Literature DB >> 29338325

Comparative Evaluations of Randomly Selected Four Point-of-Care Glucometer Devices in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Mistire Wolde1, Getahun Tarekegn2, Tedla Kebede2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Point-of-care glucometer (PoCG) devices play a significant role in self-monitoring of the blood sugar level, particularly in the follow-up of high blood sugar therapeutic response. The aim of this study was to evaluate blood glucose test results performed with four randomly selected glucometers on diabetes and control subjects versus standard wet chemistry (hexokinase) methods in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
METHOD: A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted on randomly selected 200 study participants (100 participants with diabetes and 100 healthy controls). Four randomly selected PoCG devices (CareSens N, DIAVUE Prudential, On Call Extra, i-QARE DS-W) were evaluated against hexokinase method and ISO 15197:2003 and ISO 15197:2013 standards.
RESULTS: The minimum and maximum blood sugar values were recorded by CareSens N (21 mg/dl) and hexokinase method (498.8 mg/dl), respectively. The mean sugar values of all PoCG devices except On Call Extra showed significant differences compared with the reference hexokinase method. Meanwhile, all four PoCG devices had strong positive relationship (>80%) with the reference method (hexokinase). On the other hand, none of the four PoCG devices fulfilled the minimum accuracy measurement set by ISO 15197:2003 and ISO 15197:2013 standards. In addition, the linear regression analysis revealed that all four selected PoCG overestimated the glucose concentrations.
CONCLUSIONS: The overall evaluation of the selected four PoCG measurements were poorly correlated with standard reference method. Therefore, before introducing PoCG devices to the market, there should be a standardized evaluation platform for validation. Further similar large-scale studies on other PoCG devices also need to be undertaken.

Entities:  

Keywords:  diabetes mellitus; glucometer; point-of-care devices

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29338325      PMCID: PMC6154223          DOI: 10.1177/1932296817751747

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


  5 in total

1.  Electrode systems for continuous monitoring in cardiovascular surgery.

Authors:  L C CLARK; C LYONS
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  1962-10-31       Impact factor: 5.691

2.  System accuracy evaluation of 43 blood glucose monitoring systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose according to DIN EN ISO 15197.

Authors:  Guido Freckmann; Christina Schmid; Annette Baumstark; Stefan Pleus; Manuela Link; Cornelia Haug
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2012-09-01

3.  Precision, accuracy, and user acceptance of the OneTouch SelectSimple blood glucose monitoring system.

Authors:  Athena Philis-Tsimikas; Anna Chang; Lupe Miller
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2011-11-01

Review 4.  A review of standards and statistics used to describe blood glucose monitor performance.

Authors:  Jan S Krouwer; George S Cembrowski
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2010-01-01

Review 5.  The state of point-of-care testing: a European perspective.

Authors:  Anders Larsson; Roman Greig-Pylypczuk; Albert Huisman
Journal:  Ups J Med Sci       Date:  2015-01-26       Impact factor: 2.384

  5 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  Technologies for Diabetes Self-Monitoring: A Scoping Review and Assessment Using the REASSURED Criteria.

Authors:  Jessica Hanae Zafra-Tanaka; David Beran; Beatrice Vetter; Rangarajan Sampath; Antonio Bernabe-Ortiz
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2021-03-09
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.