Technical and clinical accuracy of three blood glucose meters: clinical impact assessment using error grid analysis and insulin sliding scales
AimsManufacturers of point-of-care testing (POCT) glucose systems must adhere to International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) 15197 performance standards, a tightened version of which becomes mandatory in May 2016. Using methods deviating from the evaluation requirements of ISO 15197, we inv...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of clinical pathology 2016-10, Vol.69 (10), p.899-905 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 905 |
---|---|
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 899 |
container_title | Journal of clinical pathology |
container_volume | 69 |
creator | Sutheran, Hannah Lise Reynolds, Timothy |
description | AimsManufacturers of point-of-care testing (POCT) glucose systems must adhere to International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) 15197 performance standards, a tightened version of which becomes mandatory in May 2016. Using methods deviating from the evaluation requirements of ISO 15197, we investigated the accuracy and clinical utility of three glucose testing systems.MethodsWhole blood glucose was measured on 62 EDTA-preserved samples with each system followed by plasma glucose determination with a laboratory hexokinase method. Technical accuracy was assessed using linear regression, Bland-Altman plots and bias. Clinical utility was evaluated using consensus error grid analysis and insulin dosing algorithms.ResultsThe correlation coefficient of the glucose measuring devices with the comparator method was between 0.979 and 0.993 (n=61). Bias against the reference method was +0.7–+4.4%. The FreeStyle Lite (0.7±4.4%) and ACCU-CHEK Aviva (1.3±7.3%) systems had the least bias to the reference. Error grid analysis depicts all meters to be clinically accurate, with all results falling within Zones A and B.ConclusionsConformité Européene-marked devices are presumed to have adequate accuracy, but postmarket evaluations are imperative to assess total system accuracy and whether regulatory targets are achieved. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1136/jclinpath-2015-203339 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1827912669</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>4200928331</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b477t-4ac2095025a2dcfc35662c175d35a674ea0234816d2ad8881ed3c3844dbb64e23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkc1q3DAUhUVpaSZJH6FF0E02TvVnWc6uhCQtBLJJ1kaW7sxokK2prr2Yl8gzx47zA11lIyH4zncQh5DvnJ1zLvWvnYuh39thWwjGy-mQUtafyIqrShSKK_2ZrBgTvKgrpY_IMeKOMS4rLr-SI6FNybTkK_J4D27bB2cjtb2ns3R5ODdm6w40remwzQC0jSl5uomjSwi0gwEyXrwHQre3bqAWERA76Ac6Yug3FHJOmW5y8FOBjQcM-NwUehynLMUY_MzhJAE8JV_WNiJ8e7lPyMP11f3ln-L27ubv5e_bolVVNRTKOsHqkonSCu_WTpZaC8er0svS6kqBZUIqw7UX1htjOHjppFHKt61WIOQJOVu8-5z-jYBD0wV0EKPtIY3YcCOqmgut64-gQunacDOhP_9Dd2nM06-fKVUbVeu5u1wolxNihnWzz6Gz-dBw1szbNm_bNvO2zbLtlPvxYh_bDvxb6nXMCWAL0Ha7DzqfAMclsxE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1824984962</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Technical and clinical accuracy of three blood glucose meters: clinical impact assessment using error grid analysis and insulin sliding scales</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>BMJ Journals - NESLi2</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Sutheran, Hannah Lise ; Reynolds, Timothy</creator><creatorcontrib>Sutheran, Hannah Lise ; Reynolds, Timothy</creatorcontrib><description>AimsManufacturers of point-of-care testing (POCT) glucose systems must adhere to International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) 15197 performance standards, a tightened version of which becomes mandatory in May 2016. Using methods deviating from the evaluation requirements of ISO 15197, we investigated the accuracy and clinical utility of three glucose testing systems.MethodsWhole blood glucose was measured on 62 EDTA-preserved samples with each system followed by plasma glucose determination with a laboratory hexokinase method. Technical accuracy was assessed using linear regression, Bland-Altman plots and bias. Clinical utility was evaluated using consensus error grid analysis and insulin dosing algorithms.ResultsThe correlation coefficient of the glucose measuring devices with the comparator method was between 0.979 and 0.993 (n=61). Bias against the reference method was +0.7–+4.4%. The FreeStyle Lite (0.7±4.4%) and ACCU-CHEK Aviva (1.3±7.3%) systems had the least bias to the reference. Error grid analysis depicts all meters to be clinically accurate, with all results falling within Zones A and B.ConclusionsConformité Européene-marked devices are presumed to have adequate accuracy, but postmarket evaluations are imperative to assess total system accuracy and whether regulatory targets are achieved.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-9746</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1472-4146</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/jclinpath-2015-203339</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26850631</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JCPAAK</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BMJ Publishing Group LTD</publisher><subject>Blood Glucose - analysis ; Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring - instrumentation ; Humans ; Insulin - blood ; Point-of-Care Systems - standards ; Reproducibility of Results</subject><ispartof>Journal of clinical pathology, 2016-10, Vol.69 (10), p.899-905</ispartof><rights>Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing</rights><rights>Copyright: 2016 Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b477t-4ac2095025a2dcfc35662c175d35a674ea0234816d2ad8881ed3c3844dbb64e23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b477t-4ac2095025a2dcfc35662c175d35a674ea0234816d2ad8881ed3c3844dbb64e23</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9729-4775</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://jcp.bmj.com/content/69/10/899.full.pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://jcp.bmj.com/content/69/10/899.full$$EHTML$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>114,115,314,776,780,3182,23551,27903,27904,77347,77378</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26850631$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sutheran, Hannah Lise</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reynolds, Timothy</creatorcontrib><title>Technical and clinical accuracy of three blood glucose meters: clinical impact assessment using error grid analysis and insulin sliding scales</title><title>Journal of clinical pathology</title><addtitle>J Clin Pathol</addtitle><description>AimsManufacturers of point-of-care testing (POCT) glucose systems must adhere to International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) 15197 performance standards, a tightened version of which becomes mandatory in May 2016. Using methods deviating from the evaluation requirements of ISO 15197, we investigated the accuracy and clinical utility of three glucose testing systems.MethodsWhole blood glucose was measured on 62 EDTA-preserved samples with each system followed by plasma glucose determination with a laboratory hexokinase method. Technical accuracy was assessed using linear regression, Bland-Altman plots and bias. Clinical utility was evaluated using consensus error grid analysis and insulin dosing algorithms.ResultsThe correlation coefficient of the glucose measuring devices with the comparator method was between 0.979 and 0.993 (n=61). Bias against the reference method was +0.7–+4.4%. The FreeStyle Lite (0.7±4.4%) and ACCU-CHEK Aviva (1.3±7.3%) systems had the least bias to the reference. Error grid analysis depicts all meters to be clinically accurate, with all results falling within Zones A and B.ConclusionsConformité Européene-marked devices are presumed to have adequate accuracy, but postmarket evaluations are imperative to assess total system accuracy and whether regulatory targets are achieved.</description><subject>Blood Glucose - analysis</subject><subject>Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring - instrumentation</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Insulin - blood</subject><subject>Point-of-Care Systems - standards</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><issn>0021-9746</issn><issn>1472-4146</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkc1q3DAUhUVpaSZJH6FF0E02TvVnWc6uhCQtBLJJ1kaW7sxokK2prr2Yl8gzx47zA11lIyH4zncQh5DvnJ1zLvWvnYuh39thWwjGy-mQUtafyIqrShSKK_2ZrBgTvKgrpY_IMeKOMS4rLr-SI6FNybTkK_J4D27bB2cjtb2ns3R5ODdm6w40remwzQC0jSl5uomjSwi0gwEyXrwHQre3bqAWERA76Ac6Yug3FHJOmW5y8FOBjQcM-NwUehynLMUY_MzhJAE8JV_WNiJ8e7lPyMP11f3ln-L27ubv5e_bolVVNRTKOsHqkonSCu_WTpZaC8er0svS6kqBZUIqw7UX1htjOHjppFHKt61WIOQJOVu8-5z-jYBD0wV0EKPtIY3YcCOqmgut64-gQunacDOhP_9Dd2nM06-fKVUbVeu5u1wolxNihnWzz6Gz-dBw1szbNm_bNvO2zbLtlPvxYh_bDvxb6nXMCWAL0Ha7DzqfAMclsxE</recordid><startdate>20161001</startdate><enddate>20161001</enddate><creator>Sutheran, Hannah Lise</creator><creator>Reynolds, Timothy</creator><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>H94</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9729-4775</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20161001</creationdate><title>Technical and clinical accuracy of three blood glucose meters: clinical impact assessment using error grid analysis and insulin sliding scales</title><author>Sutheran, Hannah Lise ; Reynolds, Timothy</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b477t-4ac2095025a2dcfc35662c175d35a674ea0234816d2ad8881ed3c3844dbb64e23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Blood Glucose - analysis</topic><topic>Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring - instrumentation</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Insulin - blood</topic><topic>Point-of-Care Systems - standards</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sutheran, Hannah Lise</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reynolds, Timothy</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of clinical pathology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sutheran, Hannah Lise</au><au>Reynolds, Timothy</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Technical and clinical accuracy of three blood glucose meters: clinical impact assessment using error grid analysis and insulin sliding scales</atitle><jtitle>Journal of clinical pathology</jtitle><addtitle>J Clin Pathol</addtitle><date>2016-10-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>69</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>899</spage><epage>905</epage><pages>899-905</pages><issn>0021-9746</issn><eissn>1472-4146</eissn><coden>JCPAAK</coden><abstract>AimsManufacturers of point-of-care testing (POCT) glucose systems must adhere to International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) 15197 performance standards, a tightened version of which becomes mandatory in May 2016. Using methods deviating from the evaluation requirements of ISO 15197, we investigated the accuracy and clinical utility of three glucose testing systems.MethodsWhole blood glucose was measured on 62 EDTA-preserved samples with each system followed by plasma glucose determination with a laboratory hexokinase method. Technical accuracy was assessed using linear regression, Bland-Altman plots and bias. Clinical utility was evaluated using consensus error grid analysis and insulin dosing algorithms.ResultsThe correlation coefficient of the glucose measuring devices with the comparator method was between 0.979 and 0.993 (n=61). Bias against the reference method was +0.7–+4.4%. The FreeStyle Lite (0.7±4.4%) and ACCU-CHEK Aviva (1.3±7.3%) systems had the least bias to the reference. Error grid analysis depicts all meters to be clinically accurate, with all results falling within Zones A and B.ConclusionsConformité Européene-marked devices are presumed to have adequate accuracy, but postmarket evaluations are imperative to assess total system accuracy and whether regulatory targets are achieved.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</pub><pmid>26850631</pmid><doi>10.1136/jclinpath-2015-203339</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9729-4775</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0021-9746 |
ispartof | Journal of clinical pathology, 2016-10, Vol.69 (10), p.899-905 |
issn | 0021-9746 1472-4146 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1827912669 |
source | MEDLINE; BMJ Journals - NESLi2; PubMed Central |
subjects | Blood Glucose - analysis Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring - instrumentation Humans Insulin - blood Point-of-Care Systems - standards Reproducibility of Results |
title | Technical and clinical accuracy of three blood glucose meters: clinical impact assessment using error grid analysis and insulin sliding scales |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T05%3A49%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Technical%20and%20clinical%20accuracy%20of%20three%20blood%20glucose%20meters:%20clinical%20impact%20assessment%20using%20error%20grid%20analysis%20and%20insulin%20sliding%20scales&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20clinical%20pathology&rft.au=Sutheran,%20Hannah%20Lise&rft.date=2016-10-01&rft.volume=69&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=899&rft.epage=905&rft.pages=899-905&rft.issn=0021-9746&rft.eissn=1472-4146&rft.coden=JCPAAK&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/jclinpath-2015-203339&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E4200928331%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1824984962&rft_id=info:pmid/26850631&rfr_iscdi=true |