Comments on: More accurate meters on its way

By: sooz

sooz — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 02:08:03 +0000

Liana, you’ll love the Performa. I do, but I really want what’s called the Nano in Australia, which is like a compact Performa with a backlight and uses the same quick blood-uptake strip.

By: Liana

Liana — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 05:34:14 +0000

Accuracy (rather inaccuracy) is such an issue for me at the moment. I am thinking of changing my meter from the optium xceed to accuchek performa (I have both of these meters already but prefer the xceed for it’s compactness) I have tested during the night and come up with a result of 1.2 mmol/l tested straight after and was 3.5 then 3.7 mmol/l without treating the 1.2 mmol/l.

Of course there’s a difference of treating a 1.2 or a 3.5. This has happened to me a couple of times with lows and also highs.
Quite frustrating.

By: Sooz

Sooz — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 09:43:56 +0000

When you’re sitting at 4 mmol/L with no CGMS and you don’t know which way you’re headed, so you do 2 more tests – one is 3.7 mmol/L and the other is 4.5 mmol/L, it’s imperative to know whether to treat an impending hypo or not.

Just one example that’s happened to me quite a few times.

On the other hand I’ve given too much insulin when I”m 10 mmol/L, given the insulin, not understood why I’m that number and I test again within seconds and I’m 8.4 mmol/L.

The inaccuracy of the several meters I have, really drives me crazy. Yet on a meter test and blood test recently, the meter was spot on. That time. They are reasonably accurate… most of the time, but sometimes, when it’s important, it’s better to do 2 tests.

By: db

db — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 13:18:05 +0000

What is the accuracy standard for the lab results ? They also have an accepted standard. I would be surprised if it were less than +- 10%

Finally what is the expected consistency between blood sources ? Is the BG in all your fingers the same ?

IMO this accuracy thing is a little over blown