Accuracy, Utilization, and Effectiveness Comparisons of Different Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems

Accuracy and feature sets of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems may influence device utilization and outcomes. We compared clinical trial accuracy and real-world utilization and effectiveness of two different CGM systems. Separately conducted accuracy studies of a fifth-generation and a six...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diabetes technology & therapeutics 2019-03, Vol.21 (3), p.128-132
Hauptverfasser: Welsh, John B, Gao, Peggy, Derdzinski, Mark, Puhr, Sarah, Johnson, Terri Kang, Walker, Tomas C, Graham, Claudia
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Accuracy and feature sets of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems may influence device utilization and outcomes. We compared clinical trial accuracy and real-world utilization and effectiveness of two different CGM systems. Separately conducted accuracy studies of a fifth-generation and a sixth-generation CGM system involved 50 and 159 adults, respectively. For between-system performance comparisons, propensity score methods were utilized to balance cohort characteristics. Real-world outcomes were assessed in 10,000 anonymized patients who had switched from the fifth-generation to the sixth-generation system and had used connected mobile devices to upload data from both systems, allowing pairwise comparisons of device utilization and glucose concentration distributions. Propensity score-adjusted mean absolute relative differences for the fifth- and sixth-generation systems were 9.0% and 9.9%, and the percentages of values within ±20%/20 mg/dL were 93.1% and 92.5%, respectively. The sixth-generation system, but not the fifth-generation system, met accuracy criteria for interoperable CGM systems. Both systems had high real-world utilization rates (93.8% and 95.3% in the fifth- and sixth-generation systems, respectively). Use of the sixth-generation system was associated with fewer glucose values
ISSN:1520-9156
1557-8593
DOI:10.1089/dia.2018.0374