Performance of two updated blood glucose monitoring systems: an evaluation following ISO 15197:2013

References

• American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes – 2015. Diabetes Care 2015;38(Suppl 1):S1-95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Böhm B, Dreyer M, Fritsche A, et al. Therapie des Typ-1-Diabetes. Diabetologie 2011;6:S120-30
   Google Scholar
• Österreichische Diabetes Gesellschaft. Diabetes mellitus – Anleitungen für die Praxis. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2012;124(Suppl 2):1-128
   Google Scholar
• Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Management of diabetes – A national clinical guideline. 2010. Available at: http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/sign116.pdf [Last accessed 8 September 2015]
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization. In Vitro Diagnostic Test Systems – Requirements for Blood-Glucose Monitoring Systems for Self-Testing in Managing Diabetes Mellitus. EN ISO 15197:2003 E
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization. In Vitro Diagnostic Test Systems – Requirements for Blood-Glucose Monitoring Systems for Self-Testing in Managing Diabetes Mellitus. ISO 15197:2013 (E)
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization. In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices – Measurement of Quantities in Biological Samples – Metrological Traceability of Values Assigned to Calibrators and Control Materials. EN ISO 17511:2003 (D)
   Google Scholar
• Freckmann G, Link M, Schmid C, et al. System accuracy evaluation of different blood glucose monitoring systems following ISO 15197:2013 by using two different comparison methods. Diabetes Technol Ther 2015;17:635-48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Link M, Schmid C, Pleus S, et al. System accuracy evaluation of four systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose following ISO 15197 using a glucose oxidase and a hexokinase-based comparison method. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2015;14:1041-50
   Google Scholar
• Hasslacher C, Kulozik F, Platten I. Analytical performance of glucose monitoring systems at different blood glucose ranges and analysis of outliers in a clinical setting. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2014;8:466-72
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Scandinavian evaluation of laboratory equipment for primary health care (SKUP). Contour meter and test strips designed for self-measurements and measurements by health care professionals manufactured by Bayer HealthCare. 2009. Available at: http://www.skup.nu/[Last accessed 8 September 2015]
   Google Scholar
• Freckmann G, Baumstark A, Jendrike N, et al. System accuracy evaluation of 27 blood glucose monitoring systems according to DIN EN ISO 15197. Diabetes Technol Ther 2010;12:221-31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tack C, Pohlmeier H, Behnke T, et al. Accuracy evaluation of five blood glucose monitoring systems obtained from the pharmacy: a European multicenter study with 453 subjects. Diabetes Technol Ther 2012;14:1-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison B, Leazenby C, Halldorsdottir S. Accuracy of the Contour blood glucose monitoring system. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2011;5:1009-13
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zueger T, Schuler V, Stettler C, et al. Assessment of three frequently used blood glucose monitoring devices in clinical routine. Swiss Med Wkly 2012;142:1–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison B, Simmons D, Warchal-Windham ME. Accuracy evaluation of the Contour blood glucose monitoring system with an updated meter algorithm. Diabetes Technol Ther 2015;17:A80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison B, Simmons D, Warchal-Windham ME. Accuracy evaluation of the Contour TS blood glucose monitoring system with an updated meter algorithm. Diabetes Technol Ther 2015;17:A80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klonoff D, Lias C, Vigersky R, et al. The surveillance error grid. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2014;8:685-72
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pleus S, Link M, Baumstark A, et al. Evaluating clinical accuracy of four blood glucose monitoring systems using surveillance error grids. Diabetes Technol Ther 2015;17:A86
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freckmann G, Schmid C, Baumstark A, et al. Partial pressure of oxygen in capillary blood samples from the fingertip. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2013;7:1648-9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bundesärztekammer. Richtlinie der Bundesärztekammer zur Qualitätssicherung laboratoriumsmedizinischer Untersuchungen. Deutsches Ärzteblatt 2014;111:1583-618
   Google Scholar
• Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307-10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Passing H, Bablok W. A new biometrical procedure for testing the equality of measurements from two different analytical methods. Application of linear regression procedures for method comparison studies in clinical chemistry, Part I. J Clin Chem Clin Biochem 1983;21:709-20
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Simmons DA. How should blood glucose meter system analytical performance be assessed? J Diabetes Sci Technol 2015: published online 31 August 2015, doi: 10.1177/1932296815598599
   Google Scholar
• Parkes JL, Slatin SL, Pardo S, Ginsberg BH. A new consensus error grid to evaluate the clinical significance of inaccuracies in the measurement of blood glucose. Diabetes Care 2000;23:1143-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frank J, Wallace JF, Pardo S, Parkes JL. Performance of the Contour TS blood glucose monitoring system. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2011;5:198-205
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Franciosi M, Lucisano G, Amoretti R, et al. Costs of treatment and complications of adult type 1 diabetes. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2013;23:606-11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeaw J, Lee WC, Aagren M, Christensen T. Cost of self-monitoring of blood glucose in the United States among patients on an insulin regimen for diabetes. J Manag Care Pharm 2012;18:21-32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curkendall SM, Zhang B, Oh KS, et al. Incidence and cost of hypoglycemia among patients with type 2 diabetes in the United States: analysis of a health insurance database. J Clin Outcomes Manag 2011;18:455-62
   Google Scholar
• Budiman ES, Samant N, Resch A. Clinical implications and economic impact of accuracy differences among commercially available blood glucose monitoring systems. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2013;7:365-80
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schnell O, Erbach M, Wintergerst E. Higher accuracy of self-monitoring of blood glucose in insulin-treated patients in Germany: clinical and economical aspects. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2013;7:904-12
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Breton MD, Kovatchev BP. Impact of blood glucose self-monitoring errors on glucose variability, risk for hypoglycemia, and average glucose control in type 1 diabetes: an in silico study. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2010;4:562-70
   PubMedGoogle Scholar