[jer.lawrence]

I've quoted a reply from Grant in another thread below, and he makes a very good point that I sort of have questions about as well.

I guess knowing that my meter can be within that 20% range, I try to pay more attention to the trends of the numbers over a period of time rather than the specific numbers themselves.

However, when you're on insulin, or even when you're trying to determine an average over a period of time, how do you rely on your meter knowing that it can be off by as much as 20%?

Are there certain meters that are more accurate than others? How often have you tested against Lab results, and how close is it?

Just curious, as I'm new getting into this, and will be at it for a very long time, I'm sure.

Thanks!

Originally Posted by NewdestinyX

I was astonished to find out yesterday that my one meter 'when it's under 100' is NOT as accurate. I've done lots of comparisons between my meters when my numbers have been mostly above 100 and the two meters track nicely. But when my ReliOn Micro shows an 80-95 number, my Freedom Lite meter shows 94-115. I've done control solution tests on both -- and they're both in NOMINAL range in the test. So that's not it.

So many here have talked about the 20% variance you can get in meter reading and yet so many of us live our lives as if our meters are 'dead on' with no variance and we make 'choices' and 'determinations' about these numbers. In your mind a 99 would be WAY different than an 85 and yet that's within 20% variance. Do you often check with multiple meters? I'm starting to take both my meters everywhere with me. It's more expensive to test with two -- but I need to know the 'average' when I'm dealing with dosage changes. What a drag. I need a meter that gives me total accuracy. How do the Type 1's do this? They need to get 'pin point' accuracy in determining bolus insulin. I'm frustrated by the difference in my meters under 100 in the reading. I wonder if your numbers are perfectly accurate. Though obviously your pre-diabetes is controlled on your diet, Shottle. Keep up the good work.

[fairyblood]

Honestly I don't worry about the 20% I take my meter at its word unless there is a very good reason to think otherwise. However there are times when I trust my body over my meter. So if I am around 100 and feel like I am dropping I will treat then. I often feel high when I first wake up so if I'm not then I trust my meter and not my body.

There are some meters that run higher then others. For example freestyle tends to run higher then some of the other meters on the market. I happen to like that because I like treating things aggressively and this helps me do that.

The only time I test a second time is if it feels really off. So if I feel low or fine and it comes out high then I will test again. I personally think it is both a waste of money and a bad idea to constantly test on two meters at the same time. I can barely afford my strips as it is. Diabetes is full of inconsistency and sometimes you have to accept that things aren't always right or clear. You can drive yourself batty worrying about whether you are 95 or 85. I personally am more then happy with either number.

As a type one there are so many factors out of my control that I just take my number do what I need to do and move on.

[fgummett]

Bottom line is that apparently many of us with D -- even those on insulin -- can achieve very good BG control despite meter inaccuracy... the situation is so much better than before home BG testing when all that was available was urine testing... which basically showed such a high BG that it was spilling out of the kidneys. It is not an exact science... there are way to many variables to consider, hence the need to take multiple data points over many weeks and months so that you can become comfortable with repeatable patterns, rather than jumping to conclusions after a few observations... I'd suggest sticking with one meter and carrying it with you.

[jps]

Though the claims are 20% inaccuracy, most are much closer than that. They widen the gap probably to protect themselves. I have a One Touch II and I've measured several venous samples from different patients over various points against my Beckman Coulter DxC (heavy duty laboratory analyzer) and my particular meter was about 2% lower on average.

[NewdestinyX]

Thanks, Jer, for starting this thread!

Originally Posted by fairyblood

There are some meters that run higher then others. For example Freestyle tends to run higher than some of the other meters on the market. I happen to like that because I like treating things aggressively and this helps me do that.

Wow.. didn't know that. My one meter IS a FreeStyle Lite and it's high to my ReliOn Ultra.

You can drive yourself batty worrying about whether you are 95 or 85. I personally am more then happy with either number.

Yes -- I think that can be true. What gets weird and where I wish I had 'perfect accuracy' under 100 is when you're setting Basal dose which is a process I'm in now with Lantus. 85 or 95 makes a huge difference there.

Originally Posted by fgummett

It is not an exact science... there are way to many variables to consider, hence the need to take multiple data points over many weeks and months so that you can become comfortable with repeatable patterns, rather than jumping to conclusions after a few observations...

I don't tend to jump to conclusions after a 'few' observations but I make determinations over weeks. If for weeks I've been averaging 89 but it's really 104 then my conclusions for my control regimen are off. That's the point... I think...

I'd suggest sticking with one meter and carrying it with you.

I think I may move to that system. It's easier to have one at work and one at home. Too bulky to carry around in my experience.

Originally Posted by jps

Though the claims are 20% inaccuracy, most are much closer than that. They widen the gap probably to protect themselves.

This is my experience with numbers above 100 -- so I thought it was true universally.

I have a One Touch II and I've measured several venous samples from different patients over various points against my Beckman Coulter DxC (heavy duty laboratory analyzer) and my particular meter was about 2% lower on average.

Lucky dog -- having access to such a piece of equipment... Well since you've already tested the OneTouch II - I may pick that one up. Does it have a port for USB transfer to computer?

[jps]

I'm grateful that I have access to all that testing. I give partial credit to that for gaining control. It's easier to truly determine what is going on when you can run a full lipid panel - or whatever - every single week.

It's extra, but the One Touch II does have a very easy and efficient software program with a data port.

[Grunch]

My breeze 2 meter is way more accurate than 20%. The accu-check on the other hand seems very inaccurate, I don't trust it at all.

[NewdestinyX]

Originally Posted by Grunch

My breeze 2 meter is way more accurate than 20%.

How do you verify that? I ask because in all my searching of late it's the Breeze 2, with its test strip DISCS and USB transfer to computer that most interests me! The strips (divided by 10 in a disc) are only a little more expensive than my Freestyle Lite ones on eBay.

[Grunch]

Just by observation, I can't guarantee it. When I test 2 times in a row I've never seen a difference close to 20% and when I start feeling low it's very often around 65 but has never been above 70.

The disc is the coolest part. I hate individual strips.

[fairyblood]

I have heard that wavesense meters are supposed to make some of the most accurate meters on the market for the consumer.

Originally Posted by jps

I have a One Touch II

I am surprised that anyone still uses the One Touch II. That was the meter that was the very popular when I was dx. in 1996. It takes a lot of blood and requires cleaning. Is there a reason that you use that meter or just personal preference?

Originally Posted by NewdestinyX

when you're setting Basal dose which is a process I'm in now with Lantus. 85 or 95 makes a huge difference there.

My life is insulin... and as a type one I am much more likely to go low then a type II. I still don't see how whether it is 85 or 95 could make much difference at all. I can see how emotionally it could feel different but otherwise they are almost the same number.

[jps]

Sorry, One Touch Ultra 2. I was given two meters, both the same. One by the CDE, one by my physician.

[fairyblood]

Originally Posted by jps

Sorry, One Touch Ultra 2. I was given two meters, both the same. One by the CDE, one by my physician.

Ahh good. Glad to hear you aren't in the meter dark ages.

The One Touch II really was a beast. I am sure people still use it but I don't know why you would.

[jer.lawrence]

Originally Posted by jps

Sorry, One Touch Ultra 2. I was given two meters, both the same. One by the CDE, one by my physician.

I'm also glad to hear that because I use a One Touch Ultra 2.

I got a scary reading after dinner tonight of 149 (I didn't THINK I had too many carbs, but ate out and wasn't sure). I washed my hands and re-tested at 103. Still not satisfied, I tested one more time and came back at 101. I think that first test must have just been tainted with something on my hands.

I'll probably do a check on myself next time when I get my blood work done as well to try to gauge how accurate it is.

[jtausch]

I did that twice on my acue-check aviva meter once with a meter that the local hospital used it was within-2, the second time at the lab with a sample taken from the blod vial it was -1 one off the the lab test I think my meer is accurate. I think a lot of it has to do with the strips they could also be off to.

The blood sample reacts with the chemicals in the strip and generate a very small voltage and this is what the meter reads and turns it into a number.

[fgummett]

I have also noted a variation in batches of test strips... one bottle may tend to read higher or lower than the previous. As mentioned above, it was recommended to me that I take my meter along when having a routine lab Fasting BG and compare the readings -- I test on the hand of the same arm as the blood test within 5 minutes of the sample being taken.