Accuracy of Three Dry-Chemistry Methods for Lipid Profiling and Risk Factor Classification

in International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD  $24.95

Student 1 year online subscription

USD  $88.00

1 year online subscription

USD  $118.00

Student 2 year online subscription

USD  $168.00

2 year online subscription

USD  $224.00

The purpose of this project was to determine the accuracy in lipids measurement and risk factor classification using Reflotron, Cholestech, and Ektachem DT-60 dry-chemistry analyzers. Plasma and capillary venous blood from fasting subjects (n = 47) were analyzed for total cholesterol (TC), high density lipoprotein (HDL-C), and triglycerides (TG) using these analyzers and a CDC certified laboratory. Accuracy was evaluated by comparing the results of each portable analyzer against the CDC reference method. One-way ANOVAs were performed for TC, HDL-C, and TG between all portable analyzers and the reference method. Chi-square was used for risk classification (2001 NIH Guidelines). Compared to the reference method, the Ektachem and Reflotron provided significantly lower values for TC (p < .05). In addition, the Cholestech and Ektachem values for HDL-C were higher than the CDC (p < .05). The Reflotron and Cholestech provided higher values of TG than the CDC (p < .05). Chi-squares analyses for risk classification were not significant (p > .45) between analyzers. According to these results, the Ektachem and Cholestech analyzers met the current NCEP III guidelines for accuracy in measurement of TC, while only Ektachem met guidelines for TG. All 3 analyzers provided a good overall risk classification; however, values of HDL-C should be only used for screening purposes.

D.A. Rubin and R.G. McMurray are with the Department of Exercise & Sport Science, J.S. Harrell and B.W. Carlson are with the School of Nursing, and S. Bangdiwala is with the Department of Biostatistics—all at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-8700.