Validating the Use of Continuous Glucose Monitors With Nondiabetic Recreational Runners.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 PHYSIOLOGY
Lesley J Mason,Timothy Hartwig,David Greene
{"title":"Validating the Use of Continuous Glucose Monitors With Nondiabetic Recreational Runners.","authors":"Lesley J Mason,Timothy Hartwig,David Greene","doi":"10.1123/ijspp.2024-0102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE\r\nContinuous glucose monitors (CGMs) are becoming increasingly popular among endurance athletes despite unconfirmed accuracy. We assessed the concurrent validity of the FreeStyle Libre 2 worn on 2 different sites at rest, during steady-state running, and postprandial.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nThirteen nondiabetic, well-trained recreational runners (age = 40 [8] y, maximal aerobic oxygen consumption = 46.1 [6.4] mL·kg-1·min-1) wore a CGM on the upper arm and chest while treadmill running for 30, 60, and 90 minutes at intensities corresponding to 50%, 60%, and 70% of maximal aerobic oxygen consumption, respectively. Glucose was measured by manually scanning CGMs and obtaining a finger-prick capillary blood glucose sample. Mean absolute relative difference, time in range, and continuous glucose Clarke error grid analysis were used to compare paired CGM and blood glucose readings.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nAcross all intensities of steady-state running, we found a mean absolute relative difference of 13.8 (10.9) for the arm and 11.4 (9.0) for the chest. The coefficient of variation exceeded 70%. Approximately 47% of arm and 50% of chest paired glucose measurements had an absolute difference ≤10%. Continuous glucose Clarke error grid analysis indicated 99.8% (arm) and 99.6% (chest) CGM data fell in clinically acceptable zones A and B. Time-in-range analysis showed reduced accuracy at lower glucose levels. However, CGMs accurately detected trends in mean glucose readings over time.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nCGMs are not valid for point glucose monitoring but appear to be valid for monitoring glucose trends during steady-state exercise. Accuracy is similar for arm and chest. Further research is needed to determine whether CGMs can detect important events such as hypoglycemia during exercise.","PeriodicalId":14295,"journal":{"name":"International journal of sports physiology and performance","volume":"29 1","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of sports physiology and performance","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2024-0102","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PURPOSE Continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) are becoming increasingly popular among endurance athletes despite unconfirmed accuracy. We assessed the concurrent validity of the FreeStyle Libre 2 worn on 2 different sites at rest, during steady-state running, and postprandial. METHODS Thirteen nondiabetic, well-trained recreational runners (age = 40 [8] y, maximal aerobic oxygen consumption = 46.1 [6.4] mL·kg-1·min-1) wore a CGM on the upper arm and chest while treadmill running for 30, 60, and 90 minutes at intensities corresponding to 50%, 60%, and 70% of maximal aerobic oxygen consumption, respectively. Glucose was measured by manually scanning CGMs and obtaining a finger-prick capillary blood glucose sample. Mean absolute relative difference, time in range, and continuous glucose Clarke error grid analysis were used to compare paired CGM and blood glucose readings. RESULTS Across all intensities of steady-state running, we found a mean absolute relative difference of 13.8 (10.9) for the arm and 11.4 (9.0) for the chest. The coefficient of variation exceeded 70%. Approximately 47% of arm and 50% of chest paired glucose measurements had an absolute difference ≤10%. Continuous glucose Clarke error grid analysis indicated 99.8% (arm) and 99.6% (chest) CGM data fell in clinically acceptable zones A and B. Time-in-range analysis showed reduced accuracy at lower glucose levels. However, CGMs accurately detected trends in mean glucose readings over time. CONCLUSIONS CGMs are not valid for point glucose monitoring but appear to be valid for monitoring glucose trends during steady-state exercise. Accuracy is similar for arm and chest. Further research is needed to determine whether CGMs can detect important events such as hypoglycemia during exercise.
验证连续式葡萄糖监测仪在非糖尿病休闲跑步者中的使用。
目的连续血糖监测仪(CGM)在耐力运动员中越来越受欢迎,尽管其准确性尚未得到证实。方法十三名非糖尿病、训练有素的休闲跑步者(年龄 = 40 [8] 岁,最大有氧耗氧量 = 46.1 [6.4] mL-kg-1-min-1)在跑步机上跑步 30、60 和 90 分钟时,分别在上臂和胸部佩戴 CGM,跑步强度分别为最大有氧耗氧量的 50%、60% 和 70%。葡萄糖的测量是通过手动扫描 CGM 和指尖采集毛细血管血糖样本进行的。结果在所有强度的稳态跑步中,我们发现手臂和胸部的平均绝对相对差值分别为 13.8 (10.9)和 11.4 (9.0)。变异系数超过 70%。约 47% 的手臂和 50% 的胸部配对血糖测量值的绝对差异≤10%。连续葡萄糖克拉克误差网格分析表明,99.8%(手臂)和 99.6%(胸部)的 CGM 数据位于临床可接受的 A 区和 B 区。结论CGM 不能用于点血糖监测,但似乎可用于监测稳态运动期间的血糖趋势。手臂和胸部的准确性相似。要确定 CGM 是否能检测到运动中的低血糖等重要事件,还需要进一步的研究。
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
5.80
自引率
12.10%
发文量
199
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance (IJSPP) focuses on sport physiology and performance and is dedicated to advancing the knowledge of sport and exercise physiologists, sport-performance researchers, and other sport scientists. The journal publishes authoritative peer-reviewed research in sport physiology and related disciplines, with an emphasis on work having direct practical applications in enhancing sport performance in sport physiology and related disciplines. IJSPP publishes 10 issues per year: January, February, March, April, May, July, August, September, October, and November.
×
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