AT meter - huge differences

Hi all. For the past two days I've seen readings of approximately 100 mg/dl difference within minutes of each other - each with a fresh blood drop. I'm using an AlphaTrak 2 with strips from the same batch. We used the control solution to check the strips before use.

I know meters can vary, but 100 seems excessive. I just had readings of 299 at 10:55 and 394 at 10:57. Yesterday I had 327 at 8:49 and 438 at 8:50.

Has anyone else seen this?

 

With the 20% meter variance this could happen: for example 20% above a reading of 299 is 359 and 20% below a reading of 394 is 315. Notice the overlap. You'd find a similar overlap if you calculate 20% above 327 and 20% below 438. This can drive you crazy so if a reading seems to fit where the BG levels are on a particular day, go with one test result. I only retest if I get a number that seems way off base either too high or too low compared to the others.

 

I don't remember ever getting that much of a difference in numbers when I re-tested immediately. I only re-test immediately if I find the number suspect. The only time I have ever seen much difference is if I really did not have enough blood the first time to get an accurate reading.

 

Yesterday we had a jump of nearly 450 between AMPS and +1. I did some tests and retests to try to determine if I have a wonky meter or a wonky kitty. That's when I had the 100 mg difference within a minute.

 

Another way to look at it: 299 is almost pink and 394 is pink - both high (-ish). The 327 is pink and the 438 is red - also high. You wouldn't be changing dosing based on any of those numbers. Where it gets dicier is if the readings are low and one is a lime green and the other is barely "take action" (near 68 for the AT).

 

Grandpa is a little wacky, but I don't think he's wonky LOL. Do you have another meter there to check?

 

True. Just my anal retentive qualities, I guess. I like exact measurements. This feels like telling a carpenter to cut boards somewhere between 5 and 7 feet and then trying to build a box.

Now that I understand a range is to be expected, I'l work on taming my OCD.

Thanks!

 

That made me laugh!

Another meter? See above regarding OCD. I have one other meter here and a new one on the way.

 

You know how much I love Grandpa, us oldies gotta stick together! And OCD is my middle name, my kids and their friends would do things that they knew would drive me up the walls...put the toilet paper on the wrong way!! Argggghhhhh. I worked in an office for many years, my large paper clips had their little space and the small ones had theirs..never the twain shall meet. I do know whereof you speak.
After my daughter was grown and gone, and we were discussing something that had happened a long time ago, and I said that it wasn't really that important, she said "Who are you and what have you done with my mother?"
Now that I am older, some of it doesn't matter as much, but the toilet paper better be on the right way! Gawd, your analogy of lumber cut 5 and 7 feet to build the box made me laugh right out loud!

 

I'm finally learning to live with ambiguity in my dotage!

 

I can't stand it when toilet paper is on the wrong way!

 

Hee hee! I'm not alone in my OCD struggle. Yay!

Believe it or not, my TP rolls from underneath. Yes, sad but true. After my Pip cat discovered the fun of sitting on the toilet and spinning the roll, I gave up the fight and flipped the roll. A couple of times I tried to go back and woke to a pile of paper on the floor again. She must do spot checks.

So now she has learned to open a firmly shut kitchen cabinet to get to my dishtowels. There's nothing like being stuck on a conference call and watching your clean laundry march past.

 

I only have toilet paper on the wall holder in my ensuite bathroom where the cats don't go. In my main bathroom I keep it in a basket with a lid beside the toilet and they don't look in there (so far!). Teasel's brother, Woody, is merciless when it comes to plucking at plastic bags and tea towels with his teeth. All three of them will pull laundry off my drying rack and many good T-shirts have been relegated to the "around the house crap clothes" pile because of arrays of kitty claw holes in them.

 

I know it sounds counter-intuitive and it's hard to wrap your head around the concept, but accuracy is not important if one is following any one of the dosing protocols found on the FDMB. However, what is important is identifying and correctly analyzing trends. From personal experience, I can tell you that vets who really "get it" understand this.

Save the accuracy business for your vet or to satisfy your own OCD tendencies. You're better off using a human meter if one is following a dosing method presented on the FDMB. Each and every one of them were created for use with human meters in mind (allowances/safeguards were made and are built into the methods). Except for the take action number of 68 on a pet specific meter (which was a number, for all practical purposes, "pulled out of a hat" to provide a little safety barrier for those using pet-specific meters and are following a Tight Regulation Protocol using Lantus, Basaglar, or Levemir... in other words, when chosen, the number 68 had nothing to do with other insulins or dosing methods and 50 on a human meter does not equal 68 on a pet-specific meter), no such allowances have been made for those following dosing methods using pet-specific meters on the FDMB.

On the other hand, if one is following a protocol/method created or designed by their vet for use with pet-specific meters... that's the meter of choice.

Food for thought...

 

The documentation for the AT meter/strips says that 65 and below is considered hypoglycemic. I was never sure of where the 68 used here came from.. I thought maybe someone 'padded' the 65 a little.

 

Oh Beck, I love that. I'm sorry, but that is just plain hilarious! I am afraid that I would lose it while on that conference call, OMG. Please post a picture of Pip, I wish we could have a video of Pip and the tp, plus the dishtowels going past. You have made my morning, my dear!

 

Yes, I've read that, but what about other brands of pet-specific meters currently in use? I've read different numbers depending on the brand... and then there's the consideration of meter error.

These days, the AT meter isn't the only new kid on the block. It's enough to make my head spin!

 

That's why I use my Freestyle Lite (which has been criticized for reading low) and don't worry about it. I still have my AT meter if I feel the need to know the "real" BG but I very rarely touch it. I've learned Teasel's ranges on my FS meter and I work with that. As was said previously by Jill, it's the trends that are important.

 

Yep, certain meters are known to run low... Freestyle meters have been known to run low since I joined the FDMB in 2006, but it's always been a reliable and in my opinion... a darn good meter. ReliOn and Glucocard/Arkray meters have been known to run low for years. Accu-Chek and Contour meters have been known to run closer to lab values than most.

My usual advice is to pick a meter and stick with it. Don't add or subtract values. Use the numbers as seen or you'll drive yourself... and everyone else crazy.

 

Seems to me there's good and bad in all tools. My Freestyle Neo needs a gallon of blood, or so it seems. I wasted too many strips. The AT strips are outrageous but seemed worth it if the accuracy was spot on. I have a NovaMax Plus coming for ketones. I also have 100 AT strips being delivered today.

I don't like the 100 ml swings, but I'l live with it now that I'm aware. Maybe someday Il ditch all of these and get another, but I'l stick with the AT for now since I made the investment.

 

Wow I never had differences like that with my alpha. Maybe watch that the blood drop size isn't too small.

 

Hi. We only have been using the AlphaTRAK 2 for a month, but we also haven't seen any differences like that. This evening we tested Bella three times each ~ 15 min. apart and got BG readings of 303, 285, and 286.

 

Wow! Something is odd here then. I opened a new container of strips and tested using the control solution. It was spot on what it should've been.

 

Just tried a three-time in succession test again. We got 169 - 232-190. I still don't like 60+ ml variations, but it is what it is, I guess. The control solution test is spot on.

I wish we had the allowable variances in accounting class when I was in school. Maybe I would've had a response when Ms. Burns asked how I got a strange answer.

 

I've never seem swings like that with my AlphaTrak either ... The only exception being when I got too little or way too much blood on the strip, in which case I could get some outliers. I find the AT more difficult to use than human meters (at least when it comes to sipping appropriate amounts of blood ... I often felt I was "sipping blind").

The One Touch Ultra has been my meter of choice since 2005, though it's now less popular than it was back then. It has always been rock solid for me and produces results very similar to labwork. I use my AT for a reality check or to plot comparisons.

 

I too used and loved the OneTouch meters. However, I switched to a meter that used less expensive strips. The price of the OneTouch strips just kept on increasing.