• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Has anyone got a link to a meter accuracy testing web site

madusmacus

madusmacus

Well-Known Member
Messages
309
Type of diabetes
Treatment type
Diet only
I found one it was embarrassing it said freedom lite etc 100% 100% 100% then I read the small print
study funded by Abbott (makers of freestyle) how do they get away with this.

Anyways I want to buy the most consistent accurate meter available money no object (its my life matters more than money)
but its so full of scams I don't know where to look

The makers of Dexcom G4 constant glucose monitoring device suggested ...
they mailed me this - "I believe the BG system from Agamatrix claims accuracy of +/- 10% vs a lab standard."

They require finger pricking to calibrate the constant monitoring device - so if your strips are reporting bad then their meter isn't accurate either

If anyone knows anything can you please help me :¬)

Many thanks
 
Part of Dr Bernstein's practice is testing BG meters to ensure accuracy for his patients. He used to recommend Accuchek, but now he agrees with the Abbot funded study and recommends the Freestyle and Freestyle Lite as being most accurate. He regularly reviews the meters and updates his recommendations based purely on results. He has no connection (financial or otherwise) with any of the meter manufacturers.
 
use 3 strips and average the result?
they are all within +/-20%
as they said some are less, the paperwork with your strips will tell you the 90% etc error rate,
 
Problem is im getting this

One tub of freedom freestyle lite will give me a baseline of 6.3 mmol the next tub 5.5 and the next tub 4.7
(baseline is wake up morning - doing nothing different ever)

this is consistent throughout the life of all the 50 strips in a tub -even if the tubs are the same batch number and purchased from our own store

This is true I am not lying and I am well annoyed - I have reproduced this over my last 6 tubs of freestyle lite sticks

I don't actually care that they are rubbish +/-20% out of real values but it is so disheartening to have different tubs of sticks shift my graphing up and down my +/- 2.0 mmol

its ridiculous and I cant get to the bottom of it
 
jack412 I have tried everything imaginable

values of 6.3 5.5 and 4.7 are all legal results (my real BG is somewhere between those)

but my main problem is that these shifts in reporting my baseline values change when opening a new tub of 50 sticks
It is so obvious...
last tub I was reporting 4.7-5.2 then this new tub is 6.1-6.4

It is so obvious its the strips and this up down shift per new tub has happened for the last 6 tubs

ruling out im a moron I hope
 
Last edited by a moderator:
well if my BG is realty 5.5

tub 1 reports this as 4.7 (all 50 sticks) then...
tub 2 reports this as 6.4 (all 50 sticks)...

There is something very wrong with freestyle lite test sticks
(6 tubs bought from various sources)

I would expect random variations not carte blanche shifts of +/- 1.5mmol for the life of a tub

:¬(
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyays back on topic-ish :¬)

Has anyone found a meter that does not shift its results as you change your tubs of test sticks

Thanks for reading :¬)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You seem to be putting yourself under a lot of stress to find perfection. Meters and strips vary.


Some factors have to do with the meter, some with the strip and some, with us PWDs.

In fact, the biggest contributor to inaccuracy is the strips. Here’s the process as simply as I can put it: glucose interacts with an enzyme on the strip, releasing electrons. Another agent on the strip, called the “mediator,” turns these electrons into an electrical current. The greater the glucose concentration, the greater the current. That current then speeds through the strip. Finally, an algorithm (formula) in the meter converts the current into a concentration of glucose. And voila! You get a number.

But there’s a long list of factors that affect meter/strip accuracy:

  • Meter calibration, coding, enzymes and mathematical algorithms (all different in different meters)
  • Variable enzymes in strips
  • Mediator oxidation and strip freshness/age
  • Strips differ somewhat, lot to lot, with somewhat different precision ranges for each lot
  • Strips differ in well size (the space in a strip that holds the blood)
  • Interfering substances in one’s blood from medications (something as simple as Tylenol), and every manufacturer’s nightmare, hematocrit — that percentage of red blood cells in blood, which can interfere with the electrical current
  • Environmental conditions: temperature, climate, altitude
  • Lack of meter maintenance
  • User error – forgetting to code the meter or coding it incorrectly; not washing hands before testing (there may be some sugar residue on your fingers or sweat on hands); leaving strips exposed to air too long; or using expired strips
http://www.diabetesmine.com/2012/09/why-meters-cant-tell-us-our-blood-sugar-levels.html
 
That website is out of date.

ISO 15197:2013 standard states that 99% of results must fall within ±0.83mmol/L for blood glucose concentrations < 5.55mmol/L and within ±15% for blood glucose concentrations

So, your 4.72 to 6.38, are just on the limits.

Will you get a better meter?
Possibly, as by the nature of the test strips, they can't be tested individually, just sampled as batches.
It makes sense to keep the process as centred as possible, and you've found the process is very repeatable, as each strip in any batch is the same.
Cheaper processes could drift more, so with greater batch variation, but also more chance of waste during production.
Tighter control will keep the process more central, maybe with increased cost, but more yield.

Not sure the technology of the testing will input much, as you have said it's the batch to batch variance you're seeing, not test to test.
 
So, let me ask you a few things:

"One tub of freedom freestyle lite will give me a baseline of 6.3 mmol the next tub 5.5 and the next tub 4.7 (baseline is wake up morning - doing nothing different ever)" - Is this the average from that tub or are you saying you get these numbers every single time you test?

Are your numbers reducing with every tub? Could this be an improving condition? (Sorry of that feels insulting, but I can't tell from what you have written.)

"well if my BG is realty 5.5" - As you are testing with finger prick testing, how would you ever know what your blood reeeaaallly is at any given time?

Should we not be looking at trends, rather than numbers?

I could be worthwhile to look at your graphs of your testing, over the strips you have used and see what happens when you overlay one set of results, versus another. I don't know if you have the software to achieve the overlay, but it not, then mapping the results in Excel in separated columns or lines, per tub, could help you out.

If you are fixated with absolutely no tolerable variation, I don't think you will ever be really happy; even with a CGM, as the sensors need to be changed from time to time. Perhaps that just means that your irritation is separated by a slightly longer time frame, if you can make a sensor last longer than 50 strips. Perhaps @Spiker might be able to comment on the consistency of his own CGM, as I understand he is a committed user.

I apologise if I'm not seeming very supportive.
 
thank all for your comments but.

I don't think I have yet managed to explain what I am so annoyed about (I did try)

  • I was trying to explain Its a PER TUB VARIANCE NOT a per strip variance
  • I don't care a dam about PER STRIP VARIANCE they can have them erring +/- 30% for all I care
  • Its when, at the beginning of a new tub you get major shifts in your readings you don't know if its a spike or what it is.

I hope I have explained myself better :¬)


Either im the only one in the world that has noticed this with freedom freestyle lite strips in the UK or
I am mental (probably the latter given you all seem happy) hehe


Ill report back on this new meter see if anything gets better
 
Tubs certainly do vary, and I was pretty hacked off for a while when I was getting quite a significant variance from a particular batch, so I had some new ones that brought me back into a more acceptable variance.

Have you tried the Codefree meter and strips? I'm not suggesting for a moment it's perfect, but there are an awful lot of us on here who use it and don't appear to be experiencing the angst you are.

If you are looking for every tub to be a baseline of X, Y or Z, I don't know that you will find your solution. Let the trend (per tub) be your friend. I mean, as a T2, it's not very likely you will have to take any action to avoid dangerous situations, like deep hypos, as T1s would.
 
All the testing is funded by one manufacturer or another. A lot of the testing seems to be done in one of two laboratories in Germany. The Freestyle actually comes out well even when the source of the funding is Roche.
Heres a chart taken of one of the largest comparisons. (funded by Roche) The full study is freely available online
http://www.diabetesdaily.com/voices/2013/07/blood-glucose-meter-accuracy-comparison-chart/
Of course it doesn't look at lot to lot variability One study I could find doing this didn't include the Wavesense .
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23063033
Again the Freestyle did well (and again funded by Roche)

Having said that I hate my bGstar , and in the test above it didn't do that well. I find it far more variable than my previous monitors (2 accuchek monitors and a One touch)
One if the reasons is I think that it is very small and the strip can wobble if you touch it. This I think may lead to inaccuracies. My other meters were larger but more stable.

All in all though, I agree about looking at trends.
As I use insulin I will redo tests that don't seem right and yes if necessary take the average of three for dosing (though usually 2 are closer to each other ). Over time, even with the BGstar which I don't like but am stuck with for 4 years(French policies) it predicts my HbA1c accurately.
 
My Nexus Gluco Rx, as supplied ny the NHS, seems repeatable, but I've never worried over .5 of a point though, so probably wouldn't notice a small change batch to batch.
 
Thanks all again for more info :¬)

AndBreathe im not after much TBH I just don't want each tub jumping my baselines from 4.6 up to 6.5 then back down to 5.4 for the next tub etc etc etc
individual wacky readings due to per strip problems can be sorted out using take 3 and average but you CANT fix it when the whole tubs bonkers

phoenix exactly my point - im looking at trends and I don't need my baseline shifing every time i open a new tub - as I said I means you see a trend up or down for the life of that tub and its not acceptable

:¬)
 
Back
Top