Premium
Alternate site blood glucose testing: do patients prefer it?
Author(s) -
Tieszen K. L.,
New J. P.
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
diabetic medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.474
H-Index - 145
eISSN - 1464-5491
pISSN - 0742-3071
DOI - 10.1046/j.1464-5491.2003.00927.x
Subject(s) - medicine , forearm , sense (electronics) , surgery , usability , soft tissue , biomedical engineering , computer science , human–computer interaction , electrical engineering , engineering
Aims To examine patients’ perspectives on ease of use and pain with the MediSense alternate site blood glucose testing device (Soft‐Sense) compared with their current glucose testing method, and to evaluate the analytical performance of the MediSense device with the laboratory reference method. Methods Study participants were shown how to use the Soft‐Sense glucose device and asked to perform two tests on their forearm. A capillary sample was collected from their finger and tested on the external port of the Soft‐Sense meter and a laboratory method (YSI Glucose Analyser). Finally, one drop of blood was also directly tested from the finger onto the external port. Patients completed a questionnaire comparing ease of use and associated pain of their current testing method with the Soft‐Sense meter. Results Patients preferred the Soft‐Sense device to their own for ease of use and for less pain (93% found it easier to use and 96% less painful; P < 0.001). Glucose results correlated closely with the laboratory method (mean absolute percentage bias for the forearm 11.0%, finger 6.0%, and collected capillary sample 5.7%). Error grid analysis showed that all Soft‐Sense results were clinically acceptable. Conclusions Patients prefer the Soft‐Sense alternate site testing device to their existing measuring method. The device accurately measures whole blood glucose.