Search published articles


Showing 2 results for Hba1c
Evaluation of Accuracy, Precision and Agreement of Five Hba1c Measurement Methods with HPLC Reference Method
Mohammad Taha Jalali, Hajie Bibi Shahbazian , Mohammad Reza Afsharmanesh , Rohollah Mousavi Dehmordi , Azadeh Saki ,
Volume 10, Issue 2 (3-2016)
Abstract

ABSTRACT

        Background and Objective: The current challenge of diabetes mellitus is to prevent its complications. These complications are directly associated with hyperglycemia in diabetics. The HbA1c measurement is essential for long-term glycemic control. Synchronization of HbA1c measurement is important in order to avoid discrepancies between results reported by laboratories. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy, precision and agreement of five HbA1c measurement methods with HPLC reference method.

       Methods: HbA1c levels of 55 samples were measured using six methods of microcapillary electrophoresis (Sepia), enzymatic method (Pishtaz Teb), immunoturbidometry (Pars Azmoon), boronate affinity (Nycocard), immunofluorescence (ichroma) and Tosoh G8 HPLC.

       Results: The five tested methods showed a good agreement with the HPLC method with correlation coefficient of less than 95%. Regression testing of HPLC method and other methods showed slope of 0.99 (P<0.05) for Sebia, 1.02 (P<0.05) for Pishtaz Teb, 0.79 (P<0.05) for Pars Azmoon, 0.82 (P<0.05) for Nycocard and 0.89 (P<0.05) for ichroma. Average inaccuracy for the Sebia, Pishtaz Teb, Pars Azmoon, Nycocard and ichroma in comparison with the HPLC reference method were -0.09, -0.004, -0.75, -0.79 and -0.78, respectively.

         Conclusion: The Sebia microcapillary method and Pishtaz teb enzymatic method have appropriate accuracy and precision. Therefore, these methods can be used as alternatives to the HPLC method for HbA1c measurement. Other methods such as Pars Azmoon, Nycocard and ichroma have significant shortcomings in terms of accuracy.

     


Comparative Evaluation of HPLC and Nephelometry for HbA1c Measurement: Accuracy, Reliability, and Clinical Implications
Lohitha Polisetty, Roopa Neeharika Battula,
Volume 20, Issue 1 (1-2026)
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Accurate estimation of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) is critical for diagnosing and managing diabetes mellitus. Ion-exchange high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) is considered the gold standard for HbA1c measurement, while nephelometry is widely used in clinical laboratories due to its rapid turnaround time. This study compares the accuracy, reliability, and clinical applicability of these two methods.
Methods
A cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital, where HbA1c levels of 50 patients with diabetes mellitus were measured using both ion-exchange HPLC and nephelometry. The results were analysed using descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland–Altman analysis, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. A paired t-test was used to assess statistical significance, with p<0.05 considered significant.
Results
The mean HbA1c levels were comparable between HPLC (6.2% ± 1.5) and nephelometry (6.3% ± 1.4), with a high correlation (r = 0.96, p < 0.01) and excellent agreement (ICC = 0.96). Bland–Altman analysis showed minimal bias (mean difference = 0.09%). ROC curve analysis indicated high diagnostic performance for both methods, with HPLC demonstrating superior sensitivity (90%) and specificity (92%) compared to nephelometry (88% sensitivity, 91% specificity). Nephelometry had a faster turnaround time but slightly lower specificity.
Conclusion
Both HPLC and nephelometry provide reliable HbA1c measurements, with HPLC offering superior specificity and diagnostic precision, while nephelometry provides a quicker alternative for routine clinical use. The selection of the method should be based on clinical requirements, balancing accuracy and operational efficiency.
 
Page 1 from 1