Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Laddie on January 16, 2012 at 6:04pm

I went through the same thing several years ago. I was using the One Touch meters and was very happy with them. When I tried the Aviva, I found that it read much higher than my One Touch meters. I ended up switching the Bayer Contour instead ( my choice was Bayer or Accuchek). I now have an insurance plan where I can use any meter and I'm happily back to One Touch.

I think that we all end up with a "favorite" meter and our numbers for hypo, hyper, etc are defined by that meter. It's then hard to switch to other meters. What is interesting is that you can find people on the web with completely different opinions about different meters.

Since none of the meters are perfect, I usually go with what insurance will pay for. I personally like One Touch better than AccuCheck, but there are probably tons of people who like AccuChek better. My only advice is to make your decision and then stop comparing one brand against another. There is nothing that will drive you crazier than trying to have two meters match up with each other.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jims on January 16, 2012 at 6:25pm

I tried them all. Keep your freestyle lite. It has its strips filtered for glucose D and not affected by other trick sugars. Accucheck - forget that one. One touch super sensitive to water content in body. Free style has provided reliable consistent readings for a couple of years. I was thankful to find that one.

My body regularly shoots the trick sugars out for a few more loops thru liver etc and the accucheck viva will easily read 20 to 50 points off as their strips provide a combined reading of glucose d plus trick sugars. First 2 hours digesting both meters track well; after the 2 hours accuchek jumps out of tracking 20 to 100 points high and effect lasts till trick sugar cleaned from system - 6 hours.

I also use a dexcom cgms and the freestyle lite and dexcom track most favourably.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by MegaMinxX on January 17, 2012 at 3:58pm

Thanks for your replies. I just did one day of comparisons with One Touch and Freestyle, and the differences are much smaller than with Accu-chek. Wish I could 'stick' with Freestyle, but not if I have to pay full cost. So will switch back to One Touch.

I guess I'm surprised that the meters would differ in what they are actually measuring. I had assumed all Blood 'Glucose' meters would be measuring 'real' d-glucose.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dynamutt on January 17, 2012 at 4:34pm

the FDA mandates finger sticks to only be +/- 20% of actual in-the-bloodstream BG measurements, so it's not worth your effort to worry about differences in meters and trying to understand why one meter reads your same sample as higher or lower. My advice: stick to ONE brand meter and ONE type of strips, and don't try to make comparisons across companies/strips/technologies. All of the technologies you can buy in the store are cleared by the FDA so there's no use in trying to lose sleep over discrepancies. Trust me, T1 gives you plenty of other things to worry about.

Full disclosure: I use OneTouch and a Dexcom, but I can't defend any one company/technology.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jims on January 18, 2012 at 1:13am

I cannot really agree with those remarks about accuracy and implications for the following:

50 to 100 points off on the unfiltered pqq test strips read all sugars of accucheck is not insignifigant and exceeds the 20 % story anyways.

Going up in numbers 20 % does not have major impact as sugars rising other than comparative readings about foods eaten.

Dropping sub 100 is a whole different story and the 20 per cent accuracy is unacceptable and nonsense in my opinion. Anybody managing their lows and needing to stop BG going sub 100 as I do, find the inaccuracies documented unacceptable.

In many ways the problem has more to do with the inaccuracy showing up suddenly as one watches ones numbers and suddenly sees this extra points from the trick sugars and wondering what is going on and is my meter nuts.

Consistently off the 20 percent is containable but not 50 to 100 points off as the trick sugars show up in blood stream unnanounced and randomly based on last meal eaten. I have run two meters in parallel carefully observing cleaning and cleanliness requirements and have documented the differences seen here.

One Touch is filtered against the trick sugars while the water issue for me would see my one touch easily get 50 to 100 points off on the blood water content or some other measurement factor which the meters do show variances among themselves from manufacturer meter to manufacturer meter and width of those parameters and their ranges they can operate over.

I am not here to promote any one technology or company except to say I have tried many meters and so far for me and my body; the most reliable consistent reading has been the freestyle lite and their strip technology engineered in Japan and reports are out there on the web.

I do not work for Abbot either nor own stock and I have no special rebates or deals on the strips.

Aside from that, I also like the nova max unit which so far, one is allowed to flag bad readings from averages as they are taken if user feels they are suspect and out of consistent range. I also like their user software and reports.

Unfortunately my body also gives that meter some grief even though I believe it is an excellent meter.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dynamutt on January 18, 2012 at 9:59am

Sorry to be unclear. I absolutely agree 50-100 points difference is indeed significant, however, based on current FDA guidelines, a 20% variance from your actual reading (from whole blood, like when you draw blood for your A1c checks) is acceptable. That's not what I "find" to be acceptable, but unfortunately that is what we are stuck with for the time being. I am vaguely aware of several companies coming out with so called "10% variance" meters, but they are still being evaluated by the FDA.

Also, the 20% variance figure I quoted is in comparison to your whole blood BG (vs fingerstick), NOT a meter company to another meter company comparison (ie. comparing OneTouch with Freestyle).

We haven't even gotten to the CGM accuracy which presents its own set of difficulties comparing fingersticks with interstitial measurements. Just tack it on to the list of things we worry about daily! It's all about controlling the variables you can control....

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by MegaMinxX on January 18, 2012 at 5:20pm

I think the 20% refers to the plasma reading from a lab, being compared to the 'estimated' plasma reading from the BG meter. The meter measures an amount from whole blood, and each meter has it's own algorithm to then calculate and report what it thinks the equivalent plasma reading would be. So just adds one more variable to explain differences between meters.

Bottom line for me, is I'm going back to One Touch, and will re-adjust as necessary, as to when to treat a 'low'. So today, when my Freestyle reads 65, I treat, but the One Touch may be reporting 75. A Freestyle 75 I would only treat if insulin on board, or going to drive. That's why I was doing comparisons to see if there was a consistent difference of significance, rather than random delta's due to other variables.

Just wish my insurance would cover the Freestyle !!.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Margarida R. on March 18, 2012 at 3:29pm

I have started using Aviva Nano this last week (I used freestyle before this!) and my results are always higher than with Freestyle(5-34mg /dl variation so far!). Since it seems to be such a good device, I wonder if I should keep it or change back to freestyle! It is driving me nuts this difference, especially during hypos since the Aviva always reads normal or almost normal glucose levels! I am now wondering what values I should take into consideration and feeling extremely confused!!! Have you come to any conclusions so far?!

• ▶ Reply