advertisement

Freestyle PDM Meter Comparison

Discussion in 'Glucose Meters' started by sheeboo, Jul 13, 2012.

  1. sheeboo

    sheeboo Approved members

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Messages:
    140
    Okay, this is what I have so far....After Pod change today (our first at home), readings kept going up and up and the Pod was painful, so I changed it out. There was quite a gusher of blood. I'll post more numbers when things even out a bit. (Numbers were really good since pod-start on Tuesday, until today.)

    Control solution on Freestyle Original strips lot# 1183112 (so changes apply to Swellman's post on the update from Abbott )
    PDM #1: 84
    PDM #2: 76
    Freestyle Freedom: 105

    Reading 1
    PDM #1: 98
    Freedom: 132

    Reading 2
    PDM #1: 125
    Freedom: 173

    Reading 3:
    PDM #1: 142
    Freedom: 187

    New PDM arrived......
    Reading 4
    PDM #1: 253
    PDM #2: 229

    Reading 5:
    PDM #1: 132
    PDM #2: 112
    Freestyle Freedom: 166

    Reading 6:
    PDM #1:361
    PDM #2: 355
    Freedom: HI

    Reading 7:
    PDM #1: 190
    PDM #2: 242

    Reading 8:
    PDM #1: 216
    PDM #2: 229
     
  2. sheeboo

    sheeboo Approved members

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Messages:
    140
    I do have two boxes with different lot numbers, but I haven't opened them yet. If I open them (kinda thinking I'll try to exchange them for our old Aviva Accucheck script), how would I test? Use a strip from each lot number in each PDM? Basically checking 4X?
     
  3. swellman

    swellman Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,542
    Yes. Or if you have 3 lot numbers then all three side by side.
     
  4. swellman

    swellman Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3,542
    I just want to caution people, myself included, that we are dealing with and discussing several issues at the same time and to not draw conclusions from mostly anecdotal and certainly unscientific information.

    There are a few things that should be considered and asked before drawing any conclusion.


    • The first is "is everyone pretty much the same when it comes to glycation"? In other words, is does the standard model for predicting A1c apply equally to all people, generally speaking? What is or was the variability in data when they assessed the average BG values in relation to A1c?


    • When we look at 2 meters' results how do we know which one is "right"? Can we be sure either is "right"? How do we know for sure?


    • Can one reliably compare control solution checks to BG readings? In other words, if your control solution is reading on the low side of the range is it proper to assume that your BGs are also low?


    • Is it possible to compare two or more meters with control solutions and see completely different variability with real, whole blood readings? What does that mean?



    • Is it OK to fiddle with the Code on the meter to get numbers you like better? I'm going to go out on a limb here and answer this one as "No". We have no idea what the code relates to in the meter's algorithm. We have no idea what range it affects or if the effect is linear across the entire range of values. We don't know if the different codes weight the lower range vs mid or higher ranges differently. In short, I personally believe it's dangerous to change codes to get a number that satisfies your notion of what the meter "should" be reading.


    • Finally, at this point, I want to reiterate that saying "my meter is X points lower than the other" is a generally nonsensical statement as the raw point difference is of relatively little use as an X point difference at 45 could be a huge deal, at 100 a minor deal and at 300 of little or no consequence - in my opinion.
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2012

Share This Page

advertisement

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice