Point of Care Glucometers
5 followers
0 Likes
HI,
My organization currently uses Roche Accu-Chek Inform II glucometers. I am looking at the possibility of changing to a different glucometer once our contract ends. Any recommendations?
Stacie
35 Replies
Displaying items 1-15 of 35 in total
Reply
Subgroup Membership is required to post Replies
Join POCT Listserv now
Suggested Posts
| Topic | Replies | Likes | Views | Participants | Last Reply |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| iSTAT in NICU -chem 8, CG4 | 4 | 0 | 125 | ||
| Rotem Sigma Validation Help | 1 | 0 | 85 | ||
| Hemochron Sig Elite use outside of manufacturer temperature range | 1 | 0 | 135 |
Nova StatStrip
We also use the StatStrip and really like it.
Just wondering if there is anyone who has switched from the Inform II glucose meter to Nova Stat Strip that can provide some feedback.
Are the users happy with the switch?
What do the like the most?
What do they not like?
Are there any recurring problems that you are dealing with for the Stat Strip?
Are recall notices frequent?
How is Nova's technical support?
Do the contracts compare to Roche?
Is the functionality of the connectivity to RALS or your middleware the same as Roche?
Any other comments?
I wouldn't mind others opinions even if you haven't used Roche Inform II. We are really considering switching over since Nova has been cleared for use in the critically ill.
We made the switch about 18 months ago:
Are the users happy with the switch? Very happy, the meters themselves do not need replacement at the rate the Roche ones did
What do the like the most? Reliability
What do they not like? Having to accept each result, QC and patient, in order for the result to flow into LIS
Are there any recurring problems that you are dealing with for the Stat Strip? No
Are recall notices frequent? No
How is Nova's technical support? Great. On install makes Roche look laughable by comparison
Do the contracts compare to Roche? Roche seems to write contracts with only themselves in mind. So far so good with Nova.
Is the functionality of the connectivity to RALS or your middleware the same as Roche? Same connectivity, but users must accept each and every result
Any other comments? Make sure to have Nova explain all secondary costs very clearly. We are now looking at a large bill for having to replace all battery packs (they have expiration dates on them for some reason), we were not notified of this before and at install; will now have to budget for this added cost every 2 years or so going forward.
Max we were able to set our Nova meters up so they no longer have to hit Accept, we have Telcor sending everything through and ignoring that step. We have other rules to stop glucoses from crossing, but all rules are in Telcor.
Max, you may change your flag configuration in RALS to release unaccepted results, if you wish. Under the locations tab, flag configuration, choose device type and edit your flags.
Thank you all!
Hi Silka,
How did you setup your meters so that the user doesn't have to hit accept on the meter every time? What rules/changes were needed in Telcor? It sounds like something the end-user would like.
When setting it up in Telcor we had the option to allow unaccepted results to go through. You may want to call telcor I am not sure if it is something an end user can do
Sent via Groupsite Mobile.
Charlene, just give Telcor a call. I think most customers have it set up that way.
Sent via Groupsite Mobile.
I thought the accept setting is a necessary step to meet:
GEN.43825 Result Verification Phase II
Manual and automated result entries are verified before final acceptance and reporting by the computer.
That is how I feel about this “ ACCEPT” step. If they do not verify the Patient ID initially,
they should catch the patient ID especially if the result is critical.
I never heard our users complain about “Accept”ing the result.
I always explain the reason why we make them jump the hoops.
Then they become liable to their actions.
I always think of this quote I have posted in my office.
“ Nothing is foolproof for a sufficiently talented fool”.
We should give them every opportunity to re-check their work.
Carol Netols, there is a thing called "auto-verification" - which means the step of verification and acceptance happens automatically via a tool such as an interface manager with rules set up to detect and hold outliers for review. Most labs use this type of tool as well and are not manually verifying every single result that comes off the analyzer.
That's a good point, Silka. Never really thought of it as autoverification, but it is. Does that not then make the facility responsible for meeting all CAP autoverification standards? I have always ignored those in the checklist when it comes to POC, but perhaps I shouldn't
...
Agree James. The autoverification CAP requirements are a little confusing to get through. Does anyone answer these CAP checklist items for the POC tests that go straight to the LIS?