Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Get Involved
Book and Product Reviews
GlucoRx system
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AlcalaBob" data-source="post: 172965" data-attributes="member: 30529"><p>I've just been testing the consistency of the GlucoRx versus the OneTouch Ultra and I've found a significant variation in the GlucoRx. Testing the same site twice on the Rx gave significantly different values, like 7.5 and 9.8, when at the same point my OneTouch Ultra gave 6.5 twice - I used the same drop of blood to feed two strips, one for each meter.</p><p></p><p>I've found that the Rx consistently gave a higher reading and the stated accuracy on their website seems to be no more than ± 20% which I think is enough to be misleading. Certainly if you are trying to follow a low or reduced carb diet and want to make sure you are avoiding post-meal peaks, the Rx might give you misleading information.</p><p></p><p>Over a period of one week (twenty readings), I never once found the Rx giving a lower value than the OneTouch and the range of differences between them was from 0.5 mmol/L to 3.5 mmol/L. I tried to find some references for trials of these meters and only found the OneTouch at: <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14709195" target="_blank">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14709195</a> which demonstrates a high level of accuracy.</p><p></p><p>I'd be interested in any link to a comparable trial with the Rx. At the moment, I'm keeping the Rx as a not very trustworthy backup. I could just have a duff one but I worry about that ±20%. On a reading of 7.0 that could be anywhere between 5.6 and 8.4 - a reading of 9.0 could mean 7.2 up to 10.8 which is a massive uncertainty. The strips are certainly cheaper but it's hard even to argue that the Rx measure of a trend would be accurate since each reading could vary by ±20%. Any trend seen might not even exist.</p><p></p><p>I'd be interested in hearing of other folks' comparison tests for these meters.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AlcalaBob, post: 172965, member: 30529"] I've just been testing the consistency of the GlucoRx versus the OneTouch Ultra and I've found a significant variation in the GlucoRx. Testing the same site twice on the Rx gave significantly different values, like 7.5 and 9.8, when at the same point my OneTouch Ultra gave 6.5 twice - I used the same drop of blood to feed two strips, one for each meter. I've found that the Rx consistently gave a higher reading and the stated accuracy on their website seems to be no more than ± 20% which I think is enough to be misleading. Certainly if you are trying to follow a low or reduced carb diet and want to make sure you are avoiding post-meal peaks, the Rx might give you misleading information. Over a period of one week (twenty readings), I never once found the Rx giving a lower value than the OneTouch and the range of differences between them was from 0.5 mmol/L to 3.5 mmol/L. I tried to find some references for trials of these meters and only found the OneTouch at: [url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14709195]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14709195[/url] which demonstrates a high level of accuracy. I'd be interested in any link to a comparable trial with the Rx. At the moment, I'm keeping the Rx as a not very trustworthy backup. I could just have a duff one but I worry about that ±20%. On a reading of 7.0 that could be anywhere between 5.6 and 8.4 - a reading of 9.0 could mean 7.2 up to 10.8 which is a massive uncertainty. The strips are certainly cheaper but it's hard even to argue that the Rx measure of a trend would be accurate since each reading could vary by ±20%. Any trend seen might not even exist. I'd be interested in hearing of other folks' comparison tests for these meters. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Get Involved
Book and Product Reviews
GlucoRx system
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…