Use of continuous glucose monitoring and point-of-care glucose testing in hospitalized patients with diabetes mellitus in non-intensive care unit settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

IF 6.1 3区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM Diabetes research and clinical practice Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.diabres.2024.111986
Gabriel Cavalcante Lima Chagas , Larissa Teixeira , Mariana R.C. Clemente , Rafael Cavalcante Lima Chagas , Diego Vinicius Santinelli Pestana , Lorenna Rodrigues Silva Sombra , Bruno B. Lima , Rodolfo J. Galindo , Marconi Abreu
{"title":"Use of continuous glucose monitoring and point-of-care glucose testing in hospitalized patients with diabetes mellitus in non-intensive care unit settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials","authors":"Gabriel Cavalcante Lima Chagas ,&nbsp;Larissa Teixeira ,&nbsp;Mariana R.C. Clemente ,&nbsp;Rafael Cavalcante Lima Chagas ,&nbsp;Diego Vinicius Santinelli Pestana ,&nbsp;Lorenna Rodrigues Silva Sombra ,&nbsp;Bruno B. Lima ,&nbsp;Rodolfo J. Galindo ,&nbsp;Marconi Abreu","doi":"10.1016/j.diabres.2024.111986","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The benefits of using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in hospitalized patients with diabetes remain uncertain. Point-of-care (POC) glucose testing is the standard of care in this setting. We compared the effect of adding CGM to POC testing versus POC testing alone on glycemic outcomes in this population. We have searched the Cochrane Library, Embase, and MEDLINE databases and relevant conferences up to May 2024. We have included six randomized controlled trials (<em>n</em> = 979 patients) comparing CGM plus POC testing to POC testing alone in non-pregnant, non-critically ill hospitalized adults with diabetes. The addition of CGM improved time in range (mean difference [MD] + 7.24 %; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: +5.06, +9.42; P &lt; 0.00001; I<sup>2</sup> = 35 %), reduced time below range &lt; 70 mg/dL (MD: −1.23 %; 95 %CI: −2.27, −0.18; P = 0.02; I<sup>2</sup> = 64 %) and &lt; 54 mg/dL (MD: −0.95 %; 95 %CI: −1.19, −0.70; P &lt; 0.00001; I<sup>2</sup> = 0 %), and time above range &gt; 250 mg/dL (MD: −3.70 %; 95 %CI: −6.10, −1.29; P = 0.003; I<sup>2</sup> = 39 %) compared to POC testing alone. We observed no statistically significant differences in glycemic variability or insulin doses. In non-critically ill, hospitalized adults with diabetes, the addition of CGM to POC testing for insulin dosing resulted in superior glycemic control and reduction of hypoglycemia compared to POC testing alone.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11249,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes research and clinical practice","volume":"220 ","pages":"Article 111986"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes research and clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168822724008969","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The benefits of using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in hospitalized patients with diabetes remain uncertain. Point-of-care (POC) glucose testing is the standard of care in this setting. We compared the effect of adding CGM to POC testing versus POC testing alone on glycemic outcomes in this population. We have searched the Cochrane Library, Embase, and MEDLINE databases and relevant conferences up to May 2024. We have included six randomized controlled trials (n = 979 patients) comparing CGM plus POC testing to POC testing alone in non-pregnant, non-critically ill hospitalized adults with diabetes. The addition of CGM improved time in range (mean difference [MD] + 7.24 %; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: +5.06, +9.42; P < 0.00001; I2 = 35 %), reduced time below range < 70 mg/dL (MD: −1.23 %; 95 %CI: −2.27, −0.18; P = 0.02; I2 = 64 %) and < 54 mg/dL (MD: −0.95 %; 95 %CI: −1.19, −0.70; P < 0.00001; I2 = 0 %), and time above range > 250 mg/dL (MD: −3.70 %; 95 %CI: −6.10, −1.29; P = 0.003; I2 = 39 %) compared to POC testing alone. We observed no statistically significant differences in glycemic variability or insulin doses. In non-critically ill, hospitalized adults with diabetes, the addition of CGM to POC testing for insulin dosing resulted in superior glycemic control and reduction of hypoglycemia compared to POC testing alone.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在非重症监护病房的糖尿病住院患者中使用连续血糖监测和即时血糖检测:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析
在住院糖尿病患者中使用连续血糖监测(CGM)的益处仍不确定。即时(POC)血糖检测是这种情况下的标准护理。在该人群中,我们比较了在POC检测中加入CGM与单独进行POC检测对血糖结局的影响。我们检索了Cochrane Library、Embase和MEDLINE数据库以及截止到2024年5月的相关会议。我们纳入了6项随机对照试验(n = 979例患者),比较CGM + POC检测与单独POC检测在非妊娠、非危重住院糖尿病成人患者中的作用。CGM的加入改善了时间范围(平均差[MD] + 7.24 %;95 %置信区间[CI]: +5.06, +9.42;P 2 = 35 %),减少时间低于范围 2 = 64 %)和 2 = 0 %),和时间范围以上 >  250 mg / dL (MD: -3.70 %;95 % ci: -6.10, -1.29;P = 0.003;I2 = 39 %)与单独POC测试相比。我们观察到血糖变异性和胰岛素剂量没有统计学上的显著差异。在非危重症、住院的成人糖尿病患者中,与单独进行POC试验相比,在POC试验中加入CGM可获得更好的血糖控制和低血糖的减少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Diabetes research and clinical practice
Diabetes research and clinical practice 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
3.90%
发文量
862
审稿时长
32 days
期刊介绍: Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice is an international journal for health-care providers and clinically oriented researchers that publishes high-quality original research articles and expert reviews in diabetes and related areas. The role of the journal is to provide a venue for dissemination of knowledge and discussion of topics related to diabetes clinical research and patient care. Topics of focus include translational science, genetics, immunology, nutrition, psychosocial research, epidemiology, prevention, socio-economic research, complications, new treatments, technologies and therapy.
期刊最新文献
Achievement of guideline targets among people with type 2 diabetes with eASCVD and high risk of ASCVD in the UAE: Results of the PACT-MEA-UAE cohort Acute effects of a single bout structured resistance and combined exercise on blood glucose profile during exercise in patients with type 2 diabetes and healthy adults: A randomized crossover study Effects of exercise training and physical activity advice on HbA1c in people with type 2 diabetes: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. The effect of multidisciplinary team and experience-based co-design on the care of older adult patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomized controlled trial Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1