Literature DB >> 23566995

Clinical implications and economic impact of accuracy differences among commercially available blood glucose monitoring systems.

Erwin S Budiman1, Navendu Samant, Ansgar Resch.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite accuracy standards, there are performance differences among commercially available blood glucose monitoring (BGM) systems. The objective of this analysis was to assess the potential clinical and economic impact of accuracy differences of various BGM systems using a modeling approach.
METHODS: We simulated additional risk of hypoglycemia due to blood glucose (BG) measurement errors of five different BGM systems based on results of a real-world accuracy study, while retaining other sources of glycemic variability. Using data from published literature, we estimated an annual additional number of required medical interventions as a result of hypoglycemia. We based our calculations on patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and T2DM requiring multiple daily injections (MDIs) of insulin in a U.S. health care system. We estimated additional costs attributable to treatment of severe hypoglycemic episodes resulting from BG measurement errors.
RESULTS: Results from our model predict an annual difference of approximately 296,000 severe hypoglycemic episodes from BG measurement errors for T1DM (105,000 for T2DM MDI) patients for the estimated U.S. population of 958,800 T1DM and 1,353,600 T2DM MDI patients, using the least accurate BGM system versus patients using the most accurate system in a U.S. health care system. This resulted in additional direct costs of approximately $339 million for T1DM and approximately $121 million for T2DM MDI patients per year.
CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that error patterns over the operating range of BGM meter may lead to relevant clinical and economic outcome differences that may not be reflected in a common accuracy metric or standard. Further research is necessary to validate the findings of this model-based approach.
© 2013 Diabetes Technology Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23566995      PMCID: PMC3737638          DOI: 10.1177/193229681300700213

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


  17 in total

1.  Standards of medical care in diabetes--2011.

Authors: 
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 19.112

2.  Accuracy of the 5-day FreeStyle Navigator Continuous Glucose Monitoring System: comparison with frequent laboratory reference measurements.

Authors:  Richard L Weinstein; Sherwyn L Schwartz; Ronald L Brazg; Jolyon R Bugler; Thomas A Peyser; Geoffrey V McGarraugh
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2007-03-02       Impact factor: 19.112

3.  Standardized evaluation of nine instruments for self-monitoring of blood glucose.

Authors:  Gunn B B Kristensen; Grete Monsen; Svein Skeie; Sverre Sandberg
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 6.118

4.  Physical activity-the major unaccounted impediment to closed loop control.

Authors:  Marc D Breton
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2008-01

5.  Frequency of biochemical hypoglycaemia in adults with Type 1 diabetes with and without impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia: no identifiable differences using continuous glucose monitoring.

Authors:  P Choudhary; J Geddes; J V Freeman; C J Emery; S R Heller; B M Frier
Journal:  Diabet Med       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 4.359

6.  Accuracy evaluation of five blood glucose monitoring systems obtained from the pharmacy: a European multicenter study with 453 subjects.

Authors:  Cornelius Tack; Harald Pohlmeier; Thomas Behnke; Volkmar Schmid; Marco Grenningloh; Thomas Forst; Andreas Pfützner
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2011-12-16       Impact factor: 6.118

7.  Prevalence of impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia and frequency of hypoglycaemia in insulin-treated type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Josefine E Schopman; Jacqueline Geddes; Brian M Frier
Journal:  Diabetes Res Clin Pract       Date:  2009-11-24       Impact factor: 5.602

8.  Five-compartment model of insulin kinetics and its use to investigate action of chloroquine in NIDDM.

Authors:  R Hovorka; J K Powrie; G D Smith; P H Sönksen; E R Carson; R H Jones
Journal:  Am J Physiol       Date:  1993-07

9.  Evaluation of a continuous glucose monitoring system for home-use conditions.

Authors:  Bruce Bode; Michael Silver; Richard Weiss; Kathryn Martin
Journal:  Manag Care       Date:  2008-08

Review 10.  Hypoglycaemia in Type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  S A Amiel; T Dixon; R Mann; K Jameson
Journal:  Diabet Med       Date:  2008-01-21       Impact factor: 4.359

View more
  10 in total

1.  Performance and System Validation of a New Cellular-Enabled Blood Glucose Monitoring System Using a New Standard Reference Measurement Procedure of Isotope Dilution UPLC-MRM Mass Spectrometry.

Authors:  Kimon Angelides; Risë K Matsunami; David A Engler
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2015-05-22

Review 2.  Toward a Framework for Outcome-Based Analytical Performance Specifications: A Methodology Review of Indirect Methods for Evaluating the Impact of Measurement Uncertainty on Clinical Outcomes.

Authors:  Alison F Smith; Bethany Shinkins; Peter S Hall; Claire T Hulme; Mike P Messenger
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2019-08-23       Impact factor: 8.327

Review 3.  Performance of Cleared Blood Glucose Monitors.

Authors:  David C Klonoff; Priya Prahalad
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2015-06-08

4.  Bolus Insulin Dose Error Distributions Based on Results From Two Clinical Trials Comparing Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems.

Authors:  Scott Pardo; Nancy Dunne; David A Simmons
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2017-06-12

5.  Impact of Two Different Reference Measurement Procedures on Apparent System Accuracy of 18 CE-Marked Current-Generation Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems.

Authors:  Guido Freckmann; Annette Baumstark; Nina Jendrike; Jochen Mende; Sebastian Schauer; Manuela Link; Stefan Pleus; Cornelia Haug
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2020-08-19

6.  A Multicenter Performance Evaluation of a Blood Glucose Monitoring System in 21 Leading Hospitals in Spain.

Authors:  José Luis Bedini; Jane F Wallace; Thorsten Petruschke; Scott Pardo
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2015-08-07

7.  Impact of a reduced error range of SMBG in insulin-treated patients in Germany.

Authors:  Oliver Schnell; Michael Erbach
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2014-02-05

Review 8.  Interferences and Limitations in Blood Glucose Self-Testing: An Overview of the Current Knowledge.

Authors:  Michael Erbach; Guido Freckmann; Rolf Hinzmann; Bernhard Kulzer; Ralph Ziegler; Lutz Heinemann; Oliver Schnell
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2016-08-22

9.  Mean Absolute Relative Difference of Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems and Relationship to ISO 15197.

Authors:  Guido Freckmann; Jochen Mende; Stefan Pleus; Delia Waldenmaier; Annette Baumstark; Nina Jendrike; Cornelia Haug
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2021-03-24

10.  Accuracy Evaluation of CONTOUR(®)PLUS Compared With Four Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems.

Authors:  Nancy Dunne; Maria T Viggiani; Scott Pardo; Cynthia Robinson; Joan Lee Parkes
Journal:  Diabetes Ther       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 2.945

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.