Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Accuracy and precision of human glucose meters tested in dogs
By Brito-Casillas, Y et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary internal medicine·2014·Servicio de Endocrinologí, Spain·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: ISO-based assessment of accuracy and precision of glucose meters in dogs.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A study evaluated the accuracy of nine portable blood glucose meters (PBGMs) used on dogs to measure blood sugar levels. The meters were tested on blood samples from 59 dogs, and while none met the strict accuracy standards for whole blood, six performed well in plasma samples. The findings suggest that human glucose meters may not be reliable for dogs, highlighting the need for meters specifically designed for pets. Pet owners should consult their veterinarian about the best options for monitoring their dog's blood sugar levels.
People also search for: dog blood glucose meter accuracy · how to check dog blood sugar · best glucose meter for dogs
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Portable blood glucose meters (PBGMs) allow easy glucose measurements. As animal-specific PBGMs are not available everywhere, those for humans are widely used. OBJECTIVES: To assess the accuracy and precision of 9 PBGMs in canine whole blood (WB) and plasma, based on the ISO 15197:2013. ANIMALS: Fifty-nine client-owned dogs attending the Veterinary Teaching Hospital. METHODS: Analytical evaluation of 100 blood samples was performed for accuracy and 23 for precision (glucose 29-579 mg/dL) following ISO recommendations. A PBGM was considered accurate if 95% of the measurements were within ±15 mg/dL from the reference when glucose was <100 mg/dL and within ±15% when it was ≥100 mg/dL, and if 99% of them were within zones A and B in error grid analysis (EG). A hexokinase-based analyzer was used as reference. Ninety samples were assessed for hematocrit interferences. RESULTS: Accuracy requirements were not fulfilled by any PBGM in WB (74% of measurements within the limits for the most accurate) and by 1 only in plasma. However, the EG analysis in WB was passed by 6 PBGM and by all in plasma. The most accurate were also the most precise, with coefficients of variation <5% in WB and <3% in plasma. Hematocrit correlated with bias against the reference method in 4 PBGM (r = -0.243 - [-0.371]; P < .021). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: This disparity among PBGM suggests that meters approved for humans need to be evaluated before use in other species.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24990398/