I know there has been some discussion about the accuracy of one touch meters, I would like to hear other users experience with them. As far as my bloodwork has gone the last 6 months, the onetouch meters were higher than lab readings in July my meter showed 75, lab reading was 63 (but probably an hour inbetween tests) and in December 115 meter and 95 lab reading.

I would like to hear what you think, how do you know when the meter is "off"

Views: 284

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I love my one touch. I've never been concerned that it is giving me horribly inaccurate readings. Your results based on the meter and lab all fall within that norm of +/- 20 points. I guess for me I'd be concerned if symptomatically I felt different than what my meter was showing.

The WORST meter i had, was contour usb. Terrible mistakes. One touch would give let's say 150, and contour USB 350.

I've been using the One Touch meters for along time. The readings you post are within specified tolerance keeping in mind that lab results also have a margin of error as well although somewhat tighter than consumer units. Given the current state of "marketable" technology this margin of error will continue to exist.

As for how I know when my meter is off . . . or presenting a result that may be invalid? I would be concerned if any single result was off from what I expected. My expectations are based on a number of factors such as; historical trends for that given time of day, what did I eat earlier, how much insulin is on on board and how long has it been since my last injection and then there's the not quite so quantifiable "How do I feel"?. I pretty much (especially during the week) remain stable from one day to the next due to a "regimented" eating style (old habits do die hard) so any reading that deviates significantly is subject to a retest.

What is significant . . if I expected to be in the 80-110ish range and popped up at 140ish I'd think hard about what I was trending earlier in the day and if I missed something or made an error on a dose or snacked on something I forgot about . . . how was I feeling, a cold maybe coming on???? If I popped up with a 200 instead I'd be "What the heck", do a retest being extra careful about contamination and then compare results and re-evaluate.

Hope this helps.

I don't have a clue when my meters are off. I should pay more attention to the lab results but am really "day to day" and just look ahead at the next "event" rather than worrying about my meter that much. I have 2x OneTouch Ultra Mini meters, as they seemed to be the smallest one I could find to lug along when I run. Although being stuck in a mesh-pocket on the outside of my sweaty shorts may not exactly be in line with the manufacturer's recommendations either? They seem to be pretty accurate most of the time?

I think I am very biased when it comes to instrument accuracy, so I think all home bg meters "stink". BTW, meter accuracy in (mg/dl) is +/- 20% on a reading of 75 or higher... meaning a bg reading of 200 on your one-touch, your actual blood sugar could be between 160 and 240. the standards allow our meters to be this inaccurate and still pass and be marketed as a viable home bg meter. sooo, I take my readings with a grain of salt, realize my meter is a tool and the number is a general indication of "high". all that being said I have the best luck with one-touch meters for the last 10 years.

The other question would be if say a home meter with better accuracy were to become available for say $1000, would insurers cover it in the absence of studies "proving" that a really accurate meter offered significantly better "health benefits" or "public safety" than the current degree of "accuracy" provided by meters? Or would I buy one if it was $1000 for the meter and say $500 out of pocket for strips every month?

Or, if a more accurate meter were available that took 60 seconds and took blotting like meters back in the days, would we all want to buy them or might we prefer faster, neater albeit less accurate meters we are used to? Which many of us seem to get pretty decent results from?

Another indication of meter inaccuracy, looking at my current vial of test strips, it gives the "control range" ( range of values expected if using the control solution), as 113-150, which is roughly +/- 20% of the middle value of the range or 131 +/- 20%.

Your results are not that bad for a modern 5 second meter. when the meters took 60 seconds and a larger blood sample they were much more accurate.

I've been pretty happy with my One Touch meters. They give me the most accurate results (compared to lab BG results) and seem to be the most consistent.

Most of the 'accuracy' lies within the test strip, not the meter itself.
Just like Joe does, I take everything with a grain of salt. If I were to test twice in a row, I know I'll get different numbers. I try to look at general trends instead of focusing on 'perfect' numbers.

I know the meter is 'off' when it just doesn't feel right. Sometimes I'll test a few times if I'm feeling that something is wrong with my reading and see what happens. :)

From what I have read, these meters are only 80% accurate. Let's face it the meters are essentially free, but we pay thru the nose for the strips. With such a wide variance, we would have to build a meter that would cost thousands. Don't assume the lab results are more accurate either. They are not. I accept that any meter is better than no meter at all. I remember the old days - pee on Tes-Tape...and I hated that. We've come a long way since. I do use the CGM as a reference only. If you are using control solution to check your strips you'll notice on the solution label a range for that bottle's content. Still the accuracy is not there. Oh well. Of course all of us check the strip bottle's expiration date. My current bottle says exp 03/2012. If I got 20 left on Feb 29th do I throw em away at midnight? Don't think so. I guess being 80% accurate is better than 75%, but I would definately act on a reading of 200.




From the Diabetes Hands Foundation blog...

DHF Joins Diabetes Advocacy Alliance

Diabetes Hands Foundation is incredibly honored to join the Diabetes Advocacy Alliance, an organization with the drive and potential to affect a powerful, positive impact on diabetes and healthcare policy. Diabetes Advocacy Alliance is a 20-member coalition of leading professional Read on! →

Helmsley Charitable Trust Renews Support for DHF

HELMSLEY CHARITABLE TRUST GRANTS SUPPORT TO DIABETES HANDS FOUNDATION FOR FOURTH YEAR  Funding in 2015 to support major transitions in programs and leadership at Diabetes Hands Foundation BERKELEY, CA: February 18, 2015 – The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Read on! →

Diabetes Hands Foundation Team


Melissa Lee
(Interim Executive Director, Editor, has type 1)

Manny Hernandez
(Co-Founder, has LADA)

Emily Coles (Head of Communities, has type 1)

Mila Ferrer
(EsTuDiabetes Community Manager, mother of a child with type 1)

Mike Lawson
(Head of Experience, has type 1)

Corinna Cornejo
(Director of Operations and Development, has type 2)

Desiree Johnson  (Administrative and Programs Assistant, has type 1)


Lead Administrator

Brian (bsc) (has type 2)


Lorraine (mother of type 1)
Marie B (has type 1)

DanP (has Type 1)

Gary (has type 2)

David (has type 2)


LIKE us on Facebook

Spread the word


This website is certified by Health On the Net Foundation. Click to verify. This site complies with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information: verify here.

© 2015   A community of people touched by diabetes, run by the Diabetes Hands Foundation.

Badges  |  Contact Us  |  Terms of Service