A Comparative Review of the ACCU-Check Compact Blood Glucose Meter

Glucometers are proliferating like rabbits on Viagra. There are many out there and more are coming at a dizzying rate. The reasons for this are not entirely the workings of the free enterprise system. in fact, although it is competition, it is a competition to see who can take the most advantage of the generous practices of Medicare and some other insurances. In short, there is immense profit in the supplies required by the Glucometers, particularly the test strips. Of course, no two manufacturers use the same test strip, and there is little difference to the consumer among the test strips, so the competition comes in persuading the consumer to use a given meter. For a while, gimmicks and features that increased the ease of use were the most important issues, and the real issue, accuracy, was nearly lost in the shuffle. I am pleased to say that the recent meters I have tested have all had adequate accuracy and so the other features are, indeed, the selling points for the meters. Most of the new ones are pretty good and each has a particular claim to fame, but one stands out as the most user friendly meter of the bunch.

I speak of the ACCU-Check Compact Plus, the first meter in a many months that I thought was worth reviewing. It is worth review, and consideration, because it present features, a bit different from other meters, that are very convenient for the user.
It is, as advertised, compact. Measuring 1.2" deep, 2.2" wide, and 4.5" tall, including the detachable Lancer device; without it 1.2" X 1.9" X 4.4" This is nearly, but not quite, the smallest meter available. However, considering the compact size with the uniquely designed, "ACCU-Check Softclix Plus" device attached, it is, usefully, the most compact. The front contains a very readable, illuminated screen, roughly 1 1/8" wide by 1 3/8" high, with three control buttons for settings, memory, and strip control. The back sports a small window that presents the number of available, pre-loaded glucose strips remaining; displaying what is the best feature of the meter (see pictures).

The Compact contains a small drum that holds 17 test strips. The drum resembles a 35 mm. film container, although much smaller. It drops easily into a compartment behind a door on the front of the meter. This is depicted in figure 3, placed on top of the meter. Previous meters (Ascensia Breeze, I and II, see link to review) have sported the preloading feature, utilizing a disk with ten test strips. While the difference between 10 and 17 does not sound vast, in use, it has been striking. It feels as though it lasts much longer. It's not all roses, though, the sampling tip is slightly more fussy than that of the Breeze and several other recent meters. As I get used to the slight differences in shape and approach, however, it has become easier to use and the difference has nearly disappeared. The advertised time between sampling and the appearance of the result is five seconds for the latest model. This is the same as the Breeze II, and the Ultra II series, but the actual time is slightly longer because they don't count a delay before the countdown begins. For the Compact, this delay is quite short, well under a second. The Ultra II series is also quite short, but for the Breeze, it's over a second. These differences are, practically speaking, negligible.

An additional feature, which is more gimmick than useful, is an alarm that can be set to warn that the reading is in the hypoglycemic range. Perhaps its potential utility lies in its ability to remind the user of the critical levels, in case the hypoglycemia is sufficient to impair judgment.
Accuracy is, of course, the most critical issue in choice of a meter. I have tested most of the modern meters available, and the accuracy in general has improved markedly over the last three or four years to the point that all I have tested in the last two years have acceptable accuracy. The Compact actually publishes its own validity data and distributes the results with the meters. My testing corroborated what they claimed so closely, that I cut short my usually long series of tests, satisfied. Of course, it has a memory function with a capacity of 300 tests and it records these with time and date. It does not have the incredibly sophisticated features for data analysis of the Ultrasmart (see review) but I never used them, anyway.
At first, I was not interested in the attachable Lancet device. When I use a device (it's easy to do it without one) I like my own and planned to continue using it. For one thing my device used a slightly sharper point, and, of course, lances are not interchangeable. I changed my mind. Not only is it convenient to use something that is a part of the meter, it turns out that the lances used are Teflon coated and seemed, to me, to be a little less painful. That may be wishful thinking, but what isn't questionable is the fact that they retain their points better with repeated use, and yes, folks, if I am the only one using the device, I reuse the lances, several times. With my previous device, I would change the lances after three or four uses because they dulled and started to hurt. With these lances, I have to remind myself to change them before the 17 test strips run out. They feel as though they retain their points much longer than the other lances. Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. So I use the attached device, and usually leave it attached.

Another feature I like is that it uses two ordinary AAA cells. Batteries in other meters use cells that you don't generally have in your junk drawer; you have to go out and buy them specifically for your meter, if you can find them. It's no big deal; batteries last years, anyway, but I like the additional convenience.
By now, it should be obvious that I use this meter now, nearly to the exclusion of any other among my vast collection. I used to have one in every room in which I was likely to want to check my glucose level. I've lost touch with where some of these meters are, now. I just carry the Compact in my pocket. In technical terms, it is not the "best" meter available. That title goes, without competition, to the "One Touch Ultra Smart Blood Glucose Monitoring System (see review). If you need to analyze the factors that are related to extreme levels, the effects of illness, food, mood, and time of day, as some young, type I diabetics should definitely do, then the Ultra Smart is the only meter to consider. But for the rest of us, who never analyze those niceties because they are not important for us, anyway, this new, small, convenient meter may be the one to consider.