Coaguchek strips

[janekins]

Following on from the discussions about irregular coaguchek readings, I wanted to ask if anyone else thinks the strips look narrower than they used to be? I thought this a few months ago and have had unusual readings from batch 309 and now batch 311. I have used a coaguchek for several years with only about 0.1 difference in readings from the machine at my surgery. Now there is at least 0.5 -0.9 difference.

Jane

[MaryF Administrator]

Hi, A good idea regarding the yellow card, let us know any outcome please, so many people seem to be reporting strange results at the moment. MaryF

[Yllek]

I’d not heard of the yellow card scheme but I have now been on and reported the issues I’m having.

Although I have variable results which make it difficult to test, my variations have become much worse recently and so can’t purely be blamed on my antibodies (well I don’t think!).

Hopefully the situation with test strips will be resolved quickly.

[Ray46]

I have used coaguchek for 2yrs with normally 0.0-0.2 difference from venous, zero difference from clinic machine. With 311 strips it is 0.0-0.6 (and maybe more) difference from venous, seems it varies from strip to strip.

I don't have any older strips to compare, but I do have the impression (now you've said it) that the stack of strips looks somehow smaller in the tube.

I've been wondering (and I'm not the only one) if this has something to do with the new INRange meter - they say the strips are different and not compatible, but I just don't see them actually producing different strips for the clinic market and the home market, more likely they are the same but packaged and sold (and priced...) differently. However they may have changed something for the INRange and now the changed strips have come through to XS.

I have found this Nice review from last november: nice.org.uk/guidance/dg14/e...

Lots of redacted stuff on coaguchek which is annoying, but section 6.1 bottom of page 3 they say this:

"The CoaguChek XS has been replaced by the CoaguChek INRange meter, which

was launched in the UK in May 2017. The XS version of the device is still supported

by the manufacturer and the testing strips are still available. The CE mark for the XS

version has not changed since diagnostics guidance 14 published. A clinical expert

noted that there have been minor changes to the XS test strips."

I think that last sentence is ambiguous and could mean that the INRange strips have minor changes compared to XS, or it could mean the XS strips have changed, or maybe a bit of both.

[janekins in reply to Ray46]

Thanks Ray46 for that interesting info. That really does make me think that the test strips are slightly different now in size than they used to be!

I'm away at the moment and usually take my INR reading every couple of days to keep it in range but I'm not sure I'm going to get a correct reading so not sure what to do!!

Thanks again

Jane

[tim47]

I've been away from here for quite a while - still utterly exhausted by a run-in with Roche which has still to be fully resolved to my satisfaction.

I am on my fourth machine (I have had APS for over 40 years and long been using self-testing). The latest is a Coaguchek INRange. The hassle I have had with Roche is over the fact that the new machine allegedly needs new test strips. Not knowing this, last year when I got it I used some old ones in it and they took an age to tell me if the results were valid or if the machine might have been damaged (seems they were ok and the machine wasn't damaged)

I have just compared an old strip with a new and can see no physical difference. In fact that is one of the issues, whether there is a difference as they say you must use new strips in new machine. On the container the new says 'CoaguChek XS PT Test PST' on the old 'CoaguChek XS PT Test' (You'll perhaps have to look at that a couple of times!)

If they are differences, and frankly I have doubts as to their claim that there are, then I argued that the packaging should be radically different so as to avoid confusion.

I was promised some free replacements as I had quite a few old style, but they were never forthcoming. One day, when I have the energy I'll re-challenge them. I spoke to some senior people at Roche and I was very disappointed with them and what I saw as their failure to understand our needs. Being told it might take a week to 10 days to get an answer was not a great comfort to someone who tests, on advice of Prof H, every other day. Thankfully I have heparin to resort to. If there were an alternative supplier I'd be trying them out but it seems we are stuck with them

Meantime, when it comes to cross quality checks you really must make sure you are taking and testing the sample closely together, and you can expect a small difference both between venus and fingerprick. I get cross checks done by my haemo clinic, and also a check done between my surgery machine, my machine and a venus sample, each sample within seconds of one another. Up to 0.2 difference between any doesn't worry me but I do recall a time when there were some considerable differences that went unexplained despite additional checks to try and trace the error.

Best wishes to all my old friends out there-feeling my age now and struggle to keep up with things.

Tim

[Jumper99]

I’m also having a similar problem with batch 311. I’ve been using Coaguchek machines for about 14 or 15 years and just had only the second ever variance over 0.2. This one was 0.7 variance to the venous sample and instead of being at the bottom of my range I am way below it.

I checked a batch 311 strip to a 286 one and can honestly say I see no difference.

When I read about the INRange it said the strips for the new machine could be used in the XS machine but that the strips for the XS machine would not work in the new one.

Has anyone heard from Roche as to how their investigation is getting on? Do we just give up our machines or will another batch of strips be ok? I’m too brain fogged to talk to them today.

[janekins]

Thank you all for your replies.

Having been out the country for a week, I took my coaguchek to the surgery to compare test strip readings with their coaguchek. This was done immediately after each other.

Surgery coaguchek (code 263) 4.4

My coaguchek (code 311) 5.5

We then checked to make sure it wasn't my machine that was faulty by putting the surgery chip code in my coaguchek and used one of their test strips - 4.3

So it must be a test strip problem!

I have emailed these results to roche having contacted last week about the problem.

Thanks again

Jane

[KellyInTexas Administrator]

That’s the very best way to handle the investigative work. I’ll do the same.