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

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, w...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diabetes care 2021-07, Vol.44 (7), p.1641-1646
Hauptverfasser: Davis, Georgia M., Spanakis, Elias K., Migdal, Alexandra L., Singh, Lakshmi G., Albury, Bonnie, Urrutia, Maria Agustina, Zamudio-Coronado, K. Walkiria, Scott, William H., Doerfler, Rebecca, Lizama, Sergio, Satyarengga, Medha, Munir, Kashif, Galindo, Rodolfo J., Vellanki, Priyathama, Cardona, Saumeth, Pasquel, Francisco J., Peng, Limin, Umpierrez, Guillermo E.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung: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 (
ISSN:0149-5992
1935-5548
DOI:10.2337/dc20-2856