I have used three meters from ONETOUCH and two ACCU-CHEK’s. The ONETouch meters all read about 10 to 15 mg/dl low while the accu-cheks were all on target and only a 2mg/dl difference between the accu-chek advantage and the avia.
during the past 6 months, I’ve done a lot of research on meter accuracy. I am convinced the Flash, the accu-chek aviva and the agamatrix Keynote are the most accurate meters available at this time. I am ordering the agamatrix for myself and my wife because of its size, accuracy, its backlit display and inexpensive strips.
If I were to suggest any enhancements for the agamatrix it would be multiple strips in a wheel or drum and an attached lancing device also with a wheel or drum of spare lancets. A further enhancement would be reminder alarms with text and an insulin dose calculator for bolus/basal meds.
Hopefully this may help in sorting out your meter accuracy question. I sold inpatient glucose monitoring systems to hospitals for many years. In the hospital environment, accuracy and precision is always evaluated usually through a lab comparison study before a product is selected to do blood sugars on hospitalized people with diabetes. Most of what we know from the hospital environment also applies to consumer blood glucose monitors. The first rule of thumb is that you can’t really compare a reading you get from one meter to the a reading you get on another meter. The only true measure of accuracy is to compare your meter glucose result to a lab glucose result. Most meters have a slight bias either low or high to the lab. For meters that have a low bias the agrument could be made that you will rarely miss hypoglycemia. Here’s an example that may help illustrate this for you. Let’s say you have a lab glucose done and the lab value is 100 mg/dl. You test your blood sugar with Meter A and the value is 90 mg/dl. You then test your blood sugar with meter B and your value is 110 mg/dl. Both meters are within 10 mg/dl of the lab value yet there is a 20 mg/dl spread between the two meter values. You certainly can’t say one meter performed better than the other in comparison to the lab reading. In fact both performed exactly the same. I hope that helps!
Julie, I’m so glad you posted this. Most people don’t understand that meter accuracy should ALWAYS be compared to a lab standard, NOT another meter. A good number of meters out there also have a low bias to avoid hypos. Until meters are able to improve their accuracy to be more exact, lower readings are generally safer. What results though is higher averages of readings leading to higher A1Cs than would be expected. Please correct me if I’m wrong about this.
Accu-Chek has a program called “Inner Circle” which provides online logbooks and other support. Abbott’s Freestyle Promise program provides free meter updates, support, and training, and includes co-payment assistance for test strips. I believe Bayer and Lifescan also have user-support communities on their sites as well.
Danny,
Umm… did you actually try using a Keynote before deciding that it was the most accurate meter available? The only thing that matters is how well the meter that you actually have works. Agamatrix does a good job of pushing the accuracy of their meter, but I was badly let down by the 2 Keynotes I used and had calibrated against lab tests. Both were reading more than 20% high. Maybe I just got stuck with 2 lemons, but I doubt it, and I’m not giving them a 3rd chance. I have lots of meters, from other companies, that are much more accurate.
I have a FreeStyle meter. Sometimes I will do several tests, one right after the other, say four. I never get the same reading twice. Just recently, there was one test that was 14 points higher than the highest of the other three. I have two of these FreeStyle meters, and each has about the same faults.
The goal is to find the product that runs closest to the lab values. In the early days of meters and blood glucose testing there was alot of attention paid to meter accuracy. It seems that these days a general assumption is made that all of them more or less work the same. And without running a lab comparison it is hard to say if they are or aren’t. If a metered value runs slightly low or slightly high to the lab, there shouldn’t be much of a difference in treatment or affect on A1C’s. If the spread either way is too great, affecting meds or A1C’s, then I would look at the product, etc. Hope that helps. Julie
I’m in the process of doing side-by-sides of a number of meters (check my blog). So far, the Keynote has been running consistently higher than the other meters. It’s a small scale test with relatively few data points…
I know that my BD Link and OneTouch Mini are different. I think the OneTouch is more accurate because sometimes I would feel low but the Link wouldn’t agree with me
I have tested my One touch ultra mini with a lab test a couple of times the first time was within 2 points of the lab test the nest time lab test was 45 OTUM was 62 think it was because I had somethng on my hands. I like the One Touch Ultra product. I would say go with what you are most confertable with and your endo can help you get your BG levels right.
I wish I could find it online but at our last pump support group we were discussing meters and in the Consumer Reports magazine they had an article comparing meters and the Aviva rated ninth in acuracy. One member had gone low during the night testing with the Aviva because it said he was safe but wasn’t as high as he thought. I use the Freestyle and it seems extremely accurate and even weeds out certain medications that can cause false readings. I also love that I don’t waste any strips because it won’t start reading a result until there is sufficient blood on the strip.
I’m fortunate because I’m borderline. But it really annoys me that there can be such a dramtic difference. 20 mg/dl may not seem like a lot but that’s how things creep up on you.
When these machines are approved, the tolerance levels have to be better than 20%.
I understand that there are variances but 20% is too much. 20% puts an average major league ball player in the Hall of Fame.
Right now my one touch doesn’t seem to be properly calibrated.
My one touch has been around 10 to 20 lower than my Reli-on meter. The Reli-on meter has been around the same as my doctor’s readings. This is a good thing because the strips are a lot cheaper especially with the fact that I have no insurance. I have a one touch ultra mini and a Freestyle lite. I don’t use the Freestyle at all and used the Ultra Mini for awhile when I was getting samples from my doctor of test strips but decided to stick with the cheaper strips because it was so close to the same as my doctors. Though my doctor wasn’t happy about that because she could download the results, but even the insurance that I had before didn’t cover test strips and my husband is the only one working so you do what you have to do.
I normally use accucheck but I recently bought one touch mini and the results are like 20 mg/dl lower. Which one is correct? Does it mean I am not diabetic and am still pre diabetic or did I just waste $500 to get a more convenient to carry meter that I should not use?
It depends how the device is calibrated. In Germany the AccuCheck is calibrated to whole blood which means is says the exact number in your finger. But in other countries (to my knowledge) the AccuCheck is calibrated to blood plasma. This means that the values will be multiplied by 1.15 to make the numbers comparable with laboratory equipment and their numbers. The logical conclusion would be that the One Touch Mini is calibrated to whole blood. I think the calibration is mentioned in the description of the devices.
More information about device calibration can be found here.
In the US market, all devices are calibrated to plasma. That being said, there are several reasons a set of readings may be different from one meter to another. They include general meter variation (accuracy only has to be within 20%; most meters are within 10% over 70-200 mg/dl, some are within 5% over that range); confounding factors (contaminants such as fruit juice, soap and alcohol; cell:plasma ratios; dessication of sample; strip batch variation (age, storage conditions, etc.); intersite variability (some folk say one finger reads consistently different from its neighbor); etc.
If you are concerned with your readings, take your meters to the doctor’s office and have their readings compared with a lab sample – or with the meter your doctor’s office uses for spot checks.
I just compared the Ascensia Contour (Bayer) to the One Touch Ultra 2; same time, same finger, same blood… The Ascensia read 88 and the One Touch read 89. I don’t know if that proves anything, but it’s nice that two different meters were only one point different. It makes me feel better.
My only problem with using different meters is the software in my computer that pulls data from my One Touch. I really like it and it won’t be compatible with other meters. I’m sure if I switch there’s software for all of them. Accuracy is number one for choosing a meter, but for me the software and statistical analysis is a VERY close second.
