Literature DB >> 21880240

Lancing: quo vadis?

Lutz Heinemann1, Dirk Boecker.   

Abstract

Today, lancing fingertips or alternative sites for obtaining a blood sample for self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is a standard procedure for most patients with diabetes. The need for frequent lancing and associated discomfort and pain can be seen as a key hurdle for patients to comply with SMBG regimens. This article provides an overview of the status quo and future of lancing, focusing on key areas for future developments driven by customer and market needs. We also review technical issues and provide a background for possible improvements. The act of puncturing the skin with a lancet to obtain a blood sample seems to remain the standard procedure for the foreseeable future, because alternate ways of providing a blood sample have not demonstrated overall superiority (e.g., with laser technology). Other methods, which avoid lancing entirely, have also not gained broad market acceptance (e.g., minimally invasive continuous glucose monitoring) or not shown technical viability (e.g., noninvasive glucose monitoring). In relation to blood glucose (BG) meters and test strips, lancing has been a "stepchild" with regards to commercial attention and development efforts. Nevertheless, significant technological improvements have been made in this field to address key customer needs, including better performance (regarding pain, wound healing, and long-term sensitivity), reduced cost, and higher integration with other components of BG monitoring (e.g., integration of the lancing device with the glucose monitor). From a technical perspective, it is apparent that highly comfortable lancing can be accomplished; however, this still requires fairly advanced and complex devices. New developments are necessary to achieve this level of sophistication and performance with less intricate and costly system designs. Manufacturers' motivation to pursue these developments is compromised by the fact that they might not recoup their development cost on commercial advanced lancing systems through direct profits, but only through its positive influence on adherence and increased more profitable sensor utilization. We believe that two main driving forces will continue to push the evolution of lancing and sampling technology: (1) the need for maximum lancing comfort and (2) the advent of fully integrated systems, realizing a device in which all steps for SMBG are incorporated, thus providing a "one-step" experience. Rendering lancing a "nonissue" will eliminate a key barrier to adherence with appropriate SMBG regimens. Providing sophisticated lancing devices that allow the highest level of comfort and/or seamless blood sampling is key to improving user acceptance. This may have a greater impact on metabolic control than many of the new and expensive antidiabetic drugs.
© 2011 Diabetes Technology Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21880240      PMCID: PMC3192604          DOI: 10.1177/193229681100500420

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol        ISSN: 1932-2968


  16 in total

1.  Blood volumes and pain following capillary punctures in children and adolescents with diabetes.

Authors:  D Pacaud; J F Lemay; M Buithieu; J F Yale
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 19.112

2.  Capillary blood volume and pain intensity depend on lancet penetration.

Authors:  H Fruhstorfer; G Schmelzeisen-Redeker; T Weiss
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 19.112

Review 3.  Capillary blood sampling for self-monitoring of blood glucose.

Authors:  S I Yum; J Roe
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 6.118

4.  Finger sepsis in two poorly controlled diabetic patients with reuse of lancets.

Authors:  Matteo Monami; Edoardo Mannucci; Giulio Masotti
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 19.112

5.  Capillary blood sampling: the pain of single-use lancing devices.

Authors:  H Fruhstorfer
Journal:  Eur J Pain       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 3.931

6.  Painless self-monitoring of blood glucose at finger sites.

Authors:  T Nakayama; H Kudo; S Sakamoto; A Tanaka; Y Mano
Journal:  Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes       Date:  2007-12-10       Impact factor: 2.949

7.  Evaluation of lancets for pain perception and capillary blood volume for glucose monitoring.

Authors:  David Warunek; Ana K Stankovic
Journal:  Clin Lab Sci       Date:  2008

8.  Finger pricking and pain: a never ending story.

Authors:  Lutz Heinemann
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2008-09

9.  Is the frequency of self-monitoring of blood glucose related to long-term metabolic control? Multicenter analysis including 24,500 patients from 191 centers in Germany and Austria.

Authors:  M Schütt; W Kern; U Krause; P Busch; A Dapp; R Grziwotz; I Mayer; J Rosenbauer; C Wagner; A Zimmermann; W Kerner; R W Holl
Journal:  Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 2.949

10.  Comparison of lancing devices for self-monitoring of blood glucose regarding lancing pain.

Authors:  Serge Kocher; J K Tshiang Tshiananga; Richard Koubek
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2009-09-01
View more
  6 in total

1.  Improving the safety of blood glucose monitoring.

Authors:  David C Klonoff
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2011-11-01

2.  A clinical evaluation of routine blood sampling practices in patients with diabetes: impact on fingerstick blood volume and pain.

Authors:  Mike Grady; Mitchel Pineau; Mary Kate Pynes; Laurence B Katz; Barry Ginsberg
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2014-04-30

3.  Clinical Evaluation of a New, Lower Pain, One Touch Lancing Device for People With Diabetes: Virtually Pain-Free Testing and Improved Comfort Compared to Current Lancing Systems.

Authors:  Mike Grady; Greg Lamps; Ashley Shemain; Hilary Cameron; Linda Murray
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2019-07-17

4.  Cost of Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Canada among Patients on an Insulin Regimen for Diabetes.

Authors:  Jason Yeaw; Won Chan Lee; Michael Lyng Wolden; Torsten Christensen; Danielle Groleau
Journal:  Diabetes Ther       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 2.945

Review 5.  Italian contributions to the development of continuous glucose monitoring sensors for diabetes management.

Authors:  Giovanni Sparacino; Mattia Zanon; Andrea Facchinetti; Chiara Zecchin; Alberto Maran; Claudio Cobelli
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2012-10-12       Impact factor: 3.576

6.  Educational Workshop using games improves self-monitoring of blood glucose among children.

Authors:  Léia Alves Kaneto; Elaine Buchhorn Cintra Damião; Maria de La Ó Ramallo Verissimo; Lisabelle Mariano Rossato; Aurea Tamami Minagawa Toriyama; Regina Szylit
Journal:  Rev Lat Am Enfermagem       Date:  2018-10-25
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.