Possible Relationship between the Deteriorated Accuracy of Intermittent-Scanning Continuous Glucose Monitoring Device and the Contact Dermatitis: Post-hoc analysis of the ISCHIA Study.

Q3 Medicine
Masao Toyoda, Takashi Murata, Yushi Hirota, Kiminori Hosoda, Ken Kato, Kunichi Kouyama, Ryuji Kouyama, Akio Kuroda, Yuka Matoba, Munehide Matsuhisa, Shu Meguro, Junnosuke Miura, Kunihiro Nishimura, Akira Shimada, Shota Suzuki, Atsuhito Tone, Naoki Sakane
{"title":"Possible Relationship between the Deteriorated Accuracy of Intermittent-Scanning Continuous Glucose Monitoring Device and the Contact Dermatitis: Post-hoc analysis of the ISCHIA Study.","authors":"Masao Toyoda,&nbsp;Takashi Murata,&nbsp;Yushi Hirota,&nbsp;Kiminori Hosoda,&nbsp;Ken Kato,&nbsp;Kunichi Kouyama,&nbsp;Ryuji Kouyama,&nbsp;Akio Kuroda,&nbsp;Yuka Matoba,&nbsp;Munehide Matsuhisa,&nbsp;Shu Meguro,&nbsp;Junnosuke Miura,&nbsp;Kunihiro Nishimura,&nbsp;Akira Shimada,&nbsp;Shota Suzuki,&nbsp;Atsuhito Tone,&nbsp;Naoki Sakane","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We previously reported the mean average relative difference (MARD) of the sensor glucose (SG) of the first-generation FreeStyle Libre with the original algorithm, an intermittent scanning continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) device, was 15.6% in the Effect of Intermittent-Scanning Continuous Glucose Monitoring to Glycemic Control Including Hypoglycemia and Quality of Life of Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Study (ISCHIA Study). In the present study, we aimed to further analyze its accuracy in detail by conducting a post-hoc analysis of the study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The ISCHIA Study was a multicenter, randomized, cross-over trial to assess the efficacy of isCGM. The SG levels of isCGM and the measured capillary blood glucose (BG) levels of 91 participants were used for the analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Bland-Altman analysis showed bias of -13.0 mg/dl when the SG levels were compared to the BG levels, however no proportional bias was observed (<i>r</i> = 0.085). MARD of the participants without and with contact dermatitis were 15.0 ± 6.0% and 27.4 ± 21.4% (<i>P</i> = 0.001), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was negative bias in the SG levels of isCGM compared to the BG levels. There is a possibility that the complication of the contact dermatitis during isCGM use may be related with deteriorated accuracy of the SG levels.</p>","PeriodicalId":38819,"journal":{"name":"Tokai Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tokai Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: We previously reported the mean average relative difference (MARD) of the sensor glucose (SG) of the first-generation FreeStyle Libre with the original algorithm, an intermittent scanning continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) device, was 15.6% in the Effect of Intermittent-Scanning Continuous Glucose Monitoring to Glycemic Control Including Hypoglycemia and Quality of Life of Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Study (ISCHIA Study). In the present study, we aimed to further analyze its accuracy in detail by conducting a post-hoc analysis of the study.

Methods: The ISCHIA Study was a multicenter, randomized, cross-over trial to assess the efficacy of isCGM. The SG levels of isCGM and the measured capillary blood glucose (BG) levels of 91 participants were used for the analysis.

Results: Bland-Altman analysis showed bias of -13.0 mg/dl when the SG levels were compared to the BG levels, however no proportional bias was observed (r = 0.085). MARD of the participants without and with contact dermatitis were 15.0 ± 6.0% and 27.4 ± 21.4% (P = 0.001), respectively.

Conclusion: There was negative bias in the SG levels of isCGM compared to the BG levels. There is a possibility that the complication of the contact dermatitis during isCGM use may be related with deteriorated accuracy of the SG levels.

间歇性扫描连续血糖监测设备准确度下降与接触性皮炎的可能关系:ISCHIA研究的事后分析。
目的:我们之前报道了第一代FreeStyle Libre传感器血糖(SG)与原始算法间歇扫描连续血糖监测(isCGM)装置在间歇扫描连续血糖监测对1型糖尿病患者血糖控制包括低血糖和生活质量的影响研究(ISCHIA研究)中的平均相对差(MARD)为15.6%。在本研究中,我们旨在通过对研究进行事后分析,进一步详细分析其准确性。方法:ISCHIA研究是一项多中心、随机、交叉试验,旨在评估isCGM的疗效。91名参与者的isCGM的SG水平和测量的毛细血管血糖(BG)水平被用于分析。结果:Bland-Altman分析显示,SG水平与BG水平比较时偏差为-13.0 mg/dl,但未观察到比例偏差(r = 0.085)。无接触性皮炎和有接触性皮炎的MARD分别为15.0±6.0%和27.4±21.4% (P = 0.001)。结论:与BG水平相比,isCGM的SG水平存在负偏倚。使用isCGM期间的接触性皮炎并发症可能与SG水平准确性下降有关。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: The Tokai Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, also referred to as Tokai Journal, is an official quarterly publication of the Tokai Medical Association. Tokai Journal publishes original articles that deal with issues of clinical, experimental, socioeconomic, cultural and/or historical importance to medical science and related fields. Manuscripts may be submitted as full-length Original Articles or Brief Communications. Tokai Journal also publishes reviews and symposium proceedings. Articles accepted for publication in Tokai Journal cannot be reproduced elsewhere without written permission from the Tokai Medical Association. In addition, Tokai Journal will not be held responsible for the opinions of the authors expressed in the published articles.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信