Accuracy of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Admitted to Hospital: A Real-World Multicenter Observational Study.

IF 5.7 2区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM Diabetes technology & therapeutics Pub Date : 2025-01-13 DOI:10.1089/dia.2024.0604
Ray Wang, Mervyn Kyi, Brintha Krishnamoorthi, Jason Tjahyadi, Ailie Connell, Cherie Chiang, Debra Renouf, Rahul Barmanray, Spiros Fourlanos
{"title":"Accuracy of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Admitted to Hospital: A Real-World Multicenter Observational Study.","authors":"Ray Wang, Mervyn Kyi, Brintha Krishnamoorthi, Jason Tjahyadi, Ailie Connell, Cherie Chiang, Debra Renouf, Rahul Barmanray, Spiros Fourlanos","doi":"10.1089/dia.2024.0604","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) use in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) is revolutionizing management. Use of CGM in hospital is poised to transform care, however routine use is not currently recommended due to lack of accuracy validation in acute care, including in people with T1D. We aimed to determine real-world CGM accuracy in hospitalized adults with T1D. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> In this multicenter retrospective observational study, we compared CGM interstitial fluid glucose with reference blood glucose (capillary/whole-blood point-of-care [POC], blood gas [GAS]) in adults with T1D requiring multiday admissions during 2020-2023 across three health services in Australia. Patients requiring dialysis or admitted under pediatric/obstetric/palliative care/psychiatry units were excluded. CGM accuracy was assessed by comparison with time-matched (±5 min) reference glucose measures, utilizing median absolute relative difference (ARD), mean ARD (MARD), and consensus error grid (CEG) analysis. <b><i>Results:</i></b> In total, 2,199 CGM-reference glucose pairs from 214 admissions (146 patients) were assessed. Overall, mean (SD) ARD was 12.8% (13.1) and median (IQR) ARD was 9.4% (3.7-17.7). MARD for CGM-POC pairs was 12.3%; MARD for CGM-GAS pairs was 14.3%. In CEG analysis, 99.3% of glucose pairs were within zones A/B. Accuracy was lower in critical care compared with noncritical care wards (MARD 16.1% vs. 12.0%, <i>P</i> < 0.001). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> In this real-world multicenter study, CGM glucose agreed well with reference blood glucose, suggesting modern CGM devices could be safely and effectively used in hospitalized adults with T1D. Further prospective studies of CGM accuracy with newer generation devices across different scenarios will further elucidate inpatient CGM accuracy and safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":11159,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes technology & therapeutics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes technology & therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2024.0604","RegionNum":2,"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

Introduction: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) use in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) is revolutionizing management. Use of CGM in hospital is poised to transform care, however routine use is not currently recommended due to lack of accuracy validation in acute care, including in people with T1D. We aimed to determine real-world CGM accuracy in hospitalized adults with T1D. Materials and Methods: In this multicenter retrospective observational study, we compared CGM interstitial fluid glucose with reference blood glucose (capillary/whole-blood point-of-care [POC], blood gas [GAS]) in adults with T1D requiring multiday admissions during 2020-2023 across three health services in Australia. Patients requiring dialysis or admitted under pediatric/obstetric/palliative care/psychiatry units were excluded. CGM accuracy was assessed by comparison with time-matched (±5 min) reference glucose measures, utilizing median absolute relative difference (ARD), mean ARD (MARD), and consensus error grid (CEG) analysis. Results: In total, 2,199 CGM-reference glucose pairs from 214 admissions (146 patients) were assessed. Overall, mean (SD) ARD was 12.8% (13.1) and median (IQR) ARD was 9.4% (3.7-17.7). MARD for CGM-POC pairs was 12.3%; MARD for CGM-GAS pairs was 14.3%. In CEG analysis, 99.3% of glucose pairs were within zones A/B. Accuracy was lower in critical care compared with noncritical care wards (MARD 16.1% vs. 12.0%, P < 0.001). Conclusions: In this real-world multicenter study, CGM glucose agreed well with reference blood glucose, suggesting modern CGM devices could be safely and effectively used in hospitalized adults with T1D. Further prospective studies of CGM accuracy with newer generation devices across different scenarios will further elucidate inpatient CGM accuracy and safety.

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
住院成人1型糖尿病患者连续血糖监测的准确性:一项真实世界多中心观察性研究
连续血糖监测(CGM)在1型糖尿病(T1D)患者中的应用是革命性的管理。在医院使用CGM有望改变护理,但由于在急性护理(包括T1D患者)中缺乏准确性验证,目前不推荐常规使用。我们的目的是确定住院成人T1D患者真实世界CGM的准确性。材料和方法:在这项多中心回顾性观察性研究中,我们比较了澳大利亚2020-2023年期间需要多天住院治疗的T1D成人的CGM间质液血糖与参考血糖(毛细血管/全血护理点[POC],血气[gas])。需要透析或在儿科/产科/姑息治疗/精神科住院的患者被排除在外。采用中位数绝对相对差(ARD)、平均相对差(MARD)和一致误差网格(CEG)分析,通过与时间匹配(±5分钟)参考血糖测量值的比较来评估CGM的准确性。结果:共对214例入院患者(146例)的2199对cgm -参考血糖进行了评估。总体而言,平均(SD) ARD为12.8%(13.1),中位(IQR) ARD为9.4%(3.7-17.7)。MARD CGM-POC对12.3%;CGM-GAS配对的MARD为14.3%。在CEG分析中,99.3%的葡萄糖对位于A/B区。与非重症监护病房相比,重症监护病房的准确性较低(MARD为16.1%比12.0%,P < 0.001)。结论:在这项真实世界的多中心研究中,CGM血糖与参考血糖吻合良好,提示现代CGM装置可以安全有效地用于住院的成年T1D患者。对新一代装置在不同情况下CGM准确性的进一步前瞻性研究将进一步阐明住院CGM的准确性和安全性。
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
相关文献
Cyber Risk: Hyperconnectivity and the Political Economy of Uncertainty
IF 0 SSRN Electronic JournalPub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.4280577
T. Stevens
The Role of Cyber Threat Intelligence Sharing in the Metaverse
IF 0 IEEE Internet of Things MagazinePub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI: 10.1109/IOTM.002.2200003
Kealan Dunnett, S. Pal, Z. Jadidi, R. Jurdak
来源期刊
Diabetes technology & therapeutics
Diabetes technology & therapeutics 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
14.80%
发文量
145
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics is the only peer-reviewed journal providing healthcare professionals with information on new devices, drugs, drug delivery systems, and software for managing patients with diabetes. This leading international journal delivers practical information and comprehensive coverage of cutting-edge technologies and therapeutics in the field, and each issue highlights new pharmacological and device developments to optimize patient care.
期刊最新文献
The Association of Time-in-Range and Time-in-Tight-Range with Retinopathy Progression in the Virtual Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Continuous Glucose Monitoring Dataset. A Call-to-Action to Eliminate Barriers to Accessing Automated Insulin Delivery Systems for People with Type 1 Diabetes. FRONTIER-FreeStyle Libre System Use in Ontario Among People with Diabetes Mellitus in the IC/ES Database-Evidence from Real-World Practice: Patients Using Intensive Insulin. Omnipod5 Real-World Data from the First Pediatric Users' Universal Coverage Under the UK National Health Service. Correlation Between A1c and Continuous Glucose Monitor Time in Range in a Cohort of Pediatric Patients with Type 1 Diabetes.
×
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