Assessment of three frequently used blood glucose monitoring devices in clinical routine

• Published in: Swiss medical weekly 2012-07, Vol.142 (2728), p.w13631-w13631
• Main Authors: Zueger, Thomas, Schuler, Vanessa, Stettler, Christoph, Diem, Peter, Christ, Emanuel R
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis of Variance; blood glucose; Blood Glucose - analysis; Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring - instrumentation; Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring - standards; Chi-Square Distribution; Diabetes; Diabetes Mellitus - blood; Female; Glucose Intolerance - blood; Glycated Hemoglobin A - analysis; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Prospective Studies; Reproducibility of Results; self measurement of blood glucose (SMBG)
• ISSN: 1424-7860; 1424-3997
• DOI: 10.4414/smw.2012.13631

Self-monitoring of blood glucose plays an important role in the management of diabetes and has been shown to improve metabolic control. The use of blood glucose meters in clinical practice requires sufficient reliability to allow adequate treatment. Direct comparison of different blood glucose meters in clinical practice, independent of the manufactures is scarce. We, therefore, aimed to evaluate three frequently used blood glucose meters in daily clinical practice. Capillary blood glucose was measured simultaneous using the following glucose meters: Contour® (Bayer Diabetes Care, Zürich, Switzerland), Accu-Chek® aviva (Roche Diagnostics, Rotkreuz, Switzerland), Free-Style® lite (Abbott Diabetes Care, Baar, Switzerland). The reference method consisted of the HemoCue® Glucose 201+ System (HemoCue® AB, Ängelholm, Sweden) with plasma conversion. The devices were assessed by comparison of the Mean Absolute Relative Differences (MARD), the Clarke Error Grid Analysis (EGA) and the compliance with the International Organization of Standardization criteria (ISO 15197:2003). Capillary blood samples were obtained from 150 patients. MARD was 10.1 ± 0.65%, 7.0 ± 0.62% and 7.8 ± 0.48% for Contour®, Accu-Chek® and Free-Style®, respectively. EGA showed 99.3% (Contour®), 98.7% (Accu-Chek®) and 100% (Free-Style®) of all measurements in zone A and B (clinically acceptable). The ISO criteria were fulfilled by Accu-Chek® (95.3%) and Free-Style® (96%), but not by Contour® (92%). In the present study the three glucose meters provided good agreement with the reference and reliable results in daily clinical routine. Overall, the Free-Style® and Accu-Chek® device slightly outperformed the Contour® device.