Reproducibility of impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and impaired fasting glucose (IFG) classification: a systematic review
Reproducibility of impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and impaired fasting glucose (IFG) classification: a systematic review
复制标题
DOI：
10.1515/cclm.2007.250
复制
发表时间：
2007-01-01
影响因子：
6.8
通讯作者：
Hunt, Dereck L.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Balion, Cynthia M.;Raina, Parminder S.;Hunt, Dereck L.
背景：糖耐量受损(IGT)和空腹血糖受损(IFG)的分类代表血糖水平高于正常，但低于糖尿病的决定阈值。我们试图通过对文献进行系统回顾来确定重复测试时这些分类的可重复性是什么。方法：纳入所有以英文发表的任何研究设计的初步研究。如果研究没有遵循世界卫生组织或美国糖尿病协会的诊断标准，没有使用全血作为样本类型，没有使用血糖仪进行分析，或者没有进行间隔超过8周的重复测试，则排除这些研究。结果：5篇文章具有IGT或IFG的重复性数据，其中2篇来自相同人群，但抽样方式不同。K系数表明重复测试之间的一致性超过了机会，IGT的一致性较差(0.04，0.22，0.38，0.42)，IFG的一致性中等(0.44和0.56)。同样，观察到的IGT的重复性(33%，44%，47%，48%)略低于IFG(51%，%)。在两项同时获得IGT和IFG数据的研究中，糖尿病前期组的平均重复性(49%)低于糖尿病组(73%)或正常组(93%)。结论：IGT和IFG分类的重复性差建议在解释单一测试结果时应谨慎。
Background: The classifications of impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and impaired fasting glucose (IFG) represent glucose levels above normal, but below the decision threshold for diabetes. We sought to determine what the reproducibility of these classifications was when repeat tests were performed by conducting a systematic review of the literature.Methods: All primary studies published in English of any study design were included. Studies were excluded if they did not follow the World Health Organization or American Diabetes Association diagnostic criteria, used whole blood as the specimen type, a glucose meter for analysis, or performed repeat testing greater than 8 weeks apart.Results: Five papers had reproducibility data for IGT or IFG, two of which where from the same population but sampled differently. The K coefficients, indicating agreement between repeat tests that exceeded chance, indicated poor to fair agreement for IGT (0.04, 0.22, 0.38, 0.42) and moderate agreement for IFG (0.44 and 0.56). Similarly, the observed reproducibility was slightly lower for IGT (33%, 44%, 47%, 48%) compared to IFG (51%, 64%). In two studies for which data were available for both IGT and IFG, the average reproducibility was lower (49%) for the prediabetes group compared to the diabetes group (73%) or the normal group (93%).Conclusions: Poor reproducibility of IGT and IFG classification suggests caution should be exercised when interpreting a single test result.