BACKGROUND: Both Roche and Abbott have released new glucose meter strips. They supply the entire Australian hospital market. The present study compared the performance of the new strips utilizing various specimen types (capillary, venous lithium heparin whole blood, venous lithium heparin plasma and serum) and evaluated how well they comply with the International Standards Organization (ISO) 15197 criteria. METHODS: The study included imprecision, patient comparison and interference studies. Participants with and without diabetes were recruited to evaluate the performance of various specimen types against the Beckman DxC800 glucose method. The strips were tested for different interferences: galactose, maltose, lactose, Icodextrin, Intragam, paracetamol, sodium, ascorbic acid, variable strip storage temperature, haematocrit, haemolysis and lipaemia. RESULTS: The imprecision of the two strips was approximately 5% or less, except for the Abbott strip at very low values (1.4 mmol/L), approximately 7%. In total, 78% and 84%, respectively, of the results from the finger prick capillary specimens with the Roche (Accu-Chek Performa meter) and Abbott (Optium Xceed meter) strips, not 95% or greater as recommended by the ISO guideline, were within the recommended limits compared with reference plasma estimation on laboratory analysers. Galactose, ascorbic acid, haematocrit and sodium on the Roche and ascorbic acid and haematocrit on the Abbott strip continue to interfere to a variable degree with the glucose measurement. CONCLUSION: Analytically small differences exist between the glucose meter strips. The most significant analytical difference with the strips was at low glucose levels when compared with laboratory analyses and this may be of clinical importance. The impact of some of the interferences is variable between the two strips. Individuals, health-care professionals and health-care institutions should consider these data when selecting glucose meters for the management of people with diabetes mellitus.
BACKGROUND: Both Roche and Abbott have released new glucose meter strips. They supply the entire Australian hospital market. The present study compared the performance of the new strips utilizing various specimen types (capillary, venous lithium heparin whole blood, venous lithium heparin plasma and serum) and evaluated how well they comply with the International Standards Organization (ISO) 15197 criteria. METHODS: The study included imprecision, patient comparison and interference studies. Participants with and without diabetes were recruited to evaluate the performance of various specimen types against the Beckman DxC800 glucose method. The strips were tested for different interferences: galactose, maltose, lactose, Icodextrin, Intragam, paracetamol, sodium, ascorbic acid, variable strip storage temperature, haematocrit, haemolysis and lipaemia. RESULTS: The imprecision of the two strips was approximately 5% or less, except for the Abbott strip at very low values (1.4 mmol/L), approximately 7%. In total, 78% and 84%, respectively, of the results from the finger prick capillary specimens with the Roche (Accu-Chek Performa meter) and Abbott (Optium Xceed meter) strips, not 95% or greater as recommended by the ISO guideline, were within the recommended limits compared with reference plasma estimation on laboratory analysers. Galactose, ascorbic acid, haematocrit and sodium on the Roche and ascorbic acid and haematocrit on the Abbott strip continue to interfere to a variable degree with the glucose measurement. CONCLUSION: Analytically small differences exist between the glucose meter strips. The most significant analytical difference with the strips was at low glucose levels when compared with laboratory analyses and this may be of clinical importance. The impact of some of the interferences is variable between the two strips. Individuals, health-care professionals and health-care institutions should consider these data when selecting glucose meters for the management of people with diabetes mellitus.
Authors: Sarah Lou Bailey; Helen Ayles; Nulda Beyers; Peter Godfrey-Faussett; Monde Muyoyeta; Elizabeth du Toit; John S Yudkin; Sian Floyd Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2016-12-05 Impact factor: 3.090