handheld glucose meters evaluated had wide limits of agreement (LoA) ranging from −0.18 to 1.47 mmol/L (AC, narrowest LoA) to −1.25 to 1.82 mmol/L (AM, widest LoA). Bias was the major contributor to the total observed error (TEobs), accounting for 81.5% of the TEobs in AC, 72.0% in CT, 64.9% in AM, 61.1% in NM, 57.8% in PX, and 56.2% in FS. Overall, although some handheld meters (AC, CT, and PX) showed satisfactory precision, none were accurate measuring glucose. Future studies should evaluate whether incorporating algorithms designed for cattle can improve accuracy and precision of handheld glucose meters.

AB - The objective was to evaluate the precision and accuracy of 6 handheld glucose meters, designed for human use [Accu-Chek Aviva Plus (AC), Roche Diabetes Care, Mannheim, Germany; Aga Matrix (AM), AgaMatrix Inc., Salem, NH; Contour Next (CT), Bayer HealthCare LLC, Leverkusen, Germany; FreeStyle Precision Neo (FS), Abbott Diabetes Care Ltd., Alameda, CA; Nova Max Plus (NM), Nova Biomedical Corporation, Waltham, MA; and Precision Xtra (PX), Abbott Diabetes Care Ltd., Witney, UK] to measure blood glucose concentration in dairy cows. Blood samples from Jersey and Jersey × Holstein crossbreed cows (n = 97 for all; except CT, n = 71) were collected and analyzed in triplicate using the 6 handheld glucose meters evaluated. Plasma glucose was also measured with the laboratory reference method (hexokinase glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase). Based on the intra-assay coefficient of variation (CV), precision varied across handheld glucose meters: AC (2.2%), CT (4.0%), PX (4.7%), FS (5.6%), AM (6.2%), and NM (6.7%). Lin's concordance correlation coefficients between handheld glucose meters and the reference method were 0.75 for FS, 0.74 for PX, 0.62 for AC, 0.55 for CT, 0.53 for NM, and 0.48 for AM. Based on Passing-Bablok regression, the AM and PX meters showed bias in the measurements of blood glucose. Bland-Altman plots indicated a negative bias (FS = −0.25 mmol/L; CT = −0.60 mmol/L) or a positive bias (AM = 0.29 mmol/L; PX = 0.33 mmol/L; NM = 0.52 mmol/L; AC = 0.65 mmol/L) between handheld glucose meters and the reference method. All handheld glucose meters evaluated had wide limits of agreement (LoA) ranging from −0.18 to 1.47 mmol/L (AC, narrowest LoA) to −1.25 to 1.82 mmol/L (AM, widest LoA). Bias was the major contributor to the total observed error (TEobs), accounting for 81.5% of the TEobs in AC, 72.0% in CT, 64.9% in AM, 61.1% in NM, 57.8% in PX, and 56.2% in FS. Overall, although some handheld meters (AC, CT, and PX) showed satisfactory precision, none were accurate measuring glucose. Future studies should evaluate whether incorporating algorithms designed for cattle can improve accuracy and precision of handheld glucose meters.

KW - dairy cow

KW - glucose

KW - handheld meter

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85069963545&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85069963545&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3168/jds.2018-15688

DO - 10.3168/jds.2018-15688

M3 - Article

C2 - 31378495

AN - SCOPUS:85069963545

JO - Journal of Dairy Science

JF - Journal of Dairy Science

SN - 0022-0302

ER -