Literature DB >> 33759584

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

Guido Freckmann1, Jochen Mende1, Stefan Pleus1, Delia Waldenmaier1, Annette Baumstark1, Nina Jendrike1, Cornelia Haug1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The analytical quality of a blood glucose monitoring system (BGMS) is often assessed according to the requirements described in the international standard ISO 15197. However, the mean absolute relative difference (MARD) is sometimes used as well. This analysis aims at providing empirical data from BGMS evaluation studies conducted according to ISO 15197 and at providing an estimation of how MARD and percentage of measurement results within ISO accuracy limits are related.
METHODS: Results of 77 system accuracy evaluations conducted according to ISO 15197 were used to calculate MARD between BGMS and a laboratory comparison method's results (glucose oxidase or hexokinase method). Additionally, bias and 95%-limits of agreement (LoA) using the Bland and Altman method were calculated.
RESULTS: MARD results ranged from 2.3% to 20.5%. The lowest MARD of a test strip lot that showed <95% of results within ISO limits was 6.1%. The distribution of MARD results shows that only 3.6% of test strip lots with a MARD equal to or below 7% showed <95% of results within ISO limits (2.2% of all test strip lots). Bias of test strip lots that showed ≥95% of results within the limits ranged from -10.3% to +7.4%. The half-width of the 95%-LoA of test strip lots that showed ≥95% of results within the limits ranged from 4.8% to 24.0%.
CONCLUSION: There is a threshold MARD that may allow an estimate whether ISO 15197 requirements are fulfilled, but this statement cannot be made with certainty.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ISO 15197:2013; accuracy; mean absolute relative difference; self-monitoring of blood glucose

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33759584      PMCID: PMC9445334          DOI: 10.1177/19322968211001402

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


  26 in total

1.  A new consensus error grid to evaluate the clinical significance of inaccuracies in the measurement of blood glucose.

Authors:  J L Parkes; S L Slatin; S Pardo; B H Ginsberg
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 19.112

Review 2.  Assessing the analytical performance of systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose: concepts of performance evaluation and definition of metrological key terms.

Authors:  Oliver Schnell; Rolf Hinzmann; Bernd Kulzer; Guido Freckmann; Michael Erbach; Volker Lodwig; Lutz Heinemann
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2013-11-01

3.  Evaluation of Accuracy of Six Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems and Modeling of Possibly Related Insulin Dosing Errors.

Authors:  Annette Baumstark; Nina Jendrike; Stefan Pleus; Cornelia Haug; Guido Freckmann
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2017-07-13       Impact factor: 6.118

4.  Benefits and Limitations of MARD as a Performance Parameter for Continuous Glucose Monitoring in the Interstitial Space.

Authors:  Lutz Heinemann; Michael Schoemaker; Günther Schmelzeisen-Redecker; Rolf Hinzmann; Adham Kassab; Guido Freckmann; Florian Reiterer; Luigi Del Re
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2019-06-19

5.  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

6.  Significance and Reliability of MARD for the Accuracy of CGM Systems.

Authors:  Florian Reiterer; Philipp Polterauer; Michael Schoemaker; Guenther Schmelzeisen-Redecker; Guido Freckmann; Lutz Heinemann; Luigi Del Re
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2016-09-25

7.  Comparison of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Accuracy Between Abdominal and Upper Arm Insertion Sites.

Authors:  Isabelle Isa Kristin Steineck; Zeinab Mahmoudi; Ajenthen Ranjan; Signe Schmidt; John Bagterp Jørgensen; Kirsten Nørgaard
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2019-04-17       Impact factor: 6.118

8.  Accuracy of a Factory-Calibrated, Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring System During 10 Days of Use in Youth and Adults with Diabetes.

Authors:  R Paul Wadwa; Lori M Laffel; Viral N Shah; Satish K Garg
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2018-06-14       Impact factor: 6.118

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

Authors:  Erwin S Budiman; Navendu Samant; Ansgar Resch
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2013-03-01

10.  Performance Evaluation of Three Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems Using ISO 15197: 2013 Accuracy Criteria, Consensus and Surveillance Error Grid Analyses, and Insulin Dosing Error Modeling in a Hospital Setting.

Authors:  José Luis Bedini; Jane F Wallace; Scott Pardo; Thorsten Petruschke
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2015-10-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.