A long-term case study on marginal diabetes: demonstrating the need for effective calibration of home test devices

Main Article Content

Franco Pavese

Abstract

Accurate tracking of the trend in time of marginal diabetes level is not simple, as the precision of non-professional home testers is typically ±10–12 mg/dL—45% of the marginal range. A reliable assessment of the current calibration of home testers is difficult because it depends on the quality of the off-shell calibration and then on its subsequent validity in time. The paper reports test results specifically following a case of initial deterioration of the pancreas functionality, with the patient subsequently having to follow a strict diet with also assumption of Glucophage. The study carried out on its evolution made it possible to propose, with examples, a valid test procedure for optimising the performance of home testing without strictly requiring professional expertise, supplementing scarce/insufficient manufacturer information. The effect of the medical treatment was taken under observation for a total of ≈2300 morning glucose home tests over 8 years using several home testers models. The aim of the paper is not about the validity of the test method, but about getting evidence of the basic importance of the calibration of the testing devices, of its validity and sufficient accuracy, to improve the odds of a correct medical diagnosis—and patient confidence.

Keywords: marginal diabetes, long-term home testing, tester calibration, medical diagnosis, patient confidence

Article Details

How to Cite
PAVESE, Franco. A long-term case study on marginal diabetes: demonstrating the need for effective calibration of home test devices. Medical Research Archives, [S.l.], v. 12, n. 9, oct. 2024. ISSN 2375-1924. Available at: <https://esmed.org/MRA/mra/article/view/5873>. Date accessed: 04 oct. 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v12i9.5873.
Section
Case Reports

References

1. F. Pavese, A testing/metrological look at the accuracy of glucose strip measurements in home care for marginal diabetes, for mitigating diabetic kidney disease, Commentary, Journal of Nephrology 2022 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40620-021-01224-6, pp. 1–5. With Supplementary Information.
2. L. Heinemann, V. Lodwig, G. Freckmann, Accuracy in blood glucose measurement: what will a tightening of requirements yield? J Diabetes Sci Technol (2012) 6:435–443
3. S. Finfer, J. Wemerman, J.-C. Preiser, T. Cass, T. Desalve, Clinical review: consensus recommendations on measurement of blood glucose and reporting glycaemic control in critically ill adults. Crit Care (2013) 17:229
4. L. Ekhlaspour, D. Mondesir, N. Lautsch, C. Balliro, M. Hillard, K. Magyar, L. Goergen Radocchia, A. Esmaeili, M. Sinha, S.J. Russell, Comparative Accuracy of 17 Point-of-Care Glucose Meters. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017 May; 11(3): 558–566. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932296816672237
5. F. King, D. Ahn, V. Hsiao, T. Porco, D.C. Klonoff, A Review of Blood Glucose Monitor Accuracy. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics (2018) Vol. 20, No. 12. https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2018.0232
6. M. Tauschmann, G. Forlenza, K. Hood, R. Cardona-Hernandez, E. Giani, C. Hendrieckx, D.J. DeSalvo, L.M. Laffel, B. Saboo, B.J. Wheeler, D.N. Laptev, I. Yarhere, L.A. DiMeglio, M. Tauschmann, et al., ISPAD Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2022: Diabetes technologies: Glucose monitoring. Pediatr Diabetes. 2022 Dec;23(8):1390-1405. https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.13451