Point of care and plasma glucose measurements in the newborn: agreement and precision

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care (POC) devices for glucose measurement provide rapid results, but the accuracy of the measurement compared with the reference standard (laboratory-based plasma testing) in newborns is unclear. METHODS: We evaluated the agreement of paired POC (StatStrip glucometer) and plasma glucose measurement using the Bland-Altman method for repeated measures. Limits of agreement (LOA) falling within ±15 mg/dL were determined a priori to be acceptable. RESULTS: We analyzed 4071 paired POC and laboratory-based glucose measurements from 2065 unique patients; (mean ± SD) gestational age of 33.1 ± 5.6 weeks and birth weight of 2216.2 ± 1186.0 g. When accounting for repeated measures, the estimated mean bias was 0.86 mg/dL (95% CI: 0.40, 1.32) with LOA -61.77 to 63.49 mg/dL (95% CI: -62.91, 64.63), beyond the acceptable ±15 mg/dL. If the POC method was used alone, 7.7% of hypoglycemia and 8.2% of hyperglycemia would be undertreated. Conversely, 3.6% of euglycemia would be overtreated for hypoglycemia, and 1% overtreated for hyperglycemia. CONCLUSION: POC glucose measurements using the StatStrip glucometer showed poor precision with a greater tendency for undertreatment than overtreatment. Clinicians should be cognizant of this while interpreting bedside POC glucose measurements. IMPACT: Glucose point-of-care measurements in a newborn population showed poor precision and should not be considered interchangeable with the plasma measurements.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Pediatric Research
Published
2026-05-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-026-05125-x
Primary Topic
Hyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patients
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Point of care and plasma glucose measurements in the newborn: agreement and precision

Daniela Dinu, Mohan Pammi, Joseph Hagan, Amee Amin et al.
Pediatric Research
Hyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patients
article

Point of care and plasma glucose measurements in the newborn: agreement and precision

Daniela Dinu, Mohan Pammi, Joseph Hagan, Amee Amin, Regine Fortunov
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care (POC) devices for glucose measurement provide rapid results, but the accuracy of the measurement compared with the reference standard (laboratory-based plasma testing) in newborns is unclear. METHODS: We evaluated the agreement of paired POC (StatStrip glucometer) and plasma glucose measurement using the Bland-Altman method for repeated measures. Limits of agreement (LOA) falling within ±15 mg/dL were determined a priori to be acceptable. RESULTS: We analyzed 4071 paired POC and laboratory-based glucose measurements from 2065 unique patients; (mean ± SD) gestational age of 33.1 ± 5.6 weeks and birth weight of 2216.2 ± 1186.0 g. When accounting for repeated measures, the estimated mean bias was 0.86 mg/dL (95% CI: 0.40, 1.32) with LOA -61.77 to 63.49 mg/dL (95% CI: -62.91, 64.63), beyond the acceptable ±15 mg/dL. If the POC method was used alone, 7.7% of hypoglycemia and 8.2% of hyperglycemia would be undertreated. Conversely, 3.6% of euglycemia would be overtreated for hypoglycemia, and 1% overtreated for hyperglycemia. CONCLUSION: POC glucose measurements using the StatStrip glucometer showed poor precision with a greater tendency for undertreatment than overtreatment. Clinicians should be cognizant of this while interpreting bedside POC glucose measurements. IMPACT: Glucose point-of-care measurements in a newborn population showed poor precision and should not be considered interchangeable with the plasma measurements.

Pediatric Research
Baylor College of Medicine (US), DNAtrix (United States) (US), Texas Children's Hospital (US)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Hyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patients
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.