Evaluation of Blood Glucose Meter Systems

This study has been completed.
Sponsor:
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
Bayer HealthCare, Diabetes Care
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT01714232
First received: October 23, 2012
Last updated: November 8, 2013
Last verified: November 2013
  Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of a Bayer Blood Glucose Monitoring System (BGMS) and four additional Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems (BGMS) from other manufacturers. All meter BG results were compared with plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer).


Condition Intervention
Diabetes
Device: Contour® PLUS BGMS
Device: OneTouch® SelectSimple™ BGMS
Device: Accu-Chek® Performa BGMS
Device: Accu-Chek® Active BGMS
Device: Freestyle Freedom® BGMS

Study Type: Interventional
Study Design: Endpoint Classification: Efficacy Study
Intervention Model: Single Group Assignment
Masking: Open Label
Primary Purpose: Diagnostic
Official Title: Evaluation of Blood Glucose Meter Systems - Contour® PLUS Study

Resource links provided by NLM:


Further study details as provided by Bayer HealthCare, Diabetes Care:

Primary Outcome Measures:
  • MARD (Mean Absolute Relative Difference Between BGMS Results and Reference Method Results) Across the Overall Tested Glucose Range [ Time Frame: 8 hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Using the overall Blood Glucose (BG) range (27 to 460 mg/dL), the Mean Absolute Relative Differences (MARD) between the BGM System readings and the YSI laboratory reference values were compared. MARD was calculated from the sum of all /(BG meter)-(BG reference)//(BG reference) assessments, divided by the number of assessments, then multiplied by 100(%). Each evaluable sample was tested on all 5 BGMS, thus the same number of BG test results was analyzed for each BGMS intervention. Lower MARD values indicate smaller differences between meter value and the reference value. Higher MARD values indicate higher differences between meter value and the reference value.


Secondary Outcome Measures:
  • MARD (Mean Absolute Relative Difference Between BGMS Results and Reference Method Results) in the Low Glucose Range(<=80 mg/dL) [ Time Frame: 8 hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Using fresh and glycolyzed samples with Blood Glucose (BG) <=80 mg/dL, the Mean Absolute Relative Differences (MARD) between the BGM System readings and the YSI laboratory reference values were compared. MARD was calculated from the sum of all /(BG meter)-(BG reference)//(BG reference) assessments, divided by the number of assessments, then multiplied by 100(%). Each evaluable sample was tested on all 5 BGMS, thus the same number of BG test results was analyzed for each BGMS intervention. Lower MARD values indicate smaller differences between meter value and the reference value. Higher MARD values indicate higher differences between meter value and the reference value.

  • MARD (Mean Absolute Relative Difference Between BGMS Results and Reference Method Results) in the High Glucose Range (>180 mg/dL) [ Time Frame: 8 hours ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
    Using samples with Blood Glucose >180 mg/dL, the Mean Absolute Relative Differences (MARD) between the BGM System readings and the YSI laboratory reference values were compared. MARD was calculated from the sum of all /(BG meter)-(BG reference)//(BG reference) assessments, divided by the number of assessments, then multiplied by 100(%). Each evaluable sample was tested on all 5 BGMS, thus the same number of BG test results was analyzed for each BGMS intervention. Lower MARD values indicate smaller differences between meter value and the reference value. Higher MARD values indicate higher differences between meter value and the reference value.


Enrollment: 106
Study Start Date: October 2012
Study Completion Date: November 2012
Primary Completion Date: November 2012 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
Arms Assigned Interventions
Experimental: Study Staff Test BGMSs
All testing and lancing were performed by the study staff; subjects did not perform any lancing or self-testing in this study. Study Staff lanced the fingers of subjects and tested the blood samples using five Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems (BGMS): Contour® PLUS BGMS; OneTouch® SelectSimple™ BGMS; Accu-Chek® Performa BGMS; Accu-Chek® Active BGMS; Freestyle Freedom® BGMS.
Device: Contour® PLUS BGMS
Study staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer).
Device: OneTouch® SelectSimple™ BGMS
Study staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer).
Device: Accu-Chek® Performa BGMS
Study staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer).
Device: Accu-Chek® Active BGMS
Study staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer).
Device: Freestyle Freedom® BGMS
Study staff performed Blood Glucose (BG) tests with capillary fingerstick blood collected from subjects with diabetes and without diabetes (up to 10% of subjects without diabetes were included). All meter BG results were compared with capillary plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer).

Detailed Description:

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of a Bayer Blood Glucose Monitoring System (BGMS) and four additional Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems (BGMS) from other manufacturers. All meter BG results were compared with plasma results obtained with a reference laboratory glucose method (YSI Glucose Analyzer). Performance of the five systems were evaluated across the glucose range of the BGMSs using capillary blood. All testing and lancing were performed by study staff and some samples were tested from subject fingertips. Additionally, some blood samples were glycolyzed to lower the glucose concentration levels and glucose solution was added to other samples to raise glucose concentration levels.

  Eligibility

Ages Eligible for Study:   18 Years and older
Genders Eligible for Study:   Both
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:   Yes
Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Males and females, 18 years of age or older
  • Willing to complete all study procedures

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Blood Borne infections like hepatitis or HIV or infections such as tuberculosis
  • Hemophilia or any other bleeding disorder
  • Pregnancy
  Contacts and Locations
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01714232

Locations
United States, Indiana
Bayer HealthCare LLC, Diabetes Care
Mishawaka, Indiana, United States, 46544
Sponsors and Collaborators
Bayer HealthCare, Diabetes Care
Investigators
Principal Investigator: David Simmons, MD Bayer HealthCare, Diabetes Care
  More Information

No publications provided

Responsible Party: Bayer HealthCare, Diabetes Care
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01714232     History of Changes
Other Study ID Numbers: CTD-2012-008-01
Study First Received: October 23, 2012
Results First Received: November 8, 2013
Last Updated: November 8, 2013
Health Authority: United States: Institutional Review Board

ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on April 21, 2014