Concerns about my new meter

[rayray119]

So as have been metoned I have now have a gluco rx Q meter(gluco rx are now all my cgg suplys(well there may a a couple of others)

However I find this on the thier website.

Factors Affecting Accuracy | Blood Sugar Machine | GlucoRx

There are many factors that can potentially affect accuracy in testing blood glucose levels, find out more here.

www.glucorx.co.uk

Oh what they say the standards are and what they say there are seems to be different unless I'm misremembering


The most concreting statement is this
"Blood glucose meters are least accurate during episodes of low blood glucose" and surely as a type 1 diabetiics that's when you want it be accurate epsailly if you're using it to back up s weather a cgm us right and I thought even in these circumstances it still had be within 0.9 mmols. But what they saying is for numbers above 4.2 it has be withen 15% and no mention of of rules withrn lower numbers.

Is it worth contacting the company and challenging this or and I'm getting things wrong.

 

[Inka]

I wouldn’t bother contacting them @rayray119 That’s pretty normal.

 

[rayray119]

I wouldn’t bother contacting them @rayray119 That’s pretty normal.

Oh oh okay I was just confused because I sure I read the iso stardends were different to what they say. I was thinking if that's cases then it doesn't really back up when my dexcom saying it's low then does it

 

[Inka]

If you’re low, you’re low. All it’s saying is that the meter might say 3.3 when you’re 2.9 or 3.5. You still treat the hypo. If you test and your meter says your 6.2 but your Dexcom Low alarm woke you then you know you aren’t hypo and you maybe lay on the sensor.

 

[rayray119]

Ah okay there were some other things that led me to look it up. Yeah I wouldn't be birthed me but a difference of 3 5 or 2.9. the corncens were more about them seeming to think there are no rules below 4.2 maybe I'm misreading (I was more worried thar could mean I was actually low but my meter could read anything).

 

[Leadinglights]

I think people expect a lot more accuracy than is possible in a instrument which is incredibly cheap (even the more expensive ones) compared to laboratory instruments which would be calibrated to within an inch of their lives but cost thousands of pounds or even millions. At work we would be paying £100.000 for a blood analyser which would alert if out of calibration by 0.1%.

 

[rayray119]

I think people expect a lot more accuracy than is possible in a instrument which is incredibly cheap (even the more expensive ones) compared to laboratory instruments which would be calibrated to within an inch of their lives but cost thousands of pounds or even millions. At work we would be paying £100.000 for a blood analyser which would alert if out of calibration by 0.1%.

Yes like I said my concerns wernt about it being a difference of 3.2 or 2.3 for example. More of the fact the no mention of rules witen low numbers could potentially means it displays anything if I'm actually low.(but perhaps that's over thinking)

 

[Leadinglights]

Most monitors work by using an enzyme reaction and that will have been calibrated so the concentrations of glucose will fall on a standard curve and any concentrations outside of that will be less accurate.
However there are many other factors which will influence that as well, dehydration, anaemia, temperature, atmospheric pressure etc.

 

[rayray119]

Most monitors work by using an enzyme reaction and that will have been calibrated so the concentrations of glucose will fall on a standard curve and any concentrations outside of that will be less accurate.
, anaemia.
I wss

Interesting you mention ananima because I think I was suppose to have that tested before Christmas. I must sort that out.

 

[Leadinglights]

Interesting you mention ananima because I think I was suppose to have that tested before Christmas. I must sort that out.

In the link you posted there is a additional link to the research on the factors influencing the accuracy of monitors, a bit of a long read but interesting.

 

[rayray119]

In the link you posted there is a additional link to the research on the factors influencing the accuracy of monitors, a bit of a long read but interesting.

Yes I did read and is interesting athough part of the reasons I was concerned as with out of range numbers this particular meter hasn't very offem to been all that close to dexcom and with previous meter it almost always was I know it's generally said that meters are more accurate then dexcom but that does seem a little bit suppisous to me. Perhaps they just use a higher range of the 15%)

 

[Inka]

Ah okay there were some other things that led me to look it up. Yeah I wouldn't be birthed me but a difference of 3 5 or 2.9. the corncens were more about them seeming to think there are no rules below 4.2 maybe I'm misreading (I was more worried thar could mean I was actually low but my meter could read anything).

It doesn’t mean that the meter is horribly inaccurate below 4.2, just that it won’t be quite as accurate as within the normal range and may, say, be 0.5 mmol out rather than 0.2mmol if your blood sugar is between the ranges it quoted 🙂

 

[rayray119]

It doesn’t mean that the meter is horribly inaccurate below 4.2, just that it won’t be quite as accurate as within the normal range and may, say, be 0.5 mmol out rather than 0.2mmol if your blood sugar is between the ranges it quoted 🙂

Okay well that's a little different because that's still is actually withen 15%. That's why there was concerned then. I read it as they regarding this but my mistake.

 

[rayray119]

In the link you posted there is a additional link to the research on the factors influencing the accuracy of monitors, a bit of a long read but interesting.

Oh I just noticed that you were talking about the link at the bottom I've give thet read later. This is actually a really cheap meter. The actual meter itself cost £5 49 on there website I believe.

 

[Inka]

Okay well that's a little different because that's still is actually withen 15%. That's why there was concerned then. I read it as they regarding this but my mistake.

Yes, mine was just example numbers. What they’re saying is that the meter is within 15% in the normal range but might not be within 15% below 4.2. That just means it might be 16% out or whatever. This is the same for most meters. They all have to meet the minimum standards.

 

[trophywench]

20 years ago the pharmacist who managed and ran the pharmacy we normally used, simply cos it was the nearest one to our GP surgery and there's never been another a shorter distance from home, told me one day that he'd once been attended a Trade 'jolly' with a load of other qualified and practicing other UK pharmacists which included visiting a Malaysian factory that made test strips for numerous different sorts of tests, but one of those was glucometer strips for lots of different glucometer brands and saw two automated production lines virtually side by side - but, each turning out different Brands, then when they got to 'Packaging' across the other side of the 'factory' being automatically packed into their appropriate plastic pots.

Years ago when you could still 'chat up' the phlebotomists and ask em to add something extra to blood test forms cos they were handwritten by the doc then, I remembered to ask ours to add just 'BG' to mine which she did cos in the lab they just do both BG and HbA1c out of the same vial, then having readied my meter got an extra drop straight out of the same hole in the same arm vein onto the test strip. The result was 0.1 different (eg one was 7.6 and the other 7.7, can't remember exactly now) but that close for me to consider it 100% accurate. But there again - if I have to purchase a pot of (Roche) Accu-Chek strips myself for whatever reason - it's over £20. Which is ridiculously high, I agree with the NHS there! BUT because it has been over 10 years since I ever used a different make of meter I have absolutely no way of guessing whether they're accurate enough or not. For all I know now, the current Accu-Chek I use (as the only meter that can communicate with my pump) could be miles out!

 

[rayray119]

Yes, mine was just example numbers. What they’re saying is that the meter is within 15% in the normal range but might not be within 15% below 4.2. That just means it might be 16% out or whatever. This is the same for most meters. They all have to meet the minimum standards.

Ah I thought the rules were above 5.5 they have have to be 15% but bellow that they have(including with low numbers) were had withen 0.9 mmols so it seemed like they were misquoteing standards but may be wrong in that.

 

[rayray119]

20 years ago the pharmacist who managed and ran the pharmacy we normally used, simply cos it was the nearest one to our GP surgery and there's never been another a shorter distance from home, told me one day that he'd once been attended a Trade 'jolly' with a load of other qualified and practicing other UK pharmacists which included visiting a Malaysian factory that made test strips for numerous different sorts of tests, but one of those was glucometer strips for lots of different glucometer brands and saw two automated production lines virtually side by side - but, each turning out different Brands, then when they got to 'Packaging' across the other side of the 'factory' being automatically packed into their appropriate plastic pots.

Years ago when you could still 'chat up' the phlebotomists and ask em to add something extra to blood test forms cos they were handwritten by the doc then, I remembered to ask ours to add just 'BG' to mine which she did cos in the lab they just do both BG and HbA1c out of the same vial, then having readied my meter got an extra drop straight out of the same hole in the same arm vein onto the test strip. The result was 0.1 different (eg one was 7.6 and the other 7.7, can't remember exactly now) but that close for me to consider it 100% accurate. But there again - if I have to purchase a pot of (Roche) Accu-Chek strips myself for whatever reason - it's over £20. Which is ridiculously high, I agree with the NHS there! BUT because it has been over 10 years since I ever used a different make of meter I have absolutely no way of guessing whether they're accurate enough or not. For all I know now, the current Accu-Chek I use (as the only meter that can communicate with my pump) could be miles out!

Ah these strips cost the nhs £5.49 I believe buying a a box would cost around £9

 

[rayray119]

20 years ago the pharmacist who managed and ran the pharmacy we normally used, simply cos it was the nearest one to our GP surgery and there's never been another a shorter distance from home, told me one day that he'd once been attended a Trade 'jolly' with a load of other qualified and practicing other UK pharmacists which included visiting a Malaysian factory that made test strips for numerous different sorts of tests, but one of those was glucometer strips for lots of different glucometer brands and saw two automated production lines virtually side by side - but, each turning out different Brands, then when they got to 'Packaging' across the other side of the 'factory' being automatically packed into their appropriate plastic pots.

Years ago when you could still 'chat up' the phlebotomists and ask em to add something extra to blood test forms cos they were handwritten by the doc then, I remembered to ask ours to add just 'BG' to mine which she did cos in the lab they just do both BG and HbA1c out of the same vial, then having readied my meter got an extra drop straight out of the same hole in the same arm vein onto the test strip. The result was 0.1 different (eg one was 7.6 and the other 7.7,

That's interesting that you could do that years ago.

 

[everydayupsanddowns]

Ah I thought the rules were above 5.5 they have have to be 15% but bellow that they have(including with low numbers) were had withen 0.9 mmols so it seemed like they were misquoteing standards but may be wrong in that.

I thought the need was for a consistent accuracy at lower numbers rather than a percentage. The Useful Links thread says within +/-0.83mmol/L below 5.6

see the bottom of this section

Useful links for people new to diabetes

These links provide useful information, particularly to those newly-diagnosed. You can also browse the Recommended Books and Links sections for further information :) Contents: Type 1 Section Insulin Pumps Section Type 2 Section General Help and Information Section Complications and screening...

forum.diabetes.org.uk