Accuracy of Dexcom G6 Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Non–Critically Ill Hospitalized Patients With Diabetes

Author:

Davis Georgia M.1,Spanakis Elias K.23ORCID,Migdal Alexandra L.1,Singh Lakshmi G.2,Albury Bonnie1,Urrutia Maria Agustina1,Zamudio-Coronado K. Walkiria1,Scott William H.2,Doerfler Rebecca3,Lizama Sergio3,Satyarengga Medha3,Munir Kashif3,Galindo Rodolfo J.1ORCID,Vellanki Priyathama1,Cardona Saumeth1,Pasquel Francisco J.1ORCID,Peng Limin4,Umpierrez Guillermo E.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Lipids, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA

2. Division of Endocrinology, Baltimore Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Baltimore, MD

3. Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Nutrition, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD

4. Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Advances in continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) have transformed ambulatory diabetes management. Until recently, inpatient use of CGM has remained investigational, with limited data on its accuracy in the hospital setting. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS To analyze the accuracy of Dexcom G6, we compared retrospective matched-pair CGM and capillary point-of-care (POC) glucose data from three inpatient CGM studies (two interventional and one observational) in general medicine and surgery patients with diabetes treated with insulin. Analysis of accuracy metrics included mean absolute relative difference (MARD), median absolute relative difference (ARD), and proportion of CGM values within 15, 20, and 30% or 15, 20, and 30 mg/dL of POC reference values for blood glucose >100 mg/dL or ≤100 mg/dL, respectively (% 15/15, % 20/20, % 30/30). Clinical reliability was assessed with Clarke error grid (CEG) analyses. RESULTS A total of 218 patients were included (96% with type 2 diabetes) with a mean age of 60.6 ± 12 years. The overall MARD (n = 4,067 matched glucose pairs) was 12.8%, and median ARD was 10.1% (interquartile range 4.6, 17.6]. The proportions of readings meeting % 15/15, % 20/20, and % 30/30 criteria were 68.7, 81.7, and 93.8%, respectively. CEG analysis showed 98.7% of all values in zones A and B. MARD and median ARD were higher in the case of hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) and severe anemia (hemoglobin <7 g/dL). CONCLUSIONS Our results indicate that CGM technology is a reliable tool for hospital use and may help improve glucose monitoring in non–critically ill hospitalized patients with diabetes.

Publisher

American Diabetes Association

Subject

Advanced and Specialized Nursing,Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism,Internal Medicine

Cited by 66 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3