Fructosamine cannot replace HbAlc in the management of type 2 diabetes (NIDDM)

Furuseth, Kristian; Bruusgaard, Dag; Rutle, O; Vaaler, Stein

doi:10.3109/02813439409003703

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another study 158 reported a good correlation between FPG, fructosamine and GHb. However, further studies suggested that fructosamine was not a good predictor of GHb 159,160 or self-monitored blood glucose levels. 161 Although fructosamine levels generally correlate well with HbA 1c within a population, the value of HbA 1c in an individual cannot be inferred with any reliability from the level of fructosamine.…”

Section: Validity Of Fructosamine Testing As An Indicator Of Glycaemic Controlmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…166 In contrast, GHb correlated well with capillary blood glucose measurements in both patients with normal renal function and those with renal failure. 166 A further study 159 found weak correlations between fructosamine, HbA 1c and blood glucose in type 2 DM elderly patients, and suggested that the presence of other chronic conditions, such as liver cirrhosis and nephrotic syndrome, 61 could also influence fructosamine levels.…”

Section: Standardisation Of Fructosamine Testingmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Monitoring blood glucose control in diabetes mellitus: a systematic review.

Coster¹,

Gulliford

Seed

et al. 2000

Health Technology Assessment

205

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health Technology Assessment is indexed in Index Medicus/MEDLINE and Excerpta Medica/ EMBASE. Copies of the Executive Summaries are available from the NCCHTA website (see overleaf). NHS R&D HTA ProgrammeT he overall aim of the NHS R&D Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme is to ensure that high-quality research information on the costs, effectiveness and broader impact of health technologies is produced in the most efficient way for those who use, manage and work in the NHS. Research is undertaken in those areas where the evidence will lead to the greatest benefits to patients, either through improved patient outcomes or the most efficient use of NHS resources.The Standing Group on Health Technology advises on national priorities for health technology assessment. Six advisory panels assist the Standing Group in identifying and prioritising projects. These priorities are then considered by the HTA Commissioning Board supported by the National Coordinating Centre for HTA (NCCHTA).This report is one of a series covering acute care, diagnostics and imaging, methodology, pharmaceuticals, population screening, and primary and community care. It was identified as a priority by the Diagnostics and Imaging Panel and funded as project number 96/10/03.The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Standing Group, the Commissioning Board, the Panel members or the Department of Health. The editors wish to emphasise that funding and publication of this research by the NHS should not be taken as implicit support for the recommendations for policy contained herein. In particular, policy options in the area of screening will be considered by the National Screening Committee. This Committee, chaired by the Chief Medical Officer, will take into account the views expressed here, further available evidence and other relevant considerations.Reviews in Health Technology Assessment are termed 'systematic' when the account of the search, appraisal and synthesis methods (to minimise biases and random errors) would, in theory, permit the replication of the review by others. Criteria for inclusion in the HTA monograph seriesReports are published in the HTA monograph series if (1) they have resulted from work either prioritised by the Standing Group on Health Technology, or otherwise commissioned for the HTA programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the referees and editors.

show abstract

Section: Validity Of Fructosamine Testing As An Indicator Of Glycaemic Controlmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Standardisation Of Fructosamine Testingmentioning

confidence: 97%

Monitoring blood glucose control in diabetes mellitus: a systematic review.

Coster¹,

Gulliford

Seed

et al. 2000

Health Technology Assessment

205

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most commonly used test for GSP is the fructosamine assay which has advantages over the HbA 1c assay in being more convenient, faster and cheaper to carry out, advantages that may make the test particularly useful where resources are limited 36, 37. The relationship between this variable and other measures of blood glucose levels and its potential use in clinical practice have yet to be established 38–42. The results of some studies, however, have indicated that the fructosamine test may be a useful alternative to HbA 1c in some populations.…”

Section: Setting and Assessing Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Considerations on blood glucose management in Type 2 diabetes mellitus

Home¹,

Chacra²,

Chan³

et al. 2002

Diabetes Metabolism Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years the benefits of more intensive management in preventing or delaying the development and progression of diabetic complications have been well documented. What is not as well documented is how to motivate the person with diabetes to manage the condition, how to set, assess and quantify glucose goals, and the glucose variables that should be routinely measured. This review discusses the importance of setting targets and communicating them in a way that the patient understands. When aiming for a glycaemia target, balance is required (1) between achieving reduction of complications and causing an increased degree of hypoglycaemia, and (2) between what is achievable and what degree of benefit is gained. Target values given in guidelines should be adapted by the clinician to take into account the patient's susceptibility to hypoglycaemia, stage and type of complications, age and life expectancy, co-morbidity, social environment, understanding of the steps required and level of commitment to the treatment. Several suggestions are given regarding possible improvements and amendments to existing guidelines for diabetes management in treating to glucose goal. For example, attention should be drawn to the need to individualize goals and to consider education, long-term support, patient needs and treatment outcome when formulating diabetes management plans. The relative properties of the different glucose variables-fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), glycated haemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)), and glycated protein-in terms of their convenience of measurement, usefulness and relevance to the physician and patient are also evaluated. When prioritising the variables to be measured it is suggested that where feasible, HbA(1c) should be the standard measurement by which to gauge risk and treatment efficacy. Serial measurements should be made and, where possible, the use of blood glucose meters encouraged, in order to obtain a blood glucose profile for the patient.

show abstract