PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Are human blood glucose meters accurate for dogs and cats?

By Domori, Asuka et al.·Published in Veterinary clinical pathology·2014·Joint Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Japan·View original on PubMed

PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →

Original publication title: The clinical utility of two human portable blood glucose meters in canine and feline practice.

Plain-English summary

A study tested two portable blood glucose meters designed for humans to see if they could accurately measure blood sugar levels in dogs and cats. The results showed that while both meters correlated well with a standard reference method, they didn't always agree perfectly. The PBGM-H meter performed better overall, especially in dogs, and both meters could still help vets make treatment decisions. This means that these human meters can be useful for monitoring blood sugar in pets, but owners should discuss the results with their veterinarian for the best care.

People also search for: dog blood sugar meter · cat diabetes monitoring · portable glucose meter for pets

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Portable blood glucose meters (PBGMs) are useful for serial measurements of blood glucose and creation of blood glucose curves in veterinary practice. However, it is necessary to validate PBGMs designed for people for veterinary use. OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to evaluate the accuracy of 2 PBGMs designed for people for use in dogs and cats. METHODS: The blood glucose levels were determined in blood samples collected from 69 dogs and 26 cats admitted to the Kagoshima University Veterinary Teaching Hospital, using a MEDISAFE [PBGM-T] and an Antsense III [PBGM-H], and a FUJI DRI-CHEM 7000V as reference method. The correlations and agreements among the results were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: Simple regression analyses revealed a high correlation between values from both PBGMs and the reference method in both dogs and cats. However, Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman analyses revealed that the data from both PBGMs did not show statistical agreement with the reference values. Concordance correlated coefficients were moderate for the PBGM-T and almost perfect for the PBGM-H for canine samples, and were poor for the PBGM-T and substantial for the PBGM-H for feline samples. Hematocrit values significantly affected the results of the PBGM-T, but not the PBGM-H. Error grid analyses revealed that all measurements from both PBGMs would lead to acceptable treatment decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that both PBGMs, especially the PBGM-H, would be clinically useful in small animal practice, although there was a bias between each PBGM and the reference method.

Find similar cases for your pet

PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.

Search related cases →

Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24446729/