RESUMO
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: To monitor glycemic control in diabetic patients, regular measurement of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is recommended, but this can be difficult in remote places without access to laboratories. Portable point-of-care testing devices can prove a useful alternative. Our study aimed to assess the performance of one of them: A1CNow+, from Bayer. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional accuracy study conducted at a university hospital in Brazil. METHODS: We made three successive measurements of capillary HbA1c using the A1CNow+ in 55 diabetic volunteers, while the same measurement was made on venous blood using the hospital reference method (Vitros 5,1 FS). We used the Bland-Altman graphical method to assess the A1CNow+ in relation to the Vitros 5,1 FS method. We also evaluated clinical usefulness by calculating the sensitivity and specificity of A1CNow+ for detecting patients with HbA1c lower than 7%, which is the usual limit for good glycemic control. RESULTS: The coefficient of variation between repeat testing for the A1CNow+ was 3.6%. The mean difference between A1CNow+ and Vitros 5,1 FS was +0.67% (95% confidence interval, CI: +0.52 to +0.81). The agreement limits of our Bland-Altman graph were -0.45 (95% CI: -0.71 to -0.19) and +1.82 (95% CI: +1.52 to +2.05). The sensitivity and specificity in relation to the 7% limit were respectively 100% and 67.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Although the A1CNow+ had good sensitivity, its accuracy was insufficient for use as a replacement for laboratory measurements of HbA1c, for glycemic control monitoring in diabetic patients.
CONTEXTO E OBJETIVO: Para monitorar o controle glicêmico dos diabéticos, é recomendado medir regularmente a hemoglobina glicada (HbA1c). Isso pode ser difícil em locais distantes sem acesso a laboratórios. Uma alternativa é usar aparelhos portáteis à beira do leito do paciente. Nosso estudo visou avaliar o desempenho de um deles: A1CNow+, da Bayer. TIPO DE ESTUDO E LOCAL: Estudo transversal de acurácia realizado em hospital universitário no Brasil. MÉTODOS: Medimos, com o A1CNow+, três vezes seguidas, a HbA1c capilar de 55 diabéticos voluntários, enquanto a mesma medida era feita em sangue venoso pelo método de referência do hospital (Vitros 5,1 FS). Usamos a análise gráfica de Bland-Altman para avaliar o A1CNow+ em relação ao Vitros 5,1 FS. Verificamos a utilidade clínica através do cálculo da sensibilidade e da especificidade do A1CNow+ para detectar pacientes com HbA1c abaixo de 7%, limite usual indicando glicemia controlada. RESULTADOS: O coeficiente de variação entre testes repetidos do A1CNow+ foi de 3,6%. A diferença média entre o A1CNow+ e o Vitros 5,1 FS foi de +0,67% (95% intervalo de confiança, IC: +0,52 para +0,81). Os limites de concordância do gráfico de Bland-Altman foram -0,45 (95% IC: -0,71 para -0,19) and +1,82 (95% IC: +1,52 para +2,05). A sensibilidade e a especificidade em relação ao limite de 7% foram 100% e 67,7%, respectivamente. CONCLUSÃO: Apesar da boa sensibilidade, o A1CNow+ não tem acurácia suficiente para ser utilizado no monitoramento do controle glicêmico de pacientes diabéticos em substituição das medidas da HbA1c em laboratório.
Assuntos
Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto Jovem , Automonitorização da Glicemia/instrumentação , Hemoglobinas Glicadas/análise , Testes Imediatos , Estudos Transversais , Diabetes Mellitus/sangue , Hospitais Universitários , Padrões de Referência , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Sensibilidade e EspecificidadeRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the access to drugs for hypertension and diabetes and the direct cost of buying them among users of the Family Health Strategy (FHS) in the state of Pernambuco, Brazil. METHODS: Population-based, cross-sectional study of a systematic random sample of 785 patients with hypertension and 823 patients with diabetes mellitus who were registered in 208 randomly selected FHS teams in 35 municipalities of the state of Pernambuco. The selected municipalities were classified into three levels with probability proportional to municipality size (LS, large-sized; MS, medium-sized; SS, small-sized). To verify differences between the cities, we used the χ2 test. RESULTS: Pharmacological treatment was used by 91.2% patients with hypertension whereas 85.6% patients with diabetes mellitus used oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs), and 15.4% used insulin. The FHS team itself provided antihypertensive medications to 69.0% patients with hypertension, OADs to 75.0% patients with diabetes mellitus, and insulin treatment to 65.4%. The 36.9% patients with hypertension and 29.8% with diabetes mellitus that had to buy all or part of their medications reported median monthly cost of R$ 18.30, R$ 14.00, and R$ 27.61 for antihypertensive drugs, OADs, and insulin, respectively. CONCLUSION: It is necessary to increase efforts to ensure access to these drugs in the primary health care network.
Assuntos
Anti-Hipertensivos/uso terapêutico , Diabetes Mellitus/tratamento farmacológico , Hipertensão/tratamento farmacológico , Insulina/uso terapêutico , Brasil , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
To evaluate the access to drugs for hypertension and diabetes and the direct cost of buying them among users of the Family Health Strategy (FHS) in the state of Pernambuco, Brazil. Population-based, cross-sectional study of a systematic random sample of 785 patients with hypertension and 823 patients with diabetes mellitus who were registered in 208 randomly selected FHS teams in 35 municipalities of the state of Pernambuco. The selected municipalities were classified into three levels with probability proportional to municipality size (LS, large-sized; MS, medium-sized; SS, small-sized). To verify differences between the cities, we used the χ2 test. Pharmacological treatment was used by 91.2% patients with hypertension whereas 85.6% patients with diabetes mellitus used oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs), and 15.4% used insulin. The FHS team itself provided antihypertensive medications to 69.0% patients with hypertension, OADs to 75.0% patients with diabetes mellitus, and insulin treatment to 65.4%. The 36.9% patients with hypertension and 29.8% with diabetes mellitus that had to buy all or part of their medications reported median monthly cost of R$ 18.30, R$ 14.00, and R$ 27.61 for antihypertensive drugs, OADs, and insulin, respectively. It is necessary to increase efforts to ensure access to these drugs in the primary health care network.
Avaliar o acesso a medicamentos para hipertensão e diabetes e o gasto direto relacionado à aquisição destes insumos entre os usuários da Estratégia Saúde da Família (ESF), no estado de Pernambuco. Estudo transversal, de base populacional, numa amostra aleatória sistemática de 785 pacientes hipertensos e 823 diabéticos cadastrados em 208 equipes da ESF sorteadas em 35 municípios do estado de Pernambuco. Os municípios selecionados foram classificados em três estratos com probabilidade proporcional ao tamanho do município (GP: grande porte; MP: médio porte; PP: pequeno porte). A fim de verificar diferenças entre os municípios, foi utilizado o teste χ2. Dos 785 hipertensos, 91,2% referiram o uso de anti-hipertensivos e dos 823 diabéticos, 85,6% utilizavam antidiabéticos orais (ADO), e 15,4%, insulina. Os anti-hipertensivos eram fornecidos pelas equipes da ESF para 69,0% dos hipertensos, os ADO, para 75,0% dos diabéticos, e a insulina e insumos, para 65,4%. Os hipertensos (36,9%) e os diabéticos (29,8%) que precisavam comprar os medicamentos referiram um gasto mediano mensal de R$ 18,30, R$ 14,00 e R$ 27,61 para anti-hipertensivos, ADO e insulina, respectivamente. É necessário ampliar os esforços para assegurar o acesso aos medicamentos na rede de atenção primária de saúde.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Adolescente , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Adulto Jovem , Pneumopatias/cirurgia , Transplante de Pulmão , Fatores Etários , Bronquiectasia/mortalidade , Bronquiectasia/cirurgia , Irã (Geográfico) , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Pneumopatias/mortalidade , Transplante de Pulmão/efeitos adversos , Transplante de Pulmão/mortalidade , Análise Multivariada , Fibrose Pulmonar/mortalidade , Fibrose Pulmonar/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Fatores Sexuais , Fatores de Tempo , Doadores de Tecidos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: To monitor glycemic control in diabetic patients, regular measurement of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is recommended, but this can be difficult in remote places without access to laboratories. Portable point-of-care testing devices can prove a useful alternative. Our study aimed to assess the performance of one of them: A1CNow+, from Bayer. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional accuracy study conducted at a university hospital in Brazil. METHODS: We made three successive measurements of capillary HbA1c using the A1CNow+ in 55 diabetic volunteers, while the same measurement was made on venous blood using the hospital reference method (Vitros 5,1 FS). We used the Bland-Altman graphical method to assess the A1CNow+ in relation to the Vitros 5,1 FS method. We also evaluated clinical usefulness by calculating the sensitivity and specificity of A1CNow+ for detecting patients with HbA1c lower than 7%, which is the usual limit for good glycemic control. RESULTS: The coefficient of variation between repeat testing for the A1CNow+ was 3.6%. The mean difference between A1CNow+ and Vitros 5,1 FS was +0.67% (95% confidence interval, CI: +0.52 to +0.81). The agreement limits of our Bland-Altman graph were -0.45 (95% CI: -0.71 to -0.19) and +1.82 (95% CI: +1.52 to +2.05). The sensitivity and specificity in relation to the 7% limit were respectively 100% and 67.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Although the A1CNow+ had good sensitivity, its accuracy was insufficient for use as a replacement for laboratory measurements of HbA1c, for glycemic control monitoring in diabetic patients.
