• For Patients
  • About Us
  • Buy Online
    • English
Labtician Thea

Labtician Thea

Bringing innovation to practice

  • Dry Eye
  • Glaucoma
  • Resources
  • Programs
  • Where to Buy
  • Contact Us
  • Buy Now
  • For Patients
  • About Us
  • A-
  • A+
  • English
  • Surgical Products
  • Therapeutic Products
  • Product Search
  • Resources
  • Contact Us
< Back
[wp_social_sharing social_options='facebook,twitter,pinterest' twitter_username='labticianthea' facebook_text='Share' twitter_text='Tweet' pinterest_text="Save" icon_order='f,t,l,p,x,r' show_icons='0' before_button_text='' text_position='' social_image='']

Variability among five over-the-counter blood glucose monitors.

Kimberly MM, Vesper HW, Caudill SP, Ethridge SF, Archibold E, Porter KH, Myers GL.

ABSTRACT:

● Background: The American Diabetes Association recommends that people with diabetes use self-monitoring to control their blood glucose concentration. To assess the need for standardization, we evaluated the variability among 5 of the most common monitors: MediSense Precision Xtra, Ascencia Dex, Prestige Smart System, OneTouch Ultra, and Accu-Chek Advantage.

● Methods: We took steps to minimize preanalytical variation. We also eliminated user variability by using one trained operator to collect samples and perform all testing. Each monitor was used twice with each participant; one test was performed using an aged strip and the other using a fresh strip. We compared monitors using a separate ANOVA for each concentration range and strip lot.

● Results: The total CVs and the within-strip lot CVs were not statistically different among monitors, ranging from 3.1% to 11.3% and from 2.1% to 8.5%, respectively. There were statistically significant differences among monitors for among-strip lot CVs, which ranged from nearly 0% to 7.5%. The degree of significance increased as the concentration range increased [3.9-5.5 mmol/l: p<0.05; 5.6-7.7 mmol/l: p =0.003; 7.8-11.1 mmol/l: p < 0.001]. The average percent difference between monitor pairs was statistically significant (p < 0.05) in more than half of the paired comparisons, with significant differences ranging from 5.7% to 32.0%.

● Conclusions: Monitor results can vary significantly so that agreement among them is poor. Standardization is necessary to minimize variability and to improve patient care.

(Clin Chim Acta. 2006 Feb;364(1-2):292-7. Epub 2005 Sep 6.)

Share this Article
[wp_social_sharing social_options='facebook,twitter,pinterest' twitter_username='labticianthea' facebook_text='Share' twitter_text='Tweet' pinterest_text="Save" icon_order='f,t,l,p,x,r' show_icons='0' before_button_text='' text_position='' social_image='']

Have a question? Want to learn more?

Get in touch.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
  • Home
  • Surgical Products
  • Therapeutic Products
  • Product Search
  • Resources
  • International
  • Contact Us

GET THE LATEST UPDATES

Looking to stay on the leading edge of ophthalmic trends and practices? Sign-up today to receive helpful resources, updates, and product specials.

"*" indicates required fields

Consent

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply
Labtician Thea
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • linkedin
© Copyright 2020 Labtician Thea Inc.
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
Website design and development by 1dea Design + Media Inc.