Download PDF
Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes 2020; 128(04): 210-215
DOI: 10.1055/a-0855-3726
Article
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Accuracy Evaluation of Five Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems in Patients from Different Departments

Xiaona Li
1   Department of Endocrinology, The Affiliated Changzhou No.2 People’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, China
,
Suhua Zheng
2   Department of Hematology and Oncology, The Affiliated Changzhou No.2 People’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, China
,
Suiyue Pan
3   Department of Internal Medicine, The Affiliated Changzhou No.2 People’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, China
,
Ting Yan
4   Department of Orthopedics, The Affiliated Changzhou No.2 People’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, China
,
Jie Di
5   Department of Intensive Care Unit, The Affiliated Changzhou No.2 People’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, China
,
Yinian Yang
6   Department of Nephropathy, The Affiliated Changzhou No.2 People’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, China
,
Jinluo Cheng
1   Department of Endocrinology, The Affiliated Changzhou No.2 People’s Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Changzhou, China
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received 04 March 2018
revised 29 January 2019

accepted 11 February 2019

Publication Date:
30 April 2019 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) systems are expected to be accurate and provide reliable results. The international standard ISO (International Organization for Standardization) 15197:2013 is widely accepted for the accuracy evaluation for SMBG systems. Accuracy evaluation was performed for 5 different SMBG systems in patients from multi-departments at the hospital.

Method A total of 120 patients from Changzhou Second People’s Hospital (Changzhou, China) were randomized and enrolled in the study. Accuracy evaluation was performed for 5 different SMBG systems: Gold AQ (Sinocare), Freestyle Optium Xceed (Abbott), Contour TS (Bayer), OneTouch Ultra (J&J) and Accu-Chek Performa (Roche). For each system, comparison measurements were performed with YSI 2300 STAT PLUS Glucose and Lactate Analyzer and Roche Cobas 8000 Modular Analyzer.

Results All 5 systems showed that 100% of results fall within consensus error grid Zones A and B. Compared with YSI 2300 or Roche Cobas 8000 Modular Analyzer, Gold AQ system showed the highest accuracy. The linearity analysis also showed that Gold AQ had the highest correlation coefficient.

Conclusion Compared with other SMBG systems, Gold AQ Glucose Monitoring System manufactured by Sinocare Inc. had the highest accuracy in measuring blood glucose level in patients from multi-departments at this hospital.

Key words

glucose monitoring system - glucose - accuracy - stability
 

  • References

  • 1 Harris MI. Diabetes in America: Epidemiology and scope of the problem. Diabetes Care 1998; 21: C11-C14
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Narayan KM, Boyle JP, Thompson TJ. et al. Lifetime risk for diabetes mellitus in the United States. JAMA 2003; 290: 1884-1890
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Narayan KM, Boyle JP, Geiss LS. et al. Impact of recent increase in incidence on future diabetes burden: U.S.,2005–2050. Diabetes Care 2006; 29: 2114-2116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Yang W, Lu J, Weng J. et al. Prevalence of diabetes among men and women in China. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 1090
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet 1998; 352: 837-853
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Nordin C, Amiruddin R, Rucker L. et al. Diabetes and stress hyperglycemia associated with myocardial infarctions at an urban municipalhospital: Prevalence and effect on mortality. Cardiol Rev 2005; 13: 223-230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Bonamichi BD, Parente EB, Campos AC. et al. Hyperglycemia effect on coronary disease in patients with metabolic syndrome evaluated by intracoronary ultrasonography. PLoS One 2017; 12: e0171733; doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0171733.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Polonsky WH, Fisher L, Schikman CH. et al. Structured self-monitoring of blood glucose significantly reduces A1C levels in poorly controlled, noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetes: Results from the structured testing program study. Diabetes Care 2011; 34: 262-267
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bosi E, Scavini M, Ceriello A. et al. Intensive structured self-monitoring of blood glucose and glycemic control in noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetes: The PRISMA randomized trial. Diabetes Care 2013; 36: 2887-2894
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 American Diabetes Association. Glycemic targets. Diabetes Care 2016; 39: S39-S46
    Google Scholar
  • 11 International Organization for Standardization. In vitro diagnostic test systems—requirements for blood-glucose monitoring systems for self-testing in managing diabetes mellitus ISO 15197 2013
    PubMed
  • 12 Freckmann G, Baumstark A, Jendrike N. et al. System accuracy evaluation of 27 blood glucose monitoring systems according to DIN EN ISO 15197. Diabetes Technol Ther 2010; 12: 221-231
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Freckmann G, Baumstark A, Schmid C. et al. Evaluation of 12 blood glucose monitoring systems for selftesting: System accuracy and measurement reproducibility. Diabetes Technol Ther 2014; 16: 113-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Baumstark A, Pleus S, Schmid C. et al. Lot-to-lot variability of test strips and accuracy assessment of systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose according to ISO 15197. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2012; 6: 1076-1086
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Bernstein R, Parkes JL, Goldy A. et al. A new test strip technology platform for self-monitoring of blood glucose. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2013; 7: 1386-1399
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Hasslacher C, Kulozik F, Platten I. Analytical performance of glucose monitoring systems at different blood glucose ranges and analysis of outliers in a clinical setting. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2014; 8: 466-472
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Kristensen GB, Monsen G, Skeie S. et al. Standardized evaluation of nine instruments for self-monitoring of blood glucose. Diabetes Technol Ther 2008; 10: 467-477
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Halldorsdottir S, Warchal-Windham ME, Wallace JF. et al. Accuracy evaluation of five blood glucose monitoring systems: The North American Comparator Trial. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2013; 7: 1294-1304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Zueger T, Schuler V, Stettler C. et al. Assessment of three frequently used blood glucose monitoring devices in clinical routine. Swiss Med Wkly 2012; 142: w13631
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Pleus S, Schmid C, Link M. et al. Accuracy assessment of two novel systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose following ISO 15197:2013. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2014; 8: 906-908
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Rebel A, Rice MA, Fahy BG. Accuracy of point-of-care glucose measurements. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2012; 6: 396-411
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Kumar G, Sng BL, Kumar S. Correlation of capillary and venous blood glucometry with laboratory determination. Prehosp EmergCare 2004; 8: 378-383
    PubMedGoogle Scholar