This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Schrot, R. J. Articles by Farese, R. V. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Schrot, R. J. Articles by Farese, R. V. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Computerized Model for Home Glucose Monitoring Proficiency Testing: Efficacy of an Innovative Testing Program

Department of Family Medicine, University of South Florida College of Medicine; James A. Haley Veterans Administration Hospital, 13000 Bruce B. Downs Boulevard, Ambulatory Care Section (1lc), Tampa, FL 33612.

Philip R. Foulls, MD

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, James A. Haley Veterans Administration Hospital, University of South Florida College of Medicine, Tampa, Florida.

Anthony D. Morrison, MD

Department of Internal Medicine, James A. Haley Veterans Administration Hospital, University of South Florida College of Medicine, Tampa, Florida.

Robert V. Farese, MD

Department of Internal Medicine, Department of Biochemistry/Molecular Biology, James A. Haley Veterans Administration Hospital, University of South Florida College of Medicine, Tampa, Florida.

PURPOSE

A newly instituted computerized system for proficiency testing of home glucose monitoring was evaluated comparing accuracy of patient determination of glucose with serum values measured in the laboratory.

METHODS

Patients returning for routine blood glucose testing ordered by their care provider brought their glucose monitoring equipment to the laboratory. They performed a finger-stick glucose check in the laboratory while the laboratory phlebotomist drew blood for glucose determination; both results were computer analyzed. Patients with a 25% or less variation from the laboratory were considered proficient, while those with greater than 25% variation were defined as nonproficient.

RESULTS

Over a 19-month period, 300 of the 3208 patients notified about the study completed proficiency testing at least once. Using the defined proficiency of 25% variation or less, 12% of the participants were nonproficient. Using a variation of 15% or less, 31% of patients were nonproficient.

CONCLUSIONS

An annual methodology evaluation such as the one in this study should become a standard of care to identify patients for remedial classes to correct the source of error. The goal must be to meet or exceed the American Diabetes Association standard of 15% total error in home glucose monitoring.

The Diabetes Educator, Vol. 25, No. 1, 48-55 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/014572179902500107


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. B.B. Kristensen, K. Nerhus, G. Thue, and S. Sandberg Results and Feasibility of an External Quality Assessment Scheme for Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Clin. Chem., July 1, 2006; 52(7): 1311 - 1317. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]