Multicenter assessment of a hemoglobin A1c point-of-care device for diagnosis of diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVE: A multisite investigation compared the analytical performance of a point-of-care (POC) HbA1c device with multiple commonly used HbA1c laboratory methods and an NGSP (National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program) reference method. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Afinion AS100 POC device analyzed HbA1c using 618 EDTA whole blood excess patient specimens with clinically indicated HbA1c testing. Results were compared to measurements across five clinical laboratories and the NGSP reference method. Precision was evaluated over 8-10 consecutive days for low-, mid-, and high-range HbA1c specimens at all five sites. RESULTS: Over a wide range of HbA1c values (4.0%-15% HbA1c), 97.1% of the POC results and 94.5% of routine laboratory results fell within the target value of ±6% of the NGSP reference method results. The POC HbA1c results at 6.5% exhibited a total relative bias of -0.6% (-0.04% HbA1c) compared to the reference method while the aggregate of laboratory methods displayed a relative bias of -0.9% (-0.06% HbA1c). The total imprecision of the POC results ranged from 0.74-2.13% CV across the analytic measurement range compared to 0.81-3.23% CV for the routine laboratory methods. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy and precision of the Afinion POC HbA1c method was comparable to the laboratory HbA1c methods supporting the FDA's recent approval of the Afinion HbA1c Dx device for use in the diagnosis of diabetes.

Emergency department patients with diabetes have better glycemic control when they have identifiable primary care providers.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to determine if emergency department (ED) patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) who have primary care providers (PCPs) have better control of their DM than patients with no PCPs. METHODS: This was a prospective, cross-sectional, observation study at a large, adult, urban, academic ED with 85,000 annual visits. ED patients with a history of DM were eligible. Patients with severe systemic disease, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), sepsis, active steroid use, pregnancy, or cognitive impairment were excluded. Consenting patients had hemoglobin A1c (HgbA1c) analysis and completed a questionnaire regarding demographics, lifestyle, medication usage, educational level attained, and health care access, including whether or not they had PCPs. HgbA1c levels were compared between subjects with and without PCPs using medians with interquartile ranges (IQRs). A continuous plot was developed to demonstrate the proportion of patients without PCPs (PCP-) compared to those with PCPs (PCP+) at every level of %HgbA1c across the entire measured range. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine which clinical and demographic factors obtained from the questionnaire were associated with improved glycemic control (increased relative risk [RR] of having a %HgbA1c < 8%). RESULTS: A total of 284 patients were screened; 227 were enrolled, had HgbA1c analysis performed, and had complete PCP, race, and sex information. Complete demographic data (insurance status, employment status, etc.) were available on 209 subjects. Sixty-four of the 227 patients (28.2%) denied having PCPs. Median HgbA1c was 7.7% (IQR = 6.5% to 9.68%) in PCP+ versus 8.9% (IQR = 6.8% to 11.3%) in PCP- patients (p = 0.01). Ninety-one of 163 (55.8%) PCP+ subjects had a median HgbA1c < 8% versus 25 of 64 (39.1%) in the PCP- group (p = 0.02). After adjusting for multiple clinical and demographic variables, having a PCP remained significantly associated with a median HgbA1c value less than 8% (RR = 1.43; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes control was significantly better in patients with PCPs, even after adjusting for a number of potentially confounding social and demographic factors.

When do new biomarkers make economic sense?

Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility studies are commonly used to make payment decisions for new drugs and expensive interventions. Such studies are relatively rare for evaluating the cost-utility of clinical laboratory tests. As medical costs continue to increase in the setting of decreased resources it is likely that new biomarkers may increasingly be examined with respect to their economic benefits in addition to clinical utility. This will represent an additional hurdle for routine use of new biomarkers. Before reaching the final economic hurdle new biomarkers will still need to demonstrate clinical usefulness. Thus a new biomarker will never make economic sense if it is not clinically useful. Once diagnostic accuracy and potential clinical usefulness is established there are several types of economic studies that new biomarkers may undergo. The most common of these are cost-utility studies which estimate the ratio between the cost of an intervention or test and the benefit it produces in the number of years gained in full health. The quantity used most often to describe this is amount of money per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The threshold for being considered cost-effective is generally USD 50,000 per QALY gained. Examples of biomarkers that have been subjected to economic analyses will be provided.

Clinical and economic impact of falsely decreased calcium values caused by gadoversetamide interference.

OBJECTIVE: Gadolinium is administered as a contrast agent in MRI procedures. Two gadolinium-based contrast agents, gadodiamide and gadoversetamide, interfere with colorimetric total serum calcium methods. The purpose of this prospective observational study was to examine the incidence of calcium interference after gadoversetamide procedures, associated clinical outcomes, and costs 20 months after implementation of quality assurance and physician education programs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records of patients who received gadoversetamide from June 24, 2006, to October 7, 2006, were reviewed to determine if a routine calcium test had been performed after the injection. Calcium values were repeated with an alternate method that is less susceptible to gadoversetamide interference. If the difference was > or = 2.0 mg/dL or if the initial test value was < or = 7.0 mg/dL, patient charts were reviewed for any related treatment. Costs associated with this algorithm were tracked. RESULTS: The initial calcium test was performed after gadoversetamide in 766 of 3,439 instances. The alternate test was performed in 633 of 766. One hundred twenty-five of 633 (20%) showed a difference in calcium values that was > or = 0.7 mg/dL, with 16 showing differences of > or = 1.6 mg/dL. Chart review for 56 instances revealed that calcium supplements were administered in 22 of 56 around the time of gadoversetamide injection. However, none appeared to be related to the spurious hypocalcemia. The total additional cost (reagent and technologist) for following this algorithm for just over 3 months was $6,807. CONCLUSION: Approximately 20% of patients receiving gadoversetamide exhibited spurious hypocalcemia. No patients were identified who received inappropriate calcium because of this interference. This may be attributable to the quality assurance and physician education programs.

Laboratory assessment of oxygenation in methemoglobinemia.

BACKGROUND: This case conference reviews laboratory methods for assessing oxygenation status: arterial blood gases, pulse oximetry, and CO-oximetry. Caveats of these measurements are discussed in the context of two methemoglobinemia cases. CASES: Case 1 is a woman who presented with increased shortness of breath, productive cough, chest pain, nausea, fever, and cyanosis. CO-oximetry indicated a carboxyhemoglobin (COHb) fraction of 24.9%. She was unresponsive to O(2) therapy, and no source of carbon monoxide could be noted. Case 2 is a man who presented with syncope, chest tightness, and signs of cyanosis. His arterial blood was dark brown, and CO-oximetry showed a methemoglobin (MetHb) fraction of 23%. ISSUES: Oxygen saturation (So(2)) can be measured by three approaches that are often used interchangeably, although the measured systems are quite different. Pulse oximetry is a noninvasive, spectrophotometric method to determine arterial oxygen saturation (S(a)O(2)). CO-oximetry is a more complex and reliable method that measures the concentration of hemoglobin derivatives in the blood from which various quantities such as hemoglobin derivative fractions, total hemoglobin, and saturation are calculated. Blood gas instruments calculate the estimated O(2) saturation from empirical equations using pH and Po(2) values. In most patients, the results from these methods will be virtually identical, but in cases of increased dyshemoglobin fractions, including methemoglobinemia, it is crucial that the distinctions and limitations of these methods be understood. CONCLUSIONS: So(2) calculated from pH and Po(2) should be interpreted with caution as the algorithms used assume normal O(2) affinity, normal 2,3-diphosphoglycerate concentrations, and no dyshemoglobins or hemoglobinopathies. CO-oximeter reports should include the dyshemoglobin fractions in addition to the oxyhemoglobin fraction. In cases of increased MetHb fraction, pulse oximeter values trend toward 85%, underestimating the actual oxygen saturation. Hemoglobin M variants may yield normal MetHb and increased COHb or sulfhemoglobin fractions measured by CO-oximetry.