Clinical Chemistry Link to Randox Laboratories Web Site
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 28: 2110-2115, 1982;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an electronic Letter to
the Editor about this paper
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bandi, Z. L.
Right arrow Articles by James, G. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bandi, Z. L.
Right arrow Articles by James, G. P.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 28, 2110-2115, Copyright © 1982 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Evaluation of determination of glucose in urine with some commercially available dipsticks and tablets

ZL Bandi, JL Myers, DE Bee and GP James

Four commercial products for urine glucose determination were evaluated and compared with a quantitative hexokinase procedure. We examined precision, sensitivity, and analytical recovery of glucose from glucose- supplemented urine samples and comparison of methods, using patients' samples. Only "Chemstrip uG" (Bio-Dynamics Inc.) could differentiate between 0.3 g/L (upper limit of normal) and 0.6 g/L urine glucose concentrations. "Tes-Tape" (Lilly) and "Diastix" (Ames) gave positive readings at 0.3 g/L; "Clinitest" (Ames) detected glucose only over 1 g/L. Analytical recovery of glucose was best, for all four products, between 1 and 2.5 g/L; Chemstrip uG was the most nearly accurate among the four. Between 5 and 20 g/L glucose concentrations, Tes-Tape, Diastix, and Clinitest tended to give falsely low results; the use of Chemstrip uG resulted in overestimates of concentration at 20 g of glucose per liter. Only Chemistrip uG and Clinitest (two-drop method) had linear ranges extending to 50 g/L; Chemstrip uG had better precision and accuracy at this concentration. Of the four products, Chemstrip uG had the lowest within-technologist and technologist-to- technologist random analytical errors. In method comparison on patients' samples, Chemstrip uG was significantly stronger in its association with the quantitative hexokinase method than was Diastix, Clinitest, or Tes-Tape.


The following articles in journals at HighWire Press have cited this article:


Home page
 Clin. Chem.Home page
P. Froom, B. Bieganiec, Z. Ehrenrich, and M. Barak
Stability of Common Analytes in Urine Refrigerated for 24 h before Automated Analysis by Test Strips
Clin. Chem., September 1, 2000; 46(9): 1384 - 1386.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1982 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.