On (b)(6) 2019, a reporter for the patient contacted lifescan (b)(4), alleging that the patient¿s onetouch select simple meter read inaccurately high in comparison to her feelings/normal results.The complaint was classified based on customer service representative (csr) documentation and a review of the call by a senior csr.The reporter advised the csr that on (b)(6) 2019, the patient obtained an alleged inaccurately high reading of ¿302 mg/dl¿ on the subject meter, which she compared to her feelings/normal results.Meter to feelings/normal results comparisons do not meet the criteria necessary for lfs to determine an inaccuracy.The reporter stated that the patient manages her diabetes with self-adjusted insulin doses (unspecified type or dosage).The reporter did not specify if the patient made any changes to her usual routine of diabetes management in response to the alleged inaccurately high reading.He explained that on (b)(6) 2019, the patient experienced ¿dizziness and cramps in her legs, and then fainted¿ and that the patient was then taken to hospital.He stated that a blood glucose test was performed on the patient and obtained a result of ¿50 mg/dl¿, and that she was treated by a healthcare professional with intravenous glucose.At the time of troubleshooting, the csr confirmed that the correct unit of measure was used and that the patient¿s test strips had been stored correctly, were within expiry date.The csr walked the patient through a control solution test which did not fall within the specified range (126-171 mg/dl) on the test strip vial.Replacement products were sent to the patient.This complaint is being reported because the patient reportedly developed signs and symptoms suggestive of a serious injury adverse event after obtaining alleged inaccurate high results with the subject meter.
|
The lay user/patient's meter and test strips have been returned and evaluated by lifescan product analysis with the following findings: the meter passed all testing with no faults found.The reported issue could not be confirmed.In addition, a device history record review was performed on the subject meter lot.The review did not identify anything that could adversely impact product performance or function.Lifescan also conducted an evaluation of the test strip lot and concluded that this lot did not breach the thresholds set for escalation and no systemic issue was observed.Analysis was not possible for the returned test strips due to unknown storage and handling preventing the allegation being physically investigated, however a secondary issue was noted; the shelf-life had exceeded.If lifescan obtains additional information regarding this complaint, a follow-up report will be submitted.At this time, lifescan considers this matter closed.
|