In the management of diabetes, accuracy of devices used for self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is critical because SMBG results can affect patient diabetes-related health outcomes. A new blood glucose monitoring system (BGMS) platform has been developed that is based on the new CONTOUR® NEXT (CN) test strip. This BGMS platform uses a proprietary electron mediator and algorithm to minimize errors at different steps in the testing process, thus minimizing outliers and significantly improving accuracy from prior-generation blood glucose meter systems. As demonstrated by questionnaire results from clinical studies with the new BGMS platform, accuracy and ease of use are important considerations for people with diabetes and their health care professionals when selecting an SMBG device. This article provides an overview of laboratory studies and clinical trials in the hands of lay users involving the performance of the portfolio of blood glucose meters that uses the new test strip. Each BGMS in the platform, which includes the CONTOUR XT (CONTOUR NEXT EZ in the United States), CONTOUR NEXT LINK, CONTOUR NEXT USB, and CN systems, demonstrated advanced accuracy both in the laboratory and in the hands of subjects (people with diabetes) and trained health care professionals. All systems met and exceeded International Organization for Standardization accuracy criteria (both ISO 15197:2003 and ISO 15197:2013). Each system in the new BGMS platform delivers advanced accuracy, which is essential to people who utilize SMBG for improved management.
BodeBW. The accuracy and interferences in self-monitoring of blood glucose. US Endocrine Rev. 2007; 2: 46–8.
2.
HellmanR. Glucose meter inaccuracy and the impact on the care of patients. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2012; 28 (3): 207–9.
3.
KlonoffDCBlondeLCembrowskiGChacraARCharpentierGColagiuriSDaileyGGabbayRAHeinemannLKerrDNicolucciAPolonskyWSchnellOVigerskyRYaleJF; Coalition for Clinical Research-Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Scientific Board. Consensus report: The current role of self-monitoring of blood glucose in non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011; 5 (6): 1529–48.
4.
American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes—2012. Diabetes Care. 2012; 35Suppl 1: S11–63.
5.
FeraTBlumlBMEllisWM. Diabetes Ten City Challenge: Final economic and clinical results. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2009; 49 (3): 383–91.
6.
MartinSSchneiderBHeinemannLLodwigVKurthHJKolbHScherbaumWA. Self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes and long-term outcome: An epidemiological cohort study. Diabetologia. 2006; 49 (2): 271–8.
7.
KarterAJAckersonLMDarbinianJAD'AgostinoRBJrFerraraALiuJSelbyJV. Self-monitoring of blood glucose levels and glycemic control: The Northern California Kaiser Permanente Diabetes Registry. Am J Med. 2001; 111 (1): 1–9.
8.
FranciosiMLucisanoGPellegriniFCantarelloAConsoliACuccoLGhidelliRSartoreGSciangulaLNicolucciA; ROSES Study Group. ROSES: Role of self-monitoring of blood glucose and intensive education in patients with type 2 diabetes not receiving insulin. A pilot randomized clinical trial. Diabet Med. 2011; 28 (7): 789–96.
9.
PolonskyWHFisherLSchikmanCHHinnenDAParkinCGJelsovskyZAxel-SchweitzerMPetersenBWagnerRS. A structured self-monitoring of blood glucose approach in type 2 diabetes encourages more frequent, intensive, and effective physician interventions: Results from the STeP study. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2011; 13 (8): 797–802.
10.
American Diabetes Association. Self-monitoring of blood glucose. Diabetes Care. 1994; 17 (1): 81–6.
11.
KlonoffDC. The Food and Drug Administration is now preparing to establish tighter performance requirements for blood glucose monitors. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2010; 4 (3): 499–504.
BrownDSchachnerHCCastroRChuA. Accuracy assessment of a new blood glucose monitoring system. Abstract presented at: 21st Biennial Congress of the International Diabetes Federation, December 4–8, 2011, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
14.
HarrisonBSchachnerHCBrownD. Accuracy evaluation of a new blood glucose monitoring system. Presented at: 15th Annual Meetings of the Canadian Diabetes Association/Canadian Society of Endocrinology and Metabolism, October 10–13, 2012, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
15.
HarrisonBDunneN. Accuracy and precision evaluation of the CONTOUR® NEXT blood glucose monitoring system. Presented at: 12th Annual Meeting of the Diabetes Technology Society, November 8–10, 2012, Bethesda, MD.
16.
PflugBWarchal-WindhamMEGoldyAChuA. Analytical accuracy evaluation of the CONTOUR® XT blood glucose meter. Presented at: 12th Annual Meeting of the Diabetes Technology Society, November 8–10, 2012, Bethesda, MD.
17.
BaileyTSTidemanAGreeneCViggianiMYuJPardoSParkesJL. User performance evaluation of a new blood glucose monitoring system. Diabetes. 2012; 61Suppl 1: A223. Abstract 880-P.
18.
BaileyTWallaceJFGreeneCPardoSParkesJLSchachnerHC. Performance evaluation of a novel blood glucose monitoring system. Pediatr Diabetes. 2011; 12Suppl 15: 129. Abstract P/255/WED.
19.
BaumJRobinsonSJPardoSYuJParkesJL. Performance evaluation of a new blood glucose monitoring system in the hands of users. Presented at: 15th Annual Meetings of the Canadian Diabetes Association/Canadian Society of Endocrinology and Metabolism, October 10–13, 2012, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
20.
BaileyTSWallaceJFParkesJLPardoSYuJSchachnerHCSimmonsDAChuA. Performance of a new blood glucose monitoring system in the hands of intended users. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2012; 14 (9): 783–9.
21.
BernsteinRCaswellMFrankJFullamJPardoSWallaceJF. User performance evaluation of the CONTOUR® NEXT blood glucose monitoring system with the CONTOUR® NEXT test strip. Presented at: 12th Annual Meeting of the Diabetes Technology Society, November 8–10, 2012, Bethesda, MD.
22.
WallaceJYuJPardoSBrownDParkesJL. Accuracy of a new blood glucose monitoring system in the hands of users. Diabetes. 2012; 61Suppl 1: A590. Abstract 2340-PO.
23.
WallaceJYuJPardoSBrownDParkesJL. Accuracy of the Contour Next Link blood glucose meter system (BGMS) in the hands of users. Presented at: 12th Annual Meeting of the Diabetes Technology Society, November 8–10, 2012, Bethesda, MD.
24.
HarrisonBMaurerEWuHP. Performance of a new algorithm for sample re-application during blood glucose test strip underfill conditions. Abstract presented at: Clinical Diabetes Technology Meeting, April 20–21, 2012, Los Angeles, CA.
25.
ChuATudorB. Interference evaluation of the CONTOUR® NEXT test strip. Presented at: 12th Annual Meeting of the Diabetes Technology Society, November 8–10, 2012, Bethesda, MD.
26.
Bayer Healthcare LLC. CONTOUR NEXT reagent insert. Revised February 2011.
27.
Bayer Healthcare LLC. CONTOUR NEXT EZ user guide. Revised November 2011.
28.
Bayer Healthcare LLC. CONTOUR NEXT LINK user guide. Revised February 2013.
29.
Bayer Healthcare LLC. CONTOUR NEXT user guide. Revised May 2012.
30.
Bayer Healthcare LLC. CONTOUR NEXT USB user guide. Revised March 2012.
31.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 15197:2003: In vitro diagnostic test systems — Requirements for blood-glucose monitoring systems for self-testing in managing diabetes mellitus. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2003.
32.
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 15197:2013: In vitro diagnostic test systems — Requirements for blood-glucose monitoring systems for self-testing in managing diabetes mellitus. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2013.
33.
HarrisonBBrownDWarchal-WindhamMESchachnerHCParkesJLPardoS. Accuracy evaluation of a new platform of blood glucose monitoring systems with the CONTOUR® NEXT test strip. Presented at: 12th Annual Meeting of the Diabetes Technology Society, November 8–10, 2012, Bethesda, MD.
34.
ParkesJLSlatinSLPardoSGinsbergBH. A new consensus error grid to evaluate the clinical significance of inaccuracies in the measurement of blood glucose. Diabetes Care. 2000; 23 (8): 1143–8.
35.
AlcarazJRicoNPetruschkeTBediniJL. Performance evaluation of a novel blood glucose monitoring system: Contour® XT. Poster presented at: 5th Annual International Conference on Advanced Technologies and Treatments for Diabetes, February 8–11, 2012, Barcelona, Spain.
36.
BaileyTWallaceJGreeneCPardoSParkesJLSchachnerHC. Performance evaluation of a novel blood glucose monitoring system. Poster presented at: 37th Annual Scientific Meeting of the International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes, October 19–22, 2011, Miami Beach, FL.
37.
BaileyTTidemanAGreeneCViggianiMYuJPardoSParkesJL. User performance evaluation of the CONTOUR® NEXT EZ (CONTOUR® XT) blood glucose monitoring system. Poster presented at: 72nd Scientific Sessions of the American Diabetes Association (ADA), June 8–12, 2012, Philadelphia, PA. Abstract 880-P.
38.
LemkeCPetruschkeTWallaceJFPardoSParkesJLMatthaeiS. Comparative accuracy evaluation of the CONTOUR XT® blood glucose monitoring system. Poster presented at: 47th Annual Diabetes Congress of the Deutsche Diabetes Gesellschaft (DDG), May 16–19, 2012, Stuttgart, Germany.
39.
PettusJGreerJStengerPSchachnerHCDunneNParkesJLEdelmanSPardoS. Differences between perceived versus measured blood glucose test results in people with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes. 2012; 61Suppl 1: A218. Abstract 861-P.
40.
The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993; 329 (14): 977–86.
41.
UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet. 1998; 352 (9131): 837–53.
