We compared measurements of blood glucose concentrations in 30 healthy adult White New Zealand rabbits using 2 commercial portable glucometers (PGM1 and PGM2) and a laboratory chemical analyzer. Results were analyzed with Pearson correlation, Passing–Bablok regression analysis, Bland–Altman analysis, and a modified error grid. Measurements with PGM1 were significantly correlated (r = 0.37) with those obtained from the laboratory reference method (RM); Bland–Altman and Passing–Bablok analyses indicated no significant systematic or proportional differences (mean difference of −0.26, 95% CI of mean difference of −0.54 to 0.01, and LOA of −1.70 to 1.17); and error grid resulted in 100% of measurements in zone A. No significant correlation (r = −0.05) was detected between PGM2 and RM; Bland–Altman and Passing–Bablok analyses results indicated a mean difference of 2.14, 95% CI of mean difference of 1.67–2.60, and limit of agreement of −0.32 to 4.59, which overestimated blood glucose concentration, with 53% of glucose measurements in error grid zone A and 47% in zone B. PGM1 was considered accurate in normoglycemic rabbits, whereas the use of PGM2 could result in overestimations of glycemia.

我们使用 2 台商用便携式血糖仪（PGM1 和 PGM2）和实验室化学分析仪比较了 30 只健康成年新西兰白兔的血糖浓度测量值。结果用 Pearson 相关、Passing-Bablok 回归分析、Bland-Altman 分析和修正的误差网格进行分析。PGM1 的测量值与实验室参考方法 (RM) 的测量值显着相关 ( r = 0.37)；Bland-Altman 和 Passing-Bablok 分析表明没有显着的系统或比例差异（平均差异为 -0.26，平均差异的 95% CI 为 -0.54 至 0.01，LOA 为 -1.70 至 1.17）；和误差网格导致区域 A 中 100% 的测量结果。没有显着相关性 ( r= -0.05) 在 PGM2 和 RM 之间检测到；Bland-Altman 和 Passing-Bablok 分析结果表明平均差异为 2.14，平均差异为 1.67-2.60 的 95% CI，以及 -0.32 至 4.59 的一致性极限，这高估了血糖浓度，53% 的葡萄糖测量值在错误网格区域 A 和区域 B 中的 47%。 PGM1 在血糖正常的兔子中被认为是准确的，而 PGM2 的使用可能导致血糖的高估。