Continuous Glucose Monitor Accuracy for Diabetes Management in Hospitalized Children

IF 14.8 1区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Diabetes Care Pub Date : 2024-12-02 DOI:10.2337/dc24-1562
Neha Garg, Kamryn Lewis, Perrin C. White, Soumya Adhikari
{"title":"Continuous Glucose Monitor Accuracy for Diabetes Management in Hospitalized Children","authors":"Neha Garg, Kamryn Lewis, Perrin C. White, Soumya Adhikari","doi":"10.2337/dc24-1562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE The adoption of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) in inpatient settings in the pediatric population has been slow because of a scarcity of data on their reliability in hospitalized children. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the accuracy of the Dexcom G6 CGM system in pediatric patients with diabetes admitted to our academic children’s hospital from March 2018 to September 2023. We cross-referenced the Dexcom Clarity database against an internal database of inpatient admissions to identify all children with CGM data admitted to the hospital. We recorded sensor glucose readings from Clarity and values for point-of-care (POC) glucose, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and pH from the electronic medical record. CGM accuracy and clinical reliability were measured by mean absolute relative difference (MARD) and Clarke error grid (CEG) analyses. RESULTS There were 3,200 admissions of children with diabetes in this period, of which 277 (from 202 patients age 2–18 years) had associated CGM data. Paired CGM and POC measurements (n = 2,904) were compared, resulting in an MARD of 15.9%, with 96.6% of the values in zones A and B of the CEG analysis. Approximately 62% of paired values fell within a 15% or 15 mg/dL difference, whichever was larger (15%/15 mg/dL range), 74% within 20%/20, and 88% within 30%/30. Serum pH, sodium, and BUN had no impact on CGM values or absolute relative difference in linear regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS CGMs demonstrated acceptable accuracy in hospitalized children with diabetes. CGM data should be integrated into hospital electronic records to optimize management.","PeriodicalId":11140,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes Care","volume":"204 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":14.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2337/dc24-1562","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVE The adoption of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) in inpatient settings in the pediatric population has been slow because of a scarcity of data on their reliability in hospitalized children. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the accuracy of the Dexcom G6 CGM system in pediatric patients with diabetes admitted to our academic children’s hospital from March 2018 to September 2023. We cross-referenced the Dexcom Clarity database against an internal database of inpatient admissions to identify all children with CGM data admitted to the hospital. We recorded sensor glucose readings from Clarity and values for point-of-care (POC) glucose, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and pH from the electronic medical record. CGM accuracy and clinical reliability were measured by mean absolute relative difference (MARD) and Clarke error grid (CEG) analyses. RESULTS There were 3,200 admissions of children with diabetes in this period, of which 277 (from 202 patients age 2–18 years) had associated CGM data. Paired CGM and POC measurements (n = 2,904) were compared, resulting in an MARD of 15.9%, with 96.6% of the values in zones A and B of the CEG analysis. Approximately 62% of paired values fell within a 15% or 15 mg/dL difference, whichever was larger (15%/15 mg/dL range), 74% within 20%/20, and 88% within 30%/30. Serum pH, sodium, and BUN had no impact on CGM values or absolute relative difference in linear regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS CGMs demonstrated acceptable accuracy in hospitalized children with diabetes. CGM data should be integrated into hospital electronic records to optimize management.
连续血糖监测在住院儿童糖尿病管理中的准确性
目的:连续血糖监测仪(cgm)在儿科住院患者中的应用进展缓慢,因为缺乏关于其在住院儿童中的可靠性的数据。研究设计与方法回顾性评价Dexcom G6 CGM系统对2018年3月至2023年9月在我院学术儿童医院就诊的糖尿病患儿的准确性。我们将Dexcom Clarity数据库与住院患者的内部数据库进行交叉对照,以确定所有住院的具有CGM数据的儿童。我们记录了来自Clarity的传感器葡萄糖读数,以及来自电子病历的即时护理(POC)葡萄糖、血尿素氮(BUN)和pH值。采用平均绝对相对差(MARD)和Clarke误差网格(CEG)分析来衡量CGM的准确性和临床可靠性。结果:在此期间有3200例儿童糖尿病入院,其中277例(来自202例2-18岁的患者)有相关的CGM数据。配对CGM和POC测量值(n = 2904)进行比较,得出MARD为15.9%,其中96.6%的值在CEG分析的A区和B区。大约62%的配对值在15%或15mg /dL之间(15%/ 15mg /dL范围内),74%在20%/20范围内,88%在30%/30范围内。在线性回归分析中,血清pH、钠和BUN对CGM值没有影响,也没有绝对相对差异。结论:cgm对住院糖尿病患儿具有可接受的准确性。CGM数据应纳入医院电子档案,优化管理。
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
Diabetes Care
Diabetes Care 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
27.80
自引率
4.90%
发文量
449
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The journal's overarching mission can be captured by the simple word "Care," reflecting its commitment to enhancing patient well-being. Diabetes Care aims to support better patient care by addressing the comprehensive needs of healthcare professionals dedicated to managing diabetes. Diabetes Care serves as a valuable resource for healthcare practitioners, aiming to advance knowledge, foster research, and improve diabetes management. The journal publishes original research across various categories, including Clinical Care, Education, Nutrition, Psychosocial Research, Epidemiology, Health Services Research, Emerging Treatments and Technologies, Pathophysiology, Complications, and Cardiovascular and Metabolic Risk. Additionally, Diabetes Care features ADA statements, consensus reports, review articles, letters to the editor, and health/medical news, appealing to a diverse audience of physicians, researchers, psychologists, educators, and other healthcare professionals.
×
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