Medizinische Universität Graz Austria/Österreich - Forschungsportal - Medical University of Graz
Gewählte Publikation:
SHR Neuro Krebs Kardio Lipid Stoffw Microb
Moser, O; Pandis, M; Aberer, F; Kojzar, H; Hochfellner, D; Elsayed, H; Motschnig, M; Augustin, T; Kreuzer, P; Pieber, TR; Sourij, H; Mader, JK.
A head-to-head comparison of personal and professional continuous glucose monitoring systems in people with type 1 diabetes: Hypoglycaemia remains the weak spot.
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2019; 21(4):1043-1048
Doi: 10.1111/dom.13598
[OPEN ACCESS]
Web of Science
PubMed
FullText
FullText_MUG
- Führende Autor*innen der Med Uni Graz
- Moser Othmar
- Pandis Marlene
- Sourij Harald
- Co-Autor*innen der Med Uni Graz
- Aberer Felix
- Elsayed Hesham
- Hochfellner Daniel
- Kojzar Harald
- Mader Julia
- Pieber Thomas
- Wimmer Melanie
- Altmetrics:
- Dimensions Citations:
- Plum Analytics:
- Scite (citation analytics):
- Abstract:
- To compare the performance of a professional continuous glucose monitoring (proCGM) and a personal continuous glucose monitoring (persCGM) system worn in parallel under standardized conditions in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D), two CGM systems (iPro2 - proCGM; Minimed 640G - persCGM) worn in parallel using the same sensor (Enlite 2) were compared. Ten people with T1D were included in this single-centre, open-label study in which CGM performance was evaluated. The study consisted of a 24-hours inpatient phase (meals, exercise, glycaemic challenges) and a 4-day home phase. Analyses included fulfilment of ISO 15197:2013 criteria, mean absolute relative difference (MARD), Parkes Error Grid and Bland-Altman plots. During the inpatient stay, ISO 15197:2013 criteria fulfilment was 58.4% (proCGM) and 57.8% (persCGM). At home, the systems met ISO 15197:2013 criteria by 66.5% (proCGM) and 65.3% (persCGM). No difference of MARD in inpatient phase (19.1 ± 16.7% vs. 19.0 ± 19.6; P = 0.83) and home phase (18.6 ± 26.8% vs. 17.4 ± 21.3%, P = 0.87) was observed. All sensors performed less accurately during hypoglycaemia. ProCGM and persCGM showed similar performance during daytime and night-time for the inpatient and the home phase. However, sensor performance was reduced during hypoglycaemia for both systems. © 2018 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
- Find related publications in this database (using NLM MeSH Indexing)
- Adult -
- Blood Glucose - metabolism
- Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring - instrumentation
- Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 - drug therapy
- Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 - metabolism
- Female -
- Humans -
- Hyperglycemia - diagnosis
- Hyperglycemia - metabolism
- Hypoglycemia - diagnosis
- Hypoglycemia - metabolism
- Hypoglycemic Agents - therapeutic use
- Insulin - therapeutic use
- Male -
- Monitoring, Ambulatory - instrumentation
- Monitoring, Physiologic - instrumentation
- Young Adult -
- Find related publications in this database (Keywords)
- clinical trial
- continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)
- hypoglycaemia
- type 1 diabetes