Glucose Meter Discrepancies

New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> ]

New Member

Date Joined Dec 2006
Total Posts : 9
   Posted 12/28/2006 9:22 PM (GMT -6)   
Hi There, I am new to this forum. I have recently been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. I had two pregnancies, both with gestational diabetes and I was warned by my midwives that I was at higher risk for type 2. Anyway, I have my BG meter from when I had gestational diabetes which is an Accu-Chek advantage. Then I went to
see an Endocrinologist for my type 2 and she gave me a new One Touch Ultra 2 meter. Just out of curiosity, a few times I tried checking my BG on both meters at the same time to see if they read the same - and the One Touch consistently reads higher than the Accu-Chek, by about 20 points. What's going on? Does anyone out there have any information about either of these meters? I hope the Accu-chek is more accurate because that's what I had been using more to see how my levels are - and those levels have been acceptable. Any info is appreciated.

Thanks! SB

Pin Cushion
Regular Member

Date Joined Feb 2003
Total Posts : 442
   Posted 12/28/2006 10:59 PM (GMT -6)   
I have heard that most meters will have a difference of a few points. For me I use The Accu-Chek and have been using the same meter for about 4 years now. I have checked it a few times over the years while in the hospital and mine has been right on with theirs or within a couple of points so I am happy with what I have.
Sigmoid Colostomy / Crohns / Type 1 Diabetic / Ostioarthritus / Fibromyalgia / Asthma / High Blood Pressure / High Colesterol / Migraines. Ain't life a joy?

* I think it may be time for a colorful metaphor*

Regular Member

Date Joined Jul 2005
Total Posts : 64
   Posted 12/29/2006 9:34 AM (GMT -6)   
I also use an Accuchek Advantage and their Comfort Curve strips.  I compared it sometime ago to another brand (could have been one of the Ultras) that gave a reading much quicker than the Accuchek.  However I found the other one to be too inconsistent - from the same drop of blood. So I stayed with the Accuchek.  The other one read sometimes higher, sometimes lower than the Accuchek, so, to me, it was completely unreliable.

The short form for "you are" is "you're", NOT "your".

Veteran Member

Date Joined May 2006
Total Posts : 547
   Posted 12/29/2006 1:52 PM (GMT -6)   
At the very least, may I suggest you change out the batteries (if you've not done that recently). It's been my experience that the meters may be affected by dying-out batteries. No proof - just my experience :-)

BTW - I have both meters you refer to and found that I prefer the UltraSmart meter as it seems to register more consistently with how I feel. Go with the one you like best.
- Phishbowl (Type 1 since Jan'05 - Levemir, NovoRapid)

"What's Not Measured Is Not Managed"

New Member

Date Joined Dec 2006
Total Posts : 9
   Posted 12/29/2006 1:52 PM (GMT -6)   
Thanks for your replies. I too have noticed that my AccuChek takes quite a bit longer to come up with a reading than my fancy new OneTouch Ultra. Somehow I want to trust the Accu Chek more - maybe because it consistently reads lower! I prefer to see 138 after two hours than 159. I think that all the meters on the market should be a little more consistent with each other. I can forgive one or two points here or there, but 20 points??!? No fair. I suppose I'll have to go back to the doctor and compare with a lab blood test to know which meter to believe.

Veteran Member

Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 6056
   Posted 12/30/2006 12:50 PM (GMT -6)   

I have a Prestige IQ meter and it's a huge clunky thing (about the size of a deck of cards) that uses AA batteries. The test strips are only 30ยข each which is a boon to me because I have no insurance. It takes up to 30 seconds to supply a reading but my tests are right on with the ones on my blood lab work so I'm a happy camper. The thing I find the funniest about these meters is no matter how small they are they all seem to come in the same size zipper pack. :-) So what's the big deal about meter size?
~ Jeannie

"People are like stained glass windows: They sparkle and shine when the sun's out, but when the darkness sets in, their true beauty is revealed only if there is light within."

- Elizabeth Kubler-Ross

Regular Member

Date Joined Nov 2006
Total Posts : 20
   Posted 1/4/2007 2:24 PM (GMT -6)   
As for me, I use Accu-Check Aviva and Freestyle Flash. The Accu-check always comes out higher, (about 10 more points), then Freestyle. I believe both to be pretty accurate as they correspond pretty well with the lab readings.
I have an Ultrasmart that I haven't tried yet also. I got this meter for free and a bulk lot of test strips I found on ebay, (60.00 for 200 strips that expire in 08. Not a bad deal, and I always go for the cheapest way to test since I do it about 8 times per day!

Veteran Member

Date Joined Mar 2005
Total Posts : 1449
   Posted 1/7/2007 11:58 AM (GMT -6)   

I invite all usere of monitoirs to take 3 readings from blood squeezed from the same finger hoile, ome straight after the other, the differences may well astonish you

despite the presence of the drcimal figure on the end, most are clearly not precision instruments

I usually posy at anxiety disorders

recovered former longtime anxiety and panic attack sufferer and helper of other sufferers  but no training or  qualifications in medicine or psychology, any remarks that may be taken as advice must be confirmed with doctor or other health professional
emails are welcome but do mention healingwell to avoid risk of deletion as spam

Regular Member

Date Joined Nov 2006
Total Posts : 20
   Posted 1/7/2007 3:52 PM (GMT -6)   
Hi again:

Well, I have decided to stick with my Accu-Check system. I wasn't happy with the UltraSmart I received for free. What happened was I checked my bg on that and it was 45 points lower than my Accu-Check meter. And my Accu-Check or Freestyle Meter is right up there with the lab numbers, (only within about 5 points).

It was a pretty big discrepancy when my Accu-Check said I was 158, and the UltraSmart 100. Freestyle was close to Accu-Check at 154.


New Member

Date Joined Jan 2007
Total Posts : 3
   Posted 1/13/2007 2:38 AM (GMT -6)   
I have a One touch ultra & ultra 2 & I get different readings from both meters.

Regular Member

Date Joined Aug 2006
Total Posts : 477
   Posted 1/14/2007 5:12 PM (GMT -6)   
By law, a blood glucose meter can vary by 20% - that means if your BG is 100 your meter can read anywhere from 80 to 120 and the meter is considered to be just fine by the FDA.  At 138 the meter can read between 110 and 166 and still be considered accurate.  Test strips are very sensitive to heat, light, moisture and age- so any of those factors can make your strips perform differently. Some strips are calibrated to whole plasma readings and others are not. The One Touch family of meters is calibrated to whole blood to me more in line with the results from meters used in clinical laboratories.
One of our senior members posted awhile back that there is a study that showed that different fingers even give different numbers - even if the readings are taken at the exact same time. Glucose meters are definitely NOT precision instruments and your BG readings should be used to look for trends rather than absolutes. Otherwise, you'll drive yourself crazy-
I just want to live happily ever after-every now and then. Jimmy Buffett

New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
Forum Information
Currently it is Friday, October 28, 2016 11:07 AM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 2,713,397 posts in 299,186 threads.
View Active Threads

Who's Online
This forum has 153788 registered members. Please welcome our newest member, bobbyjgrant.
297 Guest(s), 17 Registered Member(s) are currently online.  Details
PeteZa, Kirky98, 81GyGuy, jliggett69, Gemlin, astroman, Mrseaglea, FoxRun, Laceymyaalayah, 142, Todd1963, Navigator, blksteeda, eat2bwell, Rasi, sharron19, Sissy63

Follow on Facebook  Follow on Twitter  Follow on Pinterest

©1996-2016 LLC  All rights reserved.

Advertise | Privacy Policy & Disclaimer