Accu-Chek results

1

Early this afternoon I tested 5 times using my new Accu-chek Nano trying to get a handle on my blood sugar. I got these results

156 (higher than I expected)
121 (different enough that I wanted to reconfirm)
161 (OK - the higher # is probably right but to confirm..)
129 (sigh)
134

I know these are all 20% plus or minus something like 137 and I used 140 to correct but I never had such a repeated spread using FreeStyle. Do Accu-Chek users regularly have to deal with this level of variance?

Thanks,

Maurie

2

I used to use the older Accu-check (Aviva) and found it very consistent. That's frustrating!

3

It's brutal. I've been having a lot of trouble keeping my blood sugar under control since the deposition and not knowing whether I'm at 160 or 120 makes every correction a crapshoot. I have good insurance but having to use 5 strips to come up with a working number isn't a sustainable strategy.

4

I've been having the same frustrations. I switched to the bayer usb for about a week, now back to the one touch ping as it is so much easier to see data without having to compile - wasn't worth the smaller sample.

What happened to you Maurie happened to me a few days ago. I'm at the point where I don't trust any result. I've been testing twice each time, and if they're not close a 3rd time..... Not something I want to continue but yeah, with such different results at the same time correcting is a crapshoot. I want as much control as I can have, not a crapshoot!

5

Can you go back to your old meter since it was more reliable, at least for awhile? Sounds like you need a break right now.

6

From what I have heard, the accucheck nano is supposed to be one of the more accurate meters. They claim 28% better accuracy on the standardized tests and even Bernstein recommends the accucheck last time I checked. I find my onetouch is generally more accurate than your tests show. Are you absolutely sure you controlled conditions? Did you wash your FUT (Finger Under Test) with a non-glycerin containing soap? Was your meter/strips at stable room temperature?

I know you have been at this a while, but I sometimes get weird readings, only to conclude that I had something on my hands.

Do you really correct a 140?

7

I am oing to the D doc today to get my A1C I was going to get a new prescription for The nano I guess I will find out how it is today and let you know what happens . I may be going back to my freestyle lite that I use right now .
My mom got them to send us 10 strips to try the nano ,I like the meter like the light I checked it with my freestyle and it was very close the few times I compared them .will test like you did when I get more strips

8

Not to speak for Maurie, bsc, but I do correct 140's, especially before meals, and at other times if there isn't already insulin on board to bring me down.

9

See this other thread.... the Nano is simply a smaller, renamed Aviva plus, with the same accuracy. The advertising is misleading. The "SmartView" strips are exactly the same technology as the old meter, as shown the in the FDA filing for approval. They indicate the only changes in the Nano are the size, the location of the buttons, and the lack of coding.

https://forum.tudiabetes.org/topics/accu-chek-nano?xg_source=activity

10

From the FDA request for approval for the Nano in the FDA database:

"The ACCU-CHEK(& Nano meter was developed to utilize the ACCU
CHEK@ Aviva Plus test system's technology and performance
characteristics. The ACCU-CHEKO Nano meter designers took the
measurement components of the ACCU-CHEK® Aviva Plus system, slightly
changed the firmware and hardware supporting the new user interface and
housing and embedded/programmed the strip lot code information within the
meter so a physical code key or code key port are no longer used.
The ACCU-CHEK® SmartView test strip is a No Code Freedom 2 Chemistry
test strip which shares the same scientific technology as the predicate device,
the ACCU-CHEKOg Aviva Plus test strips. The instrument's measurement
method is not modified as a part of this test strip modification project.
"
11

I did wash my hands after several of the sticks. Sometimes I get weird readings but these weren't weird. Either a 156 or a 121 would have been plausible and I got close repeats in each direction after hand washes.

I usually correct a 140 - especially four hours after a meal and if my pattern is showing that my basal isn't holding me steady.

12

So my broader question is do people get quite so much scatter with all Accu-check meters.

13

I'm sorry, when you said early afternoon, I thought this was an after meal correction. I also routinely correct a 140 before a meal or in the morning.

14

So let me present some research on this question. A study reported in April of this year looked at 5 meters and compared their accuracy, the Accucheck Aviva, essentially the same as the Nano came out well. An earlier examination in 2010 found that 40% of 27 meters failed to meet the ISO 15197 standard, but all the Accucheck meters met the standard. The standard itself is pretty loose, allowing 5% of readings to be totally "trash" and only requires that 95% of readings be within accuracy bounds.

Bernstein has recommended the Accucheck Aviva for some time.

I continue to answer despite being an avowed onetouch users. I can claim that is ok, cause I actually have an Aviva, but it is not a preferred brand with my insurance.

15

Thanks - I didn't realize that 1 out of 20 readings can be total trash. That's one every two days for many/most of us.