Accuracy of Factory-Calibrated Continuous Glucose Monitors in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Intravenous Insulin: A Prospective Clinical Trial of Two Leading Systems
Authors' conclusion
Factory-calibrated continuous glucose monitors may require accuracy validation and per-patient calibration for inpatient use in critically ill patients.
Study context
- Population
- Critically ill hospitalized patients requiring continuous intravenous insulin infusion
- Participants
- 40 participants
- Exposure
- Dexcom G6 Pro (G6P) vs FreeStyle Libre Pro (FLP) against reference serum (Lab) and point-of-care (POC) glucose
- Outcome
- CGM accuracy (MARD) vs reference Lab and POC glucose
Methodological detailsnonrandomized, open-label, clinically blinded
- Nonrandomized
- Open-label
- Clinically blinded
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
MARD vs reference glucose
| Group | Value | Mean absolute relative difference (MARD) vs Lab (1015 pairs) | MARD vs POC (2369 pairs) | MARD vs Lab (1006 pairs) | MARD vs POC (2353 pairs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| G6P | MARD 22.7% | 22.7% | 22.9% | ||
| FLP | MARD 25.2% | 25.2% | 27.0% |
Value
G6PMARD 22.7%
FLPMARD 25.2%
Mean absolute relative difference (MARD) vs Lab (1015 pairs)
G6P22.7%
FLP— not stated in the abstract
MARD vs POC (2369 pairs)
G6P22.9%
FLP— not stated in the abstract
MARD vs Lab (1006 pairs)
G6P— not stated in the abstract
FLP25.2%
MARD vs POC (2353 pairs)
G6P— not stated in the abstract
FLP27.0%
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Original publication
Accuracy of Factory-Calibrated Continuous Glucose Monitors in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Intravenous Insulin: A Prospective Clinical Trial of Two Leading Systems. J Diabetes Sci Technol. Published 8 May 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →