Publications (2)1.93 Total impact
-
Article: Unexpectedly low HbA1c levels in two diabetes patients following dapsone use.
Indian journal of endocrinology and metabolism. 07/2012; 16(4):658-9. -
Article: Comparison of capillary whole blood versus venous plasma glucose estimations in screening for diabetes mellitus in epidemiological studies in developing countries.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study compared capillary blood glucose (CBG) measurements with venous plasma glucose (VPG) measurements in screening for diabetes and prediabetes in epidemiological studies. Four hundred seven subjects ≥ 20 years old (54.1% male) without previously known diabetes underwent oral glucose tolerance tests at a tertiary diabetes center in Chennai, India. Simultaneous measurements of CBG (OneTouch(®) Ultra(®) meter, LifeScan, a Johnson & Johnson Company, Milpitas, CA) and VPG (AU2700, Beckman, Fullerton, CA) were performed, both in the fasting state and 2 h after a 75-g glucose load (2-h post-glucose [PG]). Diabetes, impaired fasting glucose (IFG) and impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) were defined using American Diabetes Association (ADA) and World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. The mean fasting CBG and VPG values were 122 ± 39 mg/dL and 115 ± 40 mg/dL, respectively, and the 2-h PG values were 203 ± 84 mg/dL and 176 ± 85 mg/dL, respectively. The Pearson's correlation coefficient for CBG with VPG was 0.681 (P < 0.001) in the fasting state and 0.897 (P < 0.001) for the 2-h PG load, indicating good correlation between the two methods. Based on the ADA fasting criteria, 31.9% versus 21.1% (capillary vs. venous) had diabetes, whereas based on the WHO criteria, 43.2% versus 38.6% (capillary vs. venous) had diabetes. The accuracy of identifying diabetes was 83.3% by the ADA and 90.9% by WHO criteria, for IGT it was 85.3%, and for IFG it was 66.3% by the ADA and 72.2% by the WHO criteria. CBG is a feasible alternative for screening of diabetes and IGT in epidemiological studies in developing countries where obtaining venous samples may be difficult.Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 03/2011; 13(5):586-91. · 1.93 Impact Factor
