The Annals New | Pharmaco Epidemiology and Therapeutic Risk Management
home help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


The Annals of Pharmacotherapy: Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 317-321. DOI 10.1345/aph.19187
© 2000 Harvey Whitney Books Company.
This Article
Right arrow PDF
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Articles Ahead of Print
Right arrow [Order Reprint]
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rheney, C.
Right arrow Articles by Kirk, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rheney, C.
Right arrow Articles by Kirk, J.


Research Articles

Performance of three blood glucose meters

CC Rheney and JK Kirk

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of three blood glucose meters. METHODS: The One Touch II (LifeScan, Milpitas, CA), Glucometer Elite (Bayer, Elkhart, IN), and Accu-Chek Advantage (Boehringer Mannheim, Indianapolis, IN) were compared with a reference laboratory method (Technicon Chem System, Tarrytown, NY). Blood glucose meters used in this study were validated by a clinically oriented approach known as the error grid analysis (EGA), for which the performance of the meters was compared to a laboratory standard, and by the criteria of the American Diabetes Association (ADA). Limits of agreement were evaluated using differences from the reference laboratory method and 95% Cls. Capillary blood was obtained from study participants in fasting state with the morning blood draw and tested on the three meters simultaneously. RESULTS: A total of 120 blood glucose meter readings were analyzed; values ranged from 62 to 396 mg/dL. For all three meters, at least 75% of the capillary blood glucose values fell into zone A (acceptable) of the EGA. The number of values falling into zone B (unacceptable) were 10, 8, and 6 for the Accu-Chek Advantage, the One Touch II, and the Glucometer Elite, respectively. Only 15-25% of the meter glucose readings met the ADA criteria of being within 5% of the laboratory standard. The mean difference from the reference values was least with the Glucometer Elite. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of blood glucose determinations obtained on the meters used in this study were within the acceptable limits using the EGA. The Glucometer Elite meter had the fewest values in the unacceptable range and had the least mean difference from reference laboratory values.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Clin. Chem.Home page
M.-H. Wu, M.-Y. Fang, L.-N. Jen, H.-C. Hsiao, A. Muller, and C.-T. Hsu
Clinical Evaluation of Bionime Rightest GM310 Biosensors with a Simplified Electrode Fabrication for Alternative-Site Blood Glucose Tests
Clin. Chem., October 1, 2008; 54(10): 1689 - 1695.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J Health Syst PharmHome page
S. M. Rivers, M. P. Kane, G. Bakst, R. S. Busch, and R. A. Hamilton
Precision and accuracy of two blood glucose meters: FreeStyle Flash versus One Touch Ultra.
Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm., August 1, 2006; 63(15): 1411 - 1416.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




homecopy help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
Copyright © 2000 by Harvey Whitney Books Company.