Sodium and potassium content of 24 h urinary collections: a comparison between field- and laboratory-based analysers.

Xuejun Yin,Bruce Neal,Maoyi Tian,Zhifang Li,Kristina Petersen,Yuichiro Komatsu,Xiangxian Feng,Yangfeng Wu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980017003731
2018-01-01
Public Health Nutrition
Abstract:Objective: Measurement of mean population Na and K intakes typically uses laboratory-based assays, which can add significant logistical burden and costs. A valid field-based measurement method would be a significant advance. In the current study, we used 24 h urine samples to compare estimates of Na, K and Na:K ratio based upon assays done using the field-based Horiba twin meter v. laboratory-based methods. Design: The performance of the Horiba twin meter was determined by comparing field-based estimates of mean Na and K against those obtained using laboratorybased methods. The reported 95% limits of agreement of Bland-Altman plots were calculated based on a regression approach for non-uniform differences. Setting: The 24 h urine samples were collected as part of an ongoing study being done in rural China. Subjects: One hundred and sixty-six complete 24 h urine samples were qualified for estimating 24 h urinary Na and K excretion. Results: Mean Na and K excretion were estimated as 170.4 and 37.4 mmol/d, respectively, using the meter-based assays; and 193.4 and 43.8 mmol/d, respectively, using the laboratory-based assays. There was excellent relative reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient) for both Na (0.986) and K (0.986). Bland-Altman plots showed moderate-to-good agreement between the two methods. Conclusions: Na and K intake estimations were moderately underestimated using assays based upon the Horiba twin meter. Compared with standard laboratorybased methods, the portable device was more practical and convenient.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?