Real-World Performance of Personal Continuous Glucose Monitors During Hospitalization
Authors' conclusion
Except for hypoglycemia ranges, patients' personal CGMs had adequate accuracy for glucose monitoring in the hospital. Vital signs and Lab values did not interfere with CGM accuracy. The TBR and glucose variability were low, better than outpatient recommendations. TIR was in line with inpatient consensus guidelines, and "glucometrics" were comparable with reports for hospital inserted sensors.
Study context
- Population
- Adults with DM wearing outpatient-inserted continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) at admission to a noncritical hospital setting
- Participants
- 101 adults188 hospitalizations
- Comparison
- Personal CGMs vs point of care (POC) glucometer and laboratory (Lab) blood glucose
- Dexcomn = 56
- Libren = 45
- Outcome
- CGM accuracy as MARD and Clarke Error Grids, CGM readings paired within 5 min with POC and Lab glucose
Methodological detailsreal-world, noncritical inpatient setting
- Real-world
- Noncritical inpatient setting
Performance
As reported in the abstract
MARD, CGM-POC pairs (3316 pairs)
- Mean absolute relative difference (MARD), all sensors
- 13.7%
- MARD for POC glucose <70 mg/dL
- 22.6%
Further findings
MARD, CGM-Lab pairs (771 pairs, 97 patients)
- MARD, CGM-Lab pairs (771 pairs, 97 patients) — MARD, all sensors
- 13.6%
Clarke Error Grid zones A and B
- CGM-POC pairs in zones A and B
- 98.7%
- CGM-Lab pairs in zones A and B
- 98.8%
Correlation of ARD with labs and vital signs
- No correlation between ARD and daily mean arterial BP, hemoglobin, GFR and pulse oximetry
CGM glucometrics
- Time below range (TBR)
- 2.2% (SD: 4.7%)
- Time in range (TIR)
- 58.7% (SD: 22.5%)
- TAR
- 39.9% (SD: 23.4%)
- CV
- 31.2%
Original publication
Real-World Performance of Personal Continuous Glucose Monitors During Hospitalization. Diabetes Technol Ther. Published 14 April 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →