posted by kelly on .
In my class, we have to research on glucose monitors and pick two disadvantages and find a way to solve those disadvantages.
The teachers know the students are not expert on designing a new product but using creativity, we have to come up with solutions
For example: I put that some monitors are to big for people to carry or to use.
the solution is to create a monitor in shape of a watch or a small pager so people can carry it in a bag or in their pocket.
My second problem is that some monitors take a lot of time to get the results. What would be one solution to this?
i can't think of anything. please help
Hi Kelly, I am no expert, however I do have diabetes and must check my blood sugar at least 3 times a day. For me, it is still difficult to muster up the courage to pop the button which shoots the needle into my finger!! I would really love a method of testing sugar without having to inject oneself ... i wonder if something could be devised to test saliva with a test strip? ... I understand there is a new device which you just strap onto your arm, no needles that a friend only told me about yesterday which they saw advertised on television. I am not sure how that works but perhaps you could key that into your search engine. Anyhow ... best of luck with your project. By the way, my monitor registers in 5 seconds, and is ready before i get my injector back into its pocket, so that is pretty fast!! ... again, best to you!
Some monitors DO take a longer time; the solution is to use reactions that take less time. Many monitors now take only a few seconds.
Another is sample size. Many of the older models took too much sample; the solution is to devise units that require smaller and smaller sample sizes. Many of the newer units now take only a few microliters.
A problem with older meters was that a drop of blood had to be placed ON a spot; newer meters now suck up the blood sample by capillary action.
The older meters measured glucose in whole blood while the standard is glucose contained in blood plasma. Most of the new models with which I am familiar make the automatic conversion from whole blood (which they measure) to plasma for the results. This is done electronically BUT some units make the conversion better than others.
One last one. I have noticed and I have had it confirmed, that many meters, including many new meters on the market, do not match the readings given by a blood sample drawn by a professional. That is, go to a professional pathology lab and have a sample drawn. Without blotting the place where the needle was used to draw the sample, let a drop of blood accumulate, then use a meter to sip the sample. Compare that reading with the result of the pathology lab after they deliver the results a few hours later. The people I have talked with AND my own experience, is that there is often a difference of 20 or 30 points on the low side for the results of the meter vs the path lab results. Physicians will take the results of the pathology lab over the meter results any day. The fix is to design a system that doesn't have that error.