Accuracy of Three Commercial Home-Use Hemoglobin A1c Tests
Jacobsen et al.
The finding, in our words
Among three home-use capillary HbA1c tests, only Home Access approached acceptable accuracy with 82% of results within 5% of venous reference values, while CoreMedica and A1cNow+ achieved just 29% and 46% respectively, all falling short of the 90% standard. This demonstrates that most current home-use glycaemic tests lack the accuracy needed for reliable decentralised diabetes monitoring.
A paraphrase to the Library’s standard, never the abstract. The source is one link away and is always the authority.
This UK consensus opinion outlines how clinical laboratories can validate self-collected capillary blood sampling against venous reference standards to achieve accreditation and facilitate the shift towards community-based patient care.
Capillary blood samples collected by staff or self-collected by participants showed strong correlation and clinically acceptable agreement with venipuncture for influenza haemagglutination inhibition titers. The small differences observed were not clinically meaningful, and adequate sample volume was achieved in most attempts, supporting the feasibility of decentralised serological testing.
Self-collected capillary blood samples posted by standard mail showed high concordance with couriered venous samples for HbA1c, creatinine and lipid parameters, supporting their use for remote monitoring in diabetes management and screening.
Although most kidney transplant recipients successfully collected capillary blood samples at home, haemolysis and transport conditions affected analyte stability. Agreement with venous sampling was acceptable for haemoglobin and creatinine, but potassium and haematocrit exceeded total allowable error limits.
In a cohort of 62 participants evaluating home self-collection with the TassoPlus device, 38 returned samples, with 29% excluded due to insufficient plasma volume below 200 ΔL. Although viral load measurements in adequate samples correlated well with conventional testing (r = 0.800), the high failure rate and missed detection in low-volume viremic samples indicate that further technical refinements are necessary before clinical adoption.