Accuracy Evaluation of 19 Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems Manufactured in the Asia-Pacific Region: A Multicenter Study

Quality assessment of glucose measurement with regard to epidemiology and clinical management of diabetes mellitus in Germany

Background

During the last decade, Germany has seen an increased prevalence and a redistribution from undetected to diagnosed diabetes mellitus. Due to this substantial epidemiological development, the number of people with documented type 2 diabetes was 8.7 million in 2022. An estimated two million undiagnosed subjects are to be added. Beyond that, the life expectancy of diabetic subjects is increasing due to more responsive health systems in terms of care. Possible reasons include improved screening of at-risk individuals, the introduction of HbA1c for diagnosis in 2010, and the higher use of risk scores. Additionally, quality aspects of the laboratory methodology should be taken into consideration.

Methods

Epidemiology and clinical management of diabetes in Germany are presented in the light of publications retrieved by a selective search of the PubMed database. Additionally, the data from German external quality assessment (EQA) surveys for the measurands glucose in plasma and HbA1c in whole blood, reviewed from 2010 until 2022, were evaluated. Above this, data concerning the analytical performance of near-patient glucometer devices, according to the ISO norm 15197:2013, were analyzed.

Results

Two laboratory aspects are in good accordance with the observation of an increase in the diabetes mellitus prevalence when retrospectively reviewing the period 2010 to 2022: First, the analytical performance according to the ISO norm 15197:2013 of the glucometer devices widely used by patients with diabetes for the glucose self-testing, has improved during this period. Secondly, concerning the EQA program of INSTAND, the number of participating laboratories raised significantly in Germany. The spreads of variations of the specified results for plasma glucose remained unchanged between 2010 and 2022, whereas for HbA1c a significant decrease of the result scattering could be observed.

Conclusion

These retrospectively established findings testify to an excellent analytical quality of laboratory diagnostics for glucose and HbA1c throughout Germany which may be involved in a better diagnosis and therapy of previously undetected diabetes mellitus.

Blood glucose monitoring devices: current considerations

Measuring blood glucose concentrations via capillary (fingerprick) blood glucose monitoring or continuous (interstitial) glucose monitoring is an important aspect of management for many people with diabetes. Blood glucose monitoring informs patient self-management strategies, which can improve the patient's engagement in their own care and reduce barriers to achieving recommended blood glucose targets. Blood glucose monitoring also informs clinician-guided management plans. Compared to capillary blood glucose monitoring, continuous glucose monitoring in people using insulin significantly improves glycaemic metrics and is associated with improved patient-reported outcomes. Even with good glycaemic metrics, patients using continuous glucose monitoring should still have access to capillary blood glucose monitoring for correlation of hypoglycaemic readings when accuracy may be compromised or if there is a malfunction with the continuous blood glucose monitor.

Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially.

APPROACH

An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in screening, diagnosis, or monitoring of diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association for Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association.

CONTENT

Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the people with diabetes measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and also by laboratory analysis of HbA1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed.

SUMMARY

The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.

Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially.

APPROACH

An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in screening, diagnosis, or monitoring of diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association.

CONTENT

Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the people with diabetes measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and also by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed.

SUMMARY

The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.

A Nanotechnology-Based Approach to Biosensor Application in Current Diabetes Management Practices

Diabetes mellitus is linked to both short-term and long-term health problems. Therefore, its detection at a very basic stage is of utmost importance. Research institutes and medical organizations are increasingly using cost-effective biosensors to monitor human biological processes and provide precise health diagnoses. Biosensors aid in accurate diabetes diagnosis and monitoring for efficient treatment and management. Recent attention to nanotechnology in the fast-evolving area of biosensing has facilitated the advancement of new sensors and sensing processes and improved the performance and sensitivity of current biosensors. Nanotechnology biosensors detect disease and track therapy response. Clinically efficient biosensors are user-friendly, efficient, cheap, and scalable in nanomaterial-based production processes and thus can transform diabetes outcomes. This article is more focused on biosensors and their substantial medical applications. The highlights of the article consist of the different types of biosensing units, the role of biosensors in diabetes, the evolution of glucose sensors, and printed biosensors and biosensing systems. Later on, we were engrossed in the glucose sensors based on biofluids, employing minimally invasive, invasive, and noninvasive technologies to find out the impact of nanotechnology on the biosensors to produce a novel device as a nano-biosensor. In this approach, this article documents major advances in nanotechnology-based biosensors for medical applications, as well as the hurdles they must overcome in clinical practice.

Comparative assessment of blood glucose monitoring techniques: a review

Monitoring blood glucose levels is a vital indicator of diabetes mellitus management. The mainstream techniques of glucometers are invasive, painful, expensive, intermittent, and time-consuming. The ever-increasing number of global diabetic patients urges the development of alternative non-invasive glucose monitoring techniques. Recent advances in electrochemical biosensors, biomaterials, wearable sensors, biomedical signal processing, and microfabrication technologies have led to significant research and ideas in elevating the patient's life quality. This review provides up-to-date information about the available technologies and compares the advantages and limitations of invasive and non-invasive monitoring techniques. The scope of measuring glucose concentration in other bio-fluids such as interstitial fluid (ISF), tears, saliva, and sweat are also discussed. The high accuracy level of invasive methods in measuring blood glucose concentrations gives them superiority over other methods due to lower average absolute error between the detected glucose concentration and reference values. Whereas minimally invasive, and non-invasive techniques have the advantages of continuous and pain-free monitoring. Various blood glucose monitoring techniques have been evaluated based on their correlation to blood, patient-friendly, time efficiency, cost efficiency, and accuracy. Finally, this review also compares the currently available glucose monitoring devices in the market.

A Simulation Study to Assess the Effect of Analytic Error on Neonatal Glucose Measurements Using the Canadian Pediatric Society Position Statement Action Thresholds

BACKGROUND

The Canadian Pediatric Society (CPS) has endorsed an algorithm for the screening and immediate management of babies at risk of neonatal hypoglycemia that provides time-dependent glucose concentration action thresholds. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of glucose analytic error (bias and imprecision) on the misclassification of glucose meter results from a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) using the CPS guidelines.

METHODS

A simulation dataset of true glucose values (N = 100 000) was derived by finite mixture model analysis of NICU glucose data (N = 23 749). Bias and imprecision were added to create measured glucose values. The percentages of measured glucose values that were misclassified at CPS action thresholds were determined by Monte Carlo simulation.

RESULTS

Measurement biases ranging from -20 to +20 mg/dL combined with coefficients of variation 0% to 20% were evaluated to predict misclassification rates at 32, 36, and 47 mg/dL. The models demonstrated low risk of false normoglycemia-at 5% CV and +10 mg/dL bias: 0.8% to 5% misclassification at the 32 and 47 mg/dL thresholds due to bias. The models demonstrated risk of false hypoglycemia-at 5% CV and -10 mg/dL bias: 3% to 12.5% misclassification at 32 and 47 mg/dL thresholds due to both bias and imprecision.

CONCLUSION

Using CPS action thresholds, the simulation model predicted the proportion of neonates at risk of inappropriate clinical action-both of omission or "failure to treat" and commission or "overtreatment" in response to NICU glucose meter results at specific bias and imprecision values.

System accuracy evaluation of 18 CE-marked current-generation blood glucose monitoring systems based on EN ISO 15197:2015

OBJECTIVE

Accuracy of 18 current-generation blood glucose monitoring systems (BGMS) available in Europe was evaluated applying criteria adapted from EN ISO 15197:2015 with one reagent system lot. BGMS were selected based on market research data.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The BGMS ABRA, Accu-Chek Guide, AURUM, CareSens Dual, CERA-CHEK 1CODE, ContourNext One, eBsensor, FreeStyle Freedom Lite, GL50 evo, GlucoCheck GOLD, GlucoMen areo 2K, GluNEO, MyStar DoseCoach, OneTouch Verio Flex, Pic GlucoTest, Rightest GM700S, TRUEyou, and WaveSense JAZZ Wireless were tested using capillary blood from 100 different subjects and assessing the percentage of results within ±15 mg/dL (0.83 mmol/L) or 15% of comparison method results for BG concentrations below or above 100 mg/dL (5.55 mmol/L), respectively. In addition, the minimal deviation from comparison method results within which ≥95% of results of the respective BGMS were found was calculated.

RESULTS

In total, 14 BGMS had ≥95% of results within ±15 mg/dL (0.83 mmol/L) or ±15% and 3 BGMS had ≥95% of results within ±10 mg/dL (0.55 mmol/L) or ±10% of the results obtained with the comparison method. The smallest deviation from comparison method results within which ≥95% of results were found was ±7.7 mg/dL (0.43 mmol/L) or ±7.7%; the highest deviation was ±19.7 mg/dL (1.09 mmol/L) or ±19.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

This accuracy evaluation shows that not all CE-labeled BGMS fulfill accuracy requirements of ISO 15197 reliably and that there is considerable variation even among BGMS fulfilling these criteria. This safety-related information should be taken into account by patients and healthcare professionals when making therapy decisions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03737188.

Assessment of System Accuracy, Intermediate Measurement Precision, and Measurement Repeatability of a Blood Glucose Monitoring System Based on ISO 15197

BACKGROUND

Analytical quality of blood glucose monitoring systems (BGMS) is an important aspect for many diabetes patients. Sufficiently high analytical quality is required for adequate diabetes therapy.

METHODS

In this study, system accuracy and measurement precision of a BGMS were assessed based on ISO 15197:2013. For system accuracy, this standard requires a specific glucose distribution and at least 95% of results obtained with the BGMS in capillary blood to fall within ±15 mg/dl or ±15% (at glucose concentrations <100 mg/dl or ≥100 mg/dl, respectively) of corresponding comparison method results, and at least 99% of results to be found within clinically acceptable consensus error grid (CEG) zones A and B. Based on ISO 15197:2013, intermediate measurement precision, using control solution, and measurement repeatability, using venous blood samples, were analyzed by calculation of standard deviations (SDs) and coefficients of variation (CV) at glucose concentrations <100 mg/dl or ≥100 mg/dl, respectively, although ISO 15197:2013 does not specify acceptance criteria.

RESULTS

The BGMS fulfilled system accuracy requirements with ≥99% of results within ±15 mg/dl or ±15% of the comparison method results, and 100% of results in CEG zones A and B. Intermediate measurement precision analysis showed SD ≤2.2 mg/dl and CV ≤2.3%. Analysis of measurement repeatability showed SD ≤2.1 mg/dl and CV ≤2.4%.

CONCLUSION

System accuracy requirements of ISO 15197:2013 were fulfilled by the BGMS. As ISO 15197:2013 does not specify precision requirements, precision analysis results were compared with those reported for other BGMS in the literature and found to be similar.

A Review of Blood Glucose Monitor Accuracy

The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of blood glucose monitors (BGMs) from studies reported in the medical literature. A literature review was performed of publications between 2010 and 2017 that presented data about the accuracy of BGMs using ISO 15197 2003 and/or ISO 15197 2013 as target standards. We found 58 publications describing the performance of 143 unique BGM systems, 59 of which were Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cleared. When compared with non-FDA-cleared BGMs, FDA-cleared BGMs were significantly more likely to pass both ISO 15197 2003 (OR = 2.39, CI 1.45-3.92, P < 0.01) and ISO 15197 2013 standards (OR = 2.20, CI 1.51-3.27, P < 0.01). Newer meters were more likely to pass both ISO 15197 2003 and ISO 15197 2013 standards. Many of the studies were supported by BGM manufacturers, and when compared with independent studies, an FDA-cleared BGM was significantly more likely to pass in a manufacturer-supported study for both ISO 15197 2003 (OR = 22.4, CI 8.73-21.57, P < 0.001) and ISO 15197 2013 (OR = 23.08, CI 10.16-60.03, P < 0.001). BGM accuracy should be assessed independently following regulatory clearance to ensure accurate performance. Failure to meet performance levels mandated by standards can result in deleterious clinical and economic effects.