Accu-Chek test strips -- Help

I have used it because the company sent me one free along with 50 test strips. I too use the One
Touch Ultra and like it very much, but the accuracy of the Accu-Chek has always been within a very
few points of the One Touch so I think it's good enough, especially if it's the only one your
insurance will pay for. Good luck.
--
Cheri

M. Pann wrote in message <[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

My insurance company, under the belief that they know best, have
informed me that they will no longer pay for One Touch Ultra strips but
will pay for any of the Accu-Chek strips.

I must convert.

Looking at the Accu-Chek offerings I saw their Active machine. It

claims

Quoted message said:

to measure in 5 to 10 seconds and use only 1 microliter blood. However,
they say that they use "chromo" technique, which is different from the
OneTouch Ultra.

Is anyone here either using now or have used in the past the Active
Accu-Chek strips? Are (were) you happy with it? Was it reliable? Any
other gotcha's I should know?

Meir
"When people are least sure, they are often most dogmatic"
John Kenneth Galbraith (1908-)
--
Meir Pann
"Management reorganizes the company whenever they need to create the
illusion of progress."

God... your U.S insurance companies have far too much power.. buggers shouldn't be allowed
to do this.

The Ultra is one of the most popular machines in the UK; I see it as giving a more accurate reading
at all temperatures than the Accuchek Active. However, the Active is also a very big seller (of
course we don't have to worry about strip costs).

I have both machines. The Accuchek active is a good machine and uses a totally different test strip
that requires a greater amount of blood. It works differently and will give readings about 7% lower
than your Ultra machine due to its method of working. I think that the "chromo" method refers to the
fact that it passes a light through the sample and measures the change in colour to determine the
glucose content. The Ultra works differently but is believed more accurate. Certainly if you keep
control using your Ultra then your control will be that little bit tighter.

I actually prefer the Active in general use, it is reliable and easy to get on with. I notice it
gets through batteries faster than the Ultra though...Luckily they are free in the UK.

I wouldn't worry at all...just remember the reading is just a little bit lower than you would
normally expect.

Martin

"M. Pann" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

My insurance company, under the belief that they know best, have informed me that they will no
longer pay for One Touch Ultra strips but will pay for any of the Accu-Chek strips.

I must convert.

Looking at the Accu-Chek offerings I saw their Active machine. It claims to measure in 5 to 10
seconds and use only 1 microliter blood. However, they say that they use "chromo" technique, which
is different from the OneTouch Ultra.

Is anyone here either using now or have used in the past the Active Accu-Chek strips? Are (were)
you happy with it? Was it reliable? Any other gotcha's I should know?

Meir "When people are least sure, they are often most dogmatic" John Kenneth Galbraith (1908-)
--
Meir Pann "Management reorganizes the company whenever they need to create the illusion of
progress."

Quoted message said:

--
Cheri responded to M. Pann,

M. Pann wrote in message <[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

My insurance company, under the belief that they know best, have informed me that they will no
longer pay for One Touch Ultra strips but will pay for any of the Accu-Chek strips.

I must convert.

My insurance company, under the belief that they know best, have informed me that they will pay a
severely reduced benefit for Accu-Chek strips but will pay the standard co-pay rate for the One
Touch Ultra strips.

I must convert.

I have converted. The One Touch Ultra seems about as accurate as my Accu-Chek Advantage which was
very accurate when I tested it against the lab machine. The Accu-Check Comfort Curve strips were
much easier to use than the One Touch and I find that I could get by with less blood with the
Comfort Curve.

These choices are dictated by backroom deals between the insurance companies and the strip
manufacturers. The ultimate choice is not a reflection of strip quality as much as on rebate policy,
i.e. my insurance company flat out admits that up-front cost for the two strips is about the same
but they get a rebate from LifeScan.

I find that very interesting because my insurance is "big company" insurance in which my former
employer just pays the bills and the Insurance Company acts as a accounting/bill paying agent for a
fee. I suspect the rebate is off the books and goes straight to the insurance company.

I don't ever intend to play poker with those guys, or even buy a used car from them. . .way out of
my league.

Regards
Old Al

Martin said:

God... your U.S insurance companies have far too much power.. buggers shouldn't be allowed to
do this.

Couldn't agree more.

Quoted message said:

The Ultra is one of the most popular machines in the UK; I see it as giving a more accurate
reading at all temperatures than the Accuchek Active. However, the Active is also a very big
seller (of course we don't have to worry about strip costs).

I have both machines. The Accuchek active is a good machine and uses a totally different test
strip that requires a greater amount of blood. It works differently and will give readings about
7% lower than your Ultra machine due to its method of working. I think that the "chromo" method
refers to the fact that it passes a light through the sample and measures the change in colour to
determine the glucose content. The Ultra works differently but is believed more accurate.
Certainly if you keep control using your Ultra then your control will be that little bit tighter.

Since I asked for help, I have done my own experimenting and measurements. I have used both machines
for a week, taking a reading on both machines at the same time from the same blood, switching who's
first and who's second every time. In all I had 26 measurements.

I computed a statistical correlation (spearman's R) of the resulting numbers, and it came out to be
.96. That is an extremely, extremely high correlation. A correlation of .96 means that there is no
difference between the reliability of these two machines.

The active did bring in numbers that, on the average, were 5.5% lower than the Ultra. However, when
in the past I have checked the Ultra against the lab's results and the Ultra tended to be a little
high. All in all, I think the Active is a little more reliable, perhaps by a gnat's hair.

Quoted message said:

I actually prefer the Active in general use, it is reliable and easy to get on with.

Also, the Active is made so it's easy to test from other sites, not just the fingertips. You can
take the strip out of the machine, get the blood on it from the alternative site, and put it back in
the machine. In that case the wait time doubles from the regular 5 seconds to 10 seconds.

Quoted message said:

I notice it gets through batteries faster than the Ultra though...Luckily they are free
in the UK.

I wouldn't worry at all...just remember the reading is just a little bit lower than you would
normally expect.

Martin

"M. Pann" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

My insurance company, under the belief that they know best, have informed me that they will no
longer pay for One Touch Ultra strips but will pay for any of the Accu-Chek strips.

I must convert.

Looking at the Accu-Chek offerings I saw their Active machine. It claims to measure in 5 to 10
seconds and use only 1 microliter blood. However, they say that they use "chromo" technique,
which is different from the OneTouch Ultra.

Is anyone here either using now or have used in the past the Active Accu-Chek strips? Are (were)
you happy with it? Was it reliable? Any other gotcha's I should know?

--
M. Pann "Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day; Give him religion, and he'll starve to
death while praying for a fish."