Accuracy Evaluation of Four Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems in the Hands of Intended Users and Trained Personnel Based on ISO 15197 Requirements.

BACKGROUND Self-monitoring of blood glucose (BG) is an integral part in the therapy of people with diabetes, which is why blood glucose monitoring systems (BGMS) have to fulfill minimum accuracy requirements. However, accuracy is often assessed by trained operators, although such assessments do not necessarily allow for drawing conclusions on accuracy in the hands of lay users. METHODS The accuracy of 4 different BGMS (Accu-Chek® Active, Accu-Chek® Performa, Contour®Plus, and OneTouch® SelectSimple™) in the hands of lay users and trained study personnel was assessed in this study. Procedures were based on International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15197:2013, clause 8, requirements. BGMS measurement results were compared against results from a glucose oxidase and a hexokinase laboratory analyzer. Handling errors made by lay users were documented. Accuracy was evaluated applying ISO 15197:2013/EN ISO 15197:2015 criteria (percentage of results within ±15 mg/dL or ±15%), more stringent criteria (10 mg/dL or 10%, and 5 mg/dL or 5%, respectively), and ISO 15197:2003 system accuracy criteria. RESULTS The level of accuracy differed among the four BGMS investigated independent from the operator. One system had less than 95% of the values within each of the limits and one system showed marked differences in accuracy when used by trained personnel and by lay users. Common lay user errors were not checking the test strip codes, incorrect application of blood, and not using the blood drop immediately. CONCLUSIONS BGMS accuracy can differ when used by trained personnel and when used by lay users. It is important that BGMS manufacturers provide systems that are as insensitive to operator errors as technically possible and easy to use.

[1]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[2]  Marc D Breton,et al.  Impact of Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring Errors on Glucose Variability, Risk for Hypoglycemia, and Average Glucose Control in Type 1 Diabetes: An In Silico Study , 2010, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[3]  H. Bilo,et al.  Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose: The Use of the First or the Second Drop of Blood , 2011, Diabetes Care.

[4]  Ryuzo Kawamori,et al.  Glucose Monitoring After Fruit Peeling: Pseudohyperglycemia When Neglecting Hand Washing Before Fingertip Blood Sampling , 2011, Diabetes Care.

[5]  Christina Schmid,et al.  System Accuracy Evaluation of 43 Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems for Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose according to DIN EN ISO 15197 , 2012, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[6]  Christina Schmid,et al.  Evaluation of 12 blood glucose monitoring systems for self-testing: system accuracy and measurement reproducibility. , 2014, Diabetes technology & therapeutics.

[7]  Christina Schmid,et al.  Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose , 2014, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[8]  Christoph Hasslacher,et al.  Analytical Performance of Glucose Monitoring Systems at Different Blood Glucose Ranges and Analysis of Outliers in a Clinical Setting , 2014, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[9]  Sverre Sandberg,et al.  Performance of 10 systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose by trained healthcare professionals and in the hands of the users. , 2015, Clinical chemistry.

[10]  David C Klonoff,et al.  Performance of Cleared Blood Glucose Monitors , 2015, Journal of diabetes science and technology.

[11]  Ronald Brazg,et al.  Accuracy evaluation of contour next compared with five blood glucose monitoring systems across a wide range of blood glucose concentrations occurring in a clinical research setting. , 2015, Diabetes technology & therapeutics.

[12]  Mary Ellen Warchal-Windham,et al.  Accuracy and user performance evaluation of a blood glucose monitoring system. , 2015, Diabetes technology & therapeutics.

[13]  FreckmannGuido,et al.  System Accuracy Evaluation of Different Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems Following ISO 15197:2013 by Using Two Different Comparison Methods. , 2015 .

[14]  Jane F Wallace,et al.  Accuracy and user performance evaluation of the Contour(®) Next Link 2.4 blood glucose monitoring system. , 2015, Clinica chimica acta; international journal of clinical chemistry.

[15]  Guido Freckmann,et al.  Performance of two updated blood glucose monitoring systems: an evaluation following ISO 15197:2013 , 2016, Current medical research and opinion.