DETERMINATION OF INDIVIDUAL GLUCOSE THRESHOLD USING PHARMACY PORTABLE BLOOD GLUCOSE METER

• Autor(a) principal: Sousa,Nuno Manuel Frade de
• Data de Publicação: 2019
• Outros Autores: Silva Júnior,Aloísio Barbosa da, Mairink,Raquel de Souza, Bertucci,Danilo Rodrigues, Souza,Markus Vinícius Campos, Martins,Raul Agostinho Simões
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Revista brasileira de medicina do esporte (Online)
• Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1517-86922019000300207
• topic: Anaerobic threshold; Ventilatory anaerobic threshold; Blood glucose

ABSTRACT Introduction The individual glucose threshold (IGT) has been used to estimate the anaerobic threshold with low-cost analyses and shorter times. However, the reliability of the glycemic analysis using a portable pharmacy glucose meter has received little attention. Objective To identify the IGT using a portable glucose meter and to compare it with the ventilatory threshold (VT). Methods Fourteen active, healthy men (25.9 ± 3.2 years; %BF = 17.9 ± 3.7%) performed an incremental treadmill test. The anaerobic threshold was identified by two different methods: (1) IGT, corresponding to the intensity of the lowest glucose value during the test; and (2) VT, corresponding to the break in linearity of the ventilation curve and an increase in the respiratory oxygen equivalent, without an equivalent increase in carbon dioxide. Results There were significant differences between VT (9.9 ± 1.2 km/h) and IGT (9.5 ± 1/1 km/h), corresponding to 75.4 ± 9.2 and 72.5 ± 10.4 %VO2max, respectively. The methods presented high correlation (r = 0.82, p = 0.002) and the Bland-Altman technique showed agreement between IGT and VT, with a mean difference of 0.5 km/h. Conclusion It was possible to determine the intensity of IGT by the glycemic response in the incremental test using a portable glucose meter. The IGT underestimated the intensity of VT by approximately 0.5 km/h, but with a high correlation and agreement between them. Level of evidence III, Case-Controle Study.