Search Results

TeleRPM Gen2 Blood Glucose Monitoring System is comprised of the TeleRPM Gen2 Blood Glucose Meter and the TeleRPM Blood Glucose Test Strips. TeleRPM Gen2 Blood Glucose Monitoring System is intended to quantitatively measure the glucose concentration in fresh capillary whole blood samples drawn from the fingertips. It is intended for use by persons with diabetes at home as an aid to monitor the effectiveness of diabetes control. It is not intended for neonatal use or for the diagnosis of or screening for diabetes. This system is intended for self-testing outside the body (in vitro diagnostic use), and should only be used by a single person and should not be shared.

TeleRPM Gen2 Blood Glucose Monitoring System consists of TeleRPM Gen2 Blood Glucose Meter and the TeleRPM Blood Glucose Test Strips.

TeleRPM Control Solution, TeleRPM Lancing Device, TeleRPM Lancets are required for use but not included in meter box or test strips box and should be purchased separately. The TeleRPM Control Solution is for use with the above meter and test strip as a quality control check to verify that the meter and test strip are working together properly, and that the test is performing correctly. TeleRPM Lancing Device and TeleRPM Lancets are used for puncturing fingertip and then user can perform qlucose test with blood sample.

TeleRPM Gen2 Blood Glucose Monitoring System is designed to quantitatively measure the glucose concentration in fresh capillary whole blood from the fingertip. The glucose measurement is achieved by using the amperometric detection method. The test is based on measurement of electrical current caused by the reaction of the glucose with the reagents on the electrode of the test strip. The blood sample is pulled into the tip of the test strip through capillary action. Glucose in the sample reacts with glucose oxidase and the mediator. Electrons are generated, producing a current that is positive correlation to the glucose concentration in the sample. After the reaction time, the glucose concentration value is reported in plasma equivalents and is displayed on meter screen.

The provided text primarily focuses on the substantial equivalence determination for the TeleRPM Gen2 Blood Glucose Monitoring System to a predicate device. While it mentions the general types of studies conducted (robustness, precision, linearity, user evaluation, interference, stability, flex studies, software, cybersecurity controls, and a clinical usability study), it does not provide detailed acceptance criteria or numerical performance data as requested for several of your points.

Based on the information available:

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

The document broadly states that the device "met the FDA SMBG OTC Guidance and industry standards" and that "these devices performed as intended and met associated guidance documents and industry standards." Specific numerical acceptance criteria and reported device performance for each study (precision, linearity, interference, etc.) are not detailed in the provided summary. For the user evaluation (clinical study), it states "the clinical performance met the FDA SMBG OTC Guidance."

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

• User Evaluation (Clinical Study): The document mentions "All participants" were able to understand the labeling, use the system, and interpret results. However, the exact sample size for the clinical usability evaluation is not specified.
• Provenance: Not explicitly stated, but the company is located in Zhongshan, Guangdong, China. The testing location isn't specified, but it's reasonable to infer the studies were conducted by or on behalf of the manufacturer, likely in China or a region where they operate.

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

• This information is not provided in the summary. For a blood glucose monitoring system, the "ground truth" for glucose levels would typically be established by a laboratory reference method, not by experts adjudicating results.
• For the usability evaluation, the "ground truth" is about successful interaction with the device, which is assessed through user performance and observation, not expert consensus on a measurement.

4. Adjudication method for the test set:

• This information is not provided. For analytical performance, laboratory reference methods are used, not typically expert adjudication. For usability, the success of user interaction is observed and recorded.

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:

• This is not applicable to this device. A "Blood Glucose Monitoring System" measures blood glucose; it is not an AI-assisted diagnostic imaging device that involves "human readers." Therefore, an MRMC study comparing human readers with and without AI assistance was not performed.

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

• The device performs a direct measurement of blood glucose. Its core function is a "standalone" algorithmic interpretation of the electrochemical reaction to display a glucose reading. This is its fundamental operation. There isn't a separate "human-in-the-loop" component in the direct glucose measurement process that would necessitate a distinction here.

7. The type of ground truth used:

• For analytical performance (precision, linearity, interference), the ground truth for blood glucose concentration would be established using a laboratory reference method (e.g., YSI analyzer). This is standard for blood glucose meter validation.
• For the usability evaluation, the "ground truth" assesses whether users can successfully operate the device and interpret results, which is based on direct observation and participant feedback.

8. The sample size for the training set:

• This device is a physical blood glucose meter and test strips relying on electrochemical principles, not a machine learning or AI model that requires a "training set" in the computational sense. Therefore, the concept of a training set sample size is not applicable here.

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

• As above, the concept of a training set is not applicable.

Ask a specific question about this device