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

What do people think of the Sinocare Safe AQ blood monitor?

J

James9000

Member
Messages
11
Type of diabetes
Prediabetes
Treatment type
Diet only
It's pretty much the cheapest one available on eBay. My own experiences and it does seem to work. I understand that all personal blood test monitors have a margin of inaccuracy. But is there any data that shows some models as being more accurate than others? Thanks
 
I agree with @ajbod and @ianf0ster above.

To be sold in the UK (and I assume you are in the UK) meters must conform to ISO Standards ( see this link ) but of course if you buy over the internet you could end up with an unapproved device.

The cost of test strips varies a lot so think about how often you want to test and the ongoing cost of buying strips, I feel you could quickly eat up any savings you make on the up front cost of the meter.
 
I've just done 3 tests in quick succession, 4th finger, little finger and middle finger, 3.8, 3.5, 4.4. This was with a Sinocare Safe-Accu. I bought it from Amazon and chose it as it was cheap. I don't know if that variability is user error or the unit is cheap for a reason.
 
You can't expect the same number even testing the same drop of blood twice, much less testing different fingers, since then both time and location come into play as well as the different test strips.
 
I'm definitely no expert by understand these metres have an accuracy or plus or minus 15% and the difference between 3.8 and 4.4 is exactly 15%.
 
James9000 said:
I'm definitely no expert by understand these metres have an accuracy or plus or minus 15% and the difference between 3.8 and 4.4 is exactly 15%.
Click to expand...
I guess I should always take 3 readings and take the middle one then. I'm going to need more blood!
 
CatrinJ said:
I guess I should always take 3 readings and take the middle one then. I'm going to need more blood!
Click to expand...
Someone else needs to come in But I'm sticking up for sinocare because it's what I got. I found this research paper abstract.

Accuracy Evaluation of Five Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems in Patients from Different Departments
Xiaona Li et al. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2020 Apr.
Show details

Full text links
Cite

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.

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no financial or other conflict of interest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…