Impact of Carbohydrate Counting Error on Glycemic Control in Open-Loop Management of Type 1 Diabetes: Quantitative Assessment Through an In Silico Trial
Background: In the management of type 1 diabetes (T1D), systematic and random errors in carb-counting can have an adverse effect on glycemic control. In this study, we performed an in silico trial aiming at quantifying the impact of different levels of carb-counting error on glycemic control. Method...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of diabetes science and technology 2022-11, Vol.16 (6), p.1541-1549 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background:
In the management of type 1 diabetes (T1D), systematic and random errors in carb-counting can have an adverse effect on glycemic control. In this study, we performed an in silico trial aiming at quantifying the impact of different levels of carb-counting error on glycemic control.
Methods:
The T1D patient decision simulator was used to simulate 7-day glycemic profiles of 100 adults using open-loop therapy. The simulation was repeated for different values of systematic and random carb-counting errors, generated with Gaussian distribution varying the error mean from -10% to +10% and standard deviation (SD) from 0% to 50%. The effect of the error was evaluated by computing the difference of time inside (∆TIR), above (∆TAR) and below (∆TBR) the target glycemic range (70-180mg/dl) compared to the reference case, that is, absence of error. Finally, 3 linear regression models were developed to mathematically describe how error mean and SD variations result in ∆TIR, ∆TAR, and ∆TBR changes.
Results:
Random errors globally deteriorate the glycemic control; systematic underestimations lead to, on average, up to 5.2% more TAR than the reference case, while systematic overestimation results in up to 0.8% more TBR. The different time in range metrics were linearly related with error mean and SD (R2>0.95), with slopes of
β
M
E
A
N
=
0
.
21
,
β
S
D
=
−
0
.
07
for ∆TIR,
β
M
E
A
N
=
−
0
.
25
,
β
S
D
=
+
0
.
06
for ∆TAR, and
β
M
E
A
N
=
0
.
05
,
β
S
D
=
+
0
.
01
for ∆TBR.
Conclusions:
The quantification of carb-counting error impact performed in this work may be useful understanding causes of glycemic variability and the impact of possible therapy adjustments or behavior changes in different glucose metrics. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1932-2968 1932-2968 1932-3107 |
DOI: | 10.1177/19322968211012392 |