Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Validation and Estimation of Uncertainty for a Glucose Determination Method GOD-PAP Using a Multi-calibrator as Reference

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
MAPAN Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

When measuring glucose concentration, assuring the reliability of the results is critical, because the clinical diagnosis of pathologies related to diabetes mellitus, as well as their medical treatment, depends on them. One of the most widely used glucose determination methods in clinical chemistry is the GOD-PAP enzymatic method. Hence, a validation process based on the theory of errors, as well as the estimation of uncertainty based on the law of propagation of uncertainty, must be performed to obtain the required level of analytical reliability. For these purposes, the method was validated by assessing linearity, the limits of detection and quantification, precision under repeatability conditions, and intermediate precision, as well as assessing trueness based on bias and the recovery percentage. The level of uncertainty was estimated using the following sources of uncertainty: glucose concentration based on the calibration curve, volumetric material, dilution factor, analytical balance, the repeatability of the measurement, and reference material. According to the results obtained, the Pearson correlation coefficient for linearity was 0.9988, and the limits of detection and quantification were 0.48 and 1.60 mg/dL, respectively. Precision under repeatability conditions and the intermediate precision denoted a coefficient of variation of 2.1% and 1.9%, respectively, while bias was −0.85 mg/dL, and the recovery percentage was 99.15%. Finally, the estimated expanded uncertainty was 5.871 mg/dL.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. M.L. Bishop, E.P. Fod and L.E. Schoeff, Clinical chemistry: principles, techniques, and correlations, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Editorial, 7th edition, United State, (2013) 384.

  2. D.C. Klonoff and J.S. Reyes, Do currently available blood glucose monitors meet regulatory standards? 1-day public meeting in Arlington, Virginia. J. Diabetes Sci. Technol., 7 (2013) 1071–1083.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. P. Gyuk, I. Vassányi and, I. Kósa, Blood glucose level prediction for diabetics based on nutrition and insulin administration logs using personalized mathematical models, J. Healthc. Eng., 2019(ID 8605206) (2019) 1–12.

  4. Randox Techniques Manual, United State, (2014), 76–79.

  5. S.K. Pradhan and P.K. Tarafder, A scheme for performance evaluations of UV–visible spectrophotometer by standard procedures including certified reference materials for the analysis of geological samples. MAPAN-J. Metrol. Soc India, 31 (2016) 275–281.

    Google Scholar 

  6. S.L.R. Ellison, Implementing measurement uncertainty for analytical chemistry: the Eurachem guide for measurement uncertainty. Metrologia, 51 (2014) 199–205.

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. S.L.R. Ellison and A. Williams, EURACHEM/CITAC guide CG 4, quantifying uncertainty in analytical measurement, United Kingdom, 3rd edition, (2012) 48.

  8. B. Magnusson and U. Ornemark, Eds, Eurachem guide: the fitness for purpose of analytical methods, a laboratory guide to method validation and related topics, United Kingdom, 2nd edition, (2014) 45. http://www.eurachem.org,

  9. S.L.R. Ellison and A. Williams, Eurachem CITAC guide, use of uncertainty information in compliance assessment, United Kingdom, 1st edition, (2007) 58.

  10. R. Kadis, Evaluation of measurement uncertainty in volumetric operations: the tolerance-based approach and the actual performance-based approach. Talanta, 64 (2004) 167–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. S.S. Swati Tripathy, R.K. Saxena and P. K. Gupta, Development and validation of method with evaluation of measurement uncertainty for the speciation analysis of chromium by ion chromatography, MAPAN-J. Metrol. Soc India, 30(2) (2015) 131–137.

  12. E. Batista, L. Pinto, E. Filipe and A.M.H. van der Veen, Calibration of micropipettes: test methods and uncertainty analysis. Measurement, 40 (2007) 338–342.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. V. Barwick, Preparation of calibration curves. A guide to best practice, Milestone Reference: KT2/1.3 LGC/VAM/2003/032 (2003) 1–27.

  14. J.J. Nielsen, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Official Academic Course, Wiley, (2016).

  15. M. Thompson, S.L.R Ellison and R. Wood, International union of pure and applied chemistry technical report. Harmonized Guidelines for Single-Laboratory Validation of Methods of Analysis (IUPAC Technical Report). Pure and Applied Chemistry, 74(5) (2002) 835–855.

  16. J. Park, G. Nam and J.O. Choi, Parameters in cause and effect diagram for uncertainty evaluation. Accreditation and Quality Assurance, 16 (2011) 325–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. V. Barwick, Evaluating measurement uncertainty in clinical chemistry. Case Studies, Setting Standards in Analytical Science, Milestone Reference: VAM KT2. 1.b, (2012).

  18. S. Basak and D. Kundu, Evaluation of measurement uncertainty in determination of lead in glass materials by a standard complexometric method. MAPAN-J. Metrol. Soc India, 27 (2012) 175–182.

    Google Scholar 

  19. M. Solaguren-Beascoa, V. Ortega and R. Serrano, On the uncertainty evaluation for repeated measurements. J. Metrol. Soc. India, 29 (2014) 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  20. K. Gates, N. Chang, I. Dilek, H. Jian, S. Pogue and U. Sreenivasan, The Uncertainty of reference standards, a guide to understanding factors impacting uncertainty, uncertainty calculations, and vendor certifications. J. Anal. Toxicol., 33 (2009) 532–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. R. Bettencourt and A. Williams, Eurachem/CITAC guide setting and using target uncertainty in chemical measurement, United Kingdom, 1st edition, (2015).

  22. N. Demitri and A.M. Zoubir, Measuring blood glucose concentrations in photometric glucometers requiring very small sample volumes. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., 64 (2017) 28–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. A.G. González and M.A. Herrador, A practical guide to analytical method validation, including measurement uncertainty and accuracy profiles. Trends Anal. Chem., 26 (2007) 227–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. A. Shrivasta and V.P. Gupta, Methods for the determination of limit of detection and limit of quantitation of the analytical methods. Chron. Young Sci., 2 (2011) 21–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. L. Dohnal, M. Kalousová and T. Zima, Comparison of three methods for determination of glucose. Prague Med. Rep., 111 (2010) 42–54.

    Google Scholar 

  26. C. Ignell and K. Berntorp, Evaluation of the relationship between capillary and venous plasma glucose concentrations obtained by the HemoCue glucose 201+ system during an oral glucose tolerance test. Scand. J. Clin. Lab. Investig., 71 (2011) 670–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. H.S. Lee, J.M. Lee, S.R. Park, J.H. Lee and Y.G. Kim, Development and validation of primary method for the determination of glucose in human serum by isotope dilution liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry and comparison with field methods. Bull. Korean Chem. Soc., 34 (2013) 1698–1702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. R.K. Matsunami, K. Angelides and D.A. Engler, Development and validation of a rapid 13C6-glucose isotope dilution UPLC-MRM mass spectrometry method for use in determining system accuracy and performance of blood glucose monitoring devices. J. Diabetes Sci. Technol., 9 (2015) 1051–1060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. E. Witkowska-Nery, M. Kundys, P.S. Jeleń and M. Jönsson-Niedziółka, Electrochemical glucose sensing: is there still room for improvement? Anal. Chem., 88 (2016) 11271–11282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. N.K. Skjaervold, E. Solligård, D.R. Hjelme and P. Aadahl, Continuous measurement of blood Glucos. Validation of a new intravascular sensor. Anesthesiology, 114 (2011) 120–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. E. Theodorsson, B. Magnusson and I. Leito, Bias in clinical chemistry. Bioanalysis, 6 (2014) 2855–2875.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. I.L. Dumitriu, B. Gurzu, E. Cojocaru, S.M. Slătineanu and M. Enea, Validation of GOD/PAP method for quantitative determination of glucose concentration in human serum. Revista Română de Medicină de Laborator, 19 (2011) 85–100.

    Google Scholar 

  33. M.S. Sylte, T. Wentzel-Larsen and B.J. Bolann, Estimation of the minimal preanalytical uncertainty for 15 clinical chemistry serum analytes. Clinical, 56 (2010) 1329–1335.

    Google Scholar 

  34. M.S. Sylte, T. Wentzel-Larsen and B.J. Bolann, Random variation and systematic error caused by various preanalytical variables. Estimated by linear mixed-effects models. Clin. Chim. Acta, 415 (2013) 196–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. W. Dimech, B. Francis, J. Kox and G. Roberts, Calculating uncertainty of measurement for serology assays by use of precision and bias. Clin. Chem., 52 (2006) 526–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. S. Linko, U. Örnemark and R. Kessel, Evaluation of measurement uncertainty in clinical chemistry. Applications to determinations of total concentration of calcium and glucose in human serum, IRMM isotope Measurement, GE/R/IM/34/01 (2001).

  37. B.N. Estevinho, A. Ferraz, L. Santos, F. Rocha and A. Alves, Uncertainty in the determination of glucose and sucrose in solutions with chitosan by enzymatic methods. J. Braz. Chem. Soc., 24 (2013) 931–938.

    Google Scholar 

  38. S. Linko, U. Örnemark, R. Kessel and P.D.P. Taylor, Evaluation of uncertainty of measurement in routine clinical chemistry-applications to determination of the substance concentration of calcium and glucose in serum. Clin. Chem. Lab. Med., 40 (2002) 391–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. E. Theodorsson and B. Magnusson, Full method validation in clinical chemistry. Accred. Qual. Assur., 22 (2017) 235–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. G. Moses and L. Crawford, Traceability and uncertainty of measurement for medical laboratories, Quality Management Program-Laboratory Services (QMP-LS), Ontario Laboratory Accreditation Division (OLA), (2009).

  41. L. Allen and L. Crawford, Guidance on measurement uncertainty for medical laboratories, Institute for Quality Management in Healthcare, Centre for Accreditation, Toronto, Canada, (2014).

  42. S. Rab, S. Yadav, A. Zafer, A. Haleem, P.K. Dubey, J. Singh, R. Kumar, R. Sharma and L. Kumar, Comparison of Monte Carlo simulation, least square fitting and calibration factor methods for the evaluation of measurement uncertainty using direct pressure indicating devices. MAPAN-J. Metrol. Soc India, 34 (2019) 305–315.

    Google Scholar 

  43. A.M. García-Alegría, A. Gómez-Álvarez, I. Anduro-Corona, A. Burgos-Hernández, E. Ruiz-Bustos, R. Canett-Romero, M.G. Cáñez-Carrasco and H.F. Astiazarán-García, Estimation of the expanded uncertainty of an analytical method to quantify aluminum in tissue of Sprague Dawley rats by FAAS and ETAAS. MAPAN-J. Metrol. Soc India, 32 (2017) 131–141.

    Google Scholar 

  44. A.M. García Alegría, M.G. Cáñez Carrasco, M. Serna-Félix, K.K. Encinas Soto and A. Gómez-Álvarez, Estimation of uncertainty in the determination of serum electrolytes (Na, K, Ca, Mg) by flame atomic absorption spectroscopy, MAPAN-J. Metrol. Soc India, 33 (2018) 99–112.

  45. S. Lorefice, Traceability and uncertainty analysis in volume measurements. Measurement, 42 (2009) 1510–1515.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  46. M. Rynning, T. Wentzel-Larsen and B.J. Bolann, A model for an uncertainty budget for preanalytical variables in clinical chemistry analyses. Clin. Chem., 53 (2007) 1343–1348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. G. Lippi, Governance of preanalytical variability: travelling the right path to the bright side of the moon? Clin. Chim. Acta, 404 (2009) 32–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. M. Plebani, Exploring the iceberg of errors in laboratory medicine. Clin. Chim. Acta, 404 (2009) 16–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. M.Á. Castaño-López, J.L. Fernández-de Liger Serrano, J.L. Robles-Rodríguez and T. Márquez-Márquez, Validation of a glucose meter at an Intensive Care Unit, Endocrinología y Nutrición, 59(1) (2012) 28–34.

  50. S. Kurasawa, S. Koyama, H. Ishizawa, K. Fujimot and S. Chino, Verification of non-invasive blood glucose measurement method based on pulse wave signal detected by FBG sensor system. Sensors, 17 (2017) 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. A. Petersmann, R. Macdonald and M. NaucK, Disregarded measurement uncertainty contributions and their magnitude in measuring plasma glucose, J. Diabetes Sci. Technol., (2020) 1–7.

  52. S. Keutmann, S. Zylla, M. Dahl, N. Friedrich, R. Landgraf, L. Heinemann, A. Kallner, M. Nauck and A. Petersmann, Measurement uncertainty impacts diagnosis of diabetes mellitus: reliable minimal difference of plasma glucose results. Diabetes Ther., 11 (2020) 293–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. H. Chen, L. Zhang, X. Bi and X. Deng, Two evaluation budgets for the measurement uncertainty of glucose in clinical chemistry. Korean J. Lab. Med., 31 (2011) 167–171.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their gratitude to Laboratorios Acuña y Asociados, in Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico, for their valuable support in the use of laboratory supplies, as well as for the physical and human infrastructure, made available to us for conducting this research project. In addition, the authors thank Crimson Interactive Pvt. Ltd. (Enago) – https://www.enago.com/es/ for their assistance in manuscript translation and editing.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Ciencias Químico Biológicas, Universidad de Sonora, Luis Encinas Y Rosales S/N, Colonia centro, C.P. 83000, Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico

    A. Rascón-Careaga, M. A. G. Corella-Madueño, C. J. Pérez-Martínez, A. M. García-Rojas, L. J. Córdoba-Beltrán, M. G. Cáñez-Carrasco & A. M. García-Alegría

  2. Laboratorios Acuña Y Asociados, Reforma 341-C, Colonia Proyecto Río Sonora, C.P. 83271, Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico

    A. Rascón-Careaga, S. Z. Souflé-Vásquez & M. T. García-Moroyoqui

Authors
  1. A. Rascón-Careaga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. A. G. Corella-Madueño
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. C. J. Pérez-Martínez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. M. García-Rojas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. Z. Souflé-Vásquez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. M. T. García-Moroyoqui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. L. J. Córdoba-Beltrán
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. M. G. Cáñez-Carrasco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. A. M. García-Alegría
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. M. García-Alegría.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rascón-Careaga, A., Corella-Madueño, M.A.G., Pérez-Martínez, C.J. et al. Validation and Estimation of Uncertainty for a Glucose Determination Method GOD-PAP Using a Multi-calibrator as Reference. MAPAN 36, 269–278 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12647-021-00441-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12647-021-00441-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation