Search Results

The Excelsior 3ul blood glucose test strips are intended for both professional and home use when used with the Home Diagnostics, Inc. Prestige LX or Prestige IQ blood glucose meters. Excelsior 3ul test strips, when used with the aforementioned meters, will quantitatively measure glucose levels in fresh whole blood, which will provide the user essential information for the proper management of diabetes.

Not Found

This document is a 510(k) clearance letter for a blood glucose test strip, which falls under IVD (In Vitro Diagnostic) devices. For IVD devices, the acceptance criteria and study details are typically presented differently than for AI/ML-based diagnostic software. Instead of metrics like sensitivity, specificity, AUC, or reader studies, IVD device performance is usually evaluated based on accuracy against a reference method (e.g., laboratory analyzer), precision (repeatability, reproducibility), and interference studies.

Based on the provided text, there is no detailed information on acceptance criteria and a study report in the format typically requested for AI/ML devices. The document is primarily an FDA clearance letter and an "Indications For Use" statement. It confirms that the device is "substantially equivalent" to a legally marketed predicate device.

Therefore, many of the requested points for describing acceptance criteria and a study cannot be directly extracted from this document because it is not a study report.

However, I can infer some information based on the context of 510(k) submissions for IVD devices and the provided text:

1. A table of acceptance criteria and the reported device performance:

This information isn't explicitly in the provided text. For blood glucose meters and strips, typical acceptance criteria would involve accuracy metrics (e.g., certain percentage of results falling within specific ranges compared to a lab reference, or mean absolute relative difference - MARD), precision (coefficients of variation), and linearity. The "substantially equivalent" determination implies that the device met performance standards comparable to the predicate device.

2. Sample size used for the test set and the data provenance:

Not provided in this document. Studies for blood glucose meters typically involve a diverse set of patient samples with varying glucose levels.

3. Number of experts used to establish the ground truth for the test set and the qualifications of those experts:

For blood glucose meters, the "ground truth" is typically established by measurements from a central laboratory's reference analyzer, not by expert interpretation.

4. Adjudication method (e.g. 2+1, 3+1, none) for the test set:

Not applicable for this type of IVD device where ground truth is machine-determined (reference lab).

5. If a multi reader multi case (MRMC) comparative effectiveness study was done, If so, what was the effect size of how much human readers improve with AI vs without AI assistance:

Not applicable. This is not an AI/ML device, and there are no "human readers" interpreting results in the way an AI would assist a radiologist.

6. If a standalone (i.e. algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done:

The device (test strips) essentially operates in a "standalone" manner in that the chemical reaction on the strip and the meter's reading algorithm directly provide a result. There isn't an AI "human-in-the-loop" component in the traditional sense for this type of device.

7. The type of ground truth used (expert consensus, pathology, outcomes data, etc):

For blood glucose test strips, the ground truth is established by a laboratory reference method, typically a clinical chemistry analyzer with high accuracy and precision, such as a YSI glucose analyzer.

8. The sample size for the training set:

Not applicable in the context of AI/ML training. For IVD devices, development involves analytical studies (e.g., accuracy, precision, interference) and clinical studies. The "training set" concept doesn't directly apply in the same way.

9. How the ground truth for the training set was established:

Not applicable as there isn't a "training set" in the AI/ML sense. Ground truth for performance evaluation samples would be established via a laboratory reference method.

Summary based on the document:

The provided document is a 510(k) clearance letter for a medical device (blood glucose test strips). It attests to the device's "substantial equivalence" to a legally marketed predicate device. This implies that the device demonstrated comparable performance to the predicate through studies (not detailed in this letter), likely including accuracy against a reference method, precision, and interference studies. However, the specific acceptance criteria, study methodologies, and performance results are not included in the provided text.

Ask a specific question about this device

The Excelsior blood glucose test strips are intended for both professional and home use when used with the Home Diagnostics, Inc. Prestige LX blood glucose meters. Excelsior test strips, when used with the Home Diagnostics, Inc. Prestige LX blood glucose meters, quantitatively measure glucose levels in fresh whole blood, which will provide the user essential information for the proper management of diabetes.

Excelsior blood glucose test strips for use with the Home Diagnostics, Inc. Prestige LX Dood glucose system, and Prestige IQ blood glucose system.

The provided document is an FDA 510(k) clearance letter for a medical device (Excelsior Blood Glucose Test Strips). It states that the device is substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device.

This document does not contain the specific information requested regarding acceptance criteria, device performance studies, sample sizes, ground truth establishment, expert qualifications, or MRMC studies.

FDA 510(k) clearance letters primarily focus on the determination of substantial equivalence, not a detailed breakdown of clinical study results or technical performance metrics used in the study submitted to support the 510(k). The detailed performance data would typically be found within the 510(k) submission itself, which is not provided here.

Therefore, I cannot provide the requested information based on the given text.

Ask a specific question about this device