BACKGROUND: Real-time, personal continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is a validated technology that can help patients improve glycemic control. Blinded CGM is a promising technology for obtaining retrospective data in clinical research where the quantity and quality of blood glucose information is important. This study was designed to investigate the use of novel procedures to enhance data capture from blinded CGM. METHODS: Following a 4-week run-in, 46 patients with type 1 diabetes were randomized to one of two prandial insulins for a 12-week treatment period, after which they were crossed over to the alternate treatment for 12 weeks. Continuous glucose monitoring was implemented at the end of run-in (practice only) and during the last 2 weeks of each treatment period. Eighty percent of 288 possible daily glucose values were required for at least three days. Continuous glucose monitoring was extended for an additional week if these criteria were not met, and patients were allowed to insert sensors at home when necessary. Continuous glucose monitoring results were compared to reference eight-point self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). RESULTS: Higher than expected sensor failure rate was approximately 25%. During run-in, 12 of 45 attempted profiles failed adequacy criteria. However, treatment periods had only 1 of 82 attempted profiles considered inadequate (6 cases required an additional week of CGM). Using SMBG as reference, 93.7% of 777 CGM values were in Clarke error grid zones A+B. CONCLUSIONS: With appropriate training, adequate practice, and opportunity to repeat blinded CGM as needed, nearly 100% of attempted profiles can be obtained successfully.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Real-time, personal continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is a validated technology that can help patients improve glycemic control. Blinded CGM is a promising technology for obtaining retrospective data in clinical research where the quantity and quality of blood glucose information is important. This study was designed to investigate the use of novel procedures to enhance data capture from blinded CGM. METHODS: Following a 4-week run-in, 46 patients with type 1 diabetes were randomized to one of two prandial insulins for a 12-week treatment period, after which they were crossed over to the alternate treatment for 12 weeks. Continuous glucose monitoring was implemented at the end of run-in (practice only) and during the last 2 weeks of each treatment period. Eighty percent of 288 possible daily glucose values were required for at least three days. Continuous glucose monitoring was extended for an additional week if these criteria were not met, and patients were allowed to insert sensors at home when necessary. Continuous glucose monitoring results were compared to reference eight-point self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). RESULTS: Higher than expected sensor failure rate was approximately 25%. During run-in, 12 of 45 attempted profiles failed adequacy criteria. However, treatment periods had only 1 of 82 attempted profiles considered inadequate (6 cases required an additional week of CGM). Using SMBG as reference, 93.7% of 777 CGM values were in Clarke error grid zones A+B. CONCLUSIONS: With appropriate training, adequate practice, and opportunity to repeat blinded CGM as needed, nearly 100% of attempted profiles can be obtained successfully.
Authors: Roger S Mazze; Ellie Strock; Sarah Borgman; David Wesley; Philip Stout; Joel Racchini Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: Richard M Bergenstal; William V Tamborlane; Andrew Ahmann; John B Buse; George Dailey; Stephen N Davis; Carol Joyce; Tim Peoples; Bruce A Perkins; John B Welsh; Steven M Willi; Michael A Wood Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-06-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: R Schiaffini; P Ciampalini; A Fierabracci; S Spera; P Borrelli; G F Bottazzo; A Crinò Journal: Diabetes Metab Res Rev Date: 2002 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.876
Authors: Laura M Gandrud; Dongyuan Xing; Craig Kollman; Jen M Block; Betsy Kunselman; Darrell M Wilson; Bruce A Buckingham Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: William V Tamborlane; Roy W Beck; Bruce W Bode; Bruce Buckingham; H Peter Chase; Robert Clemons; Rosanna Fiallo-Scharer; Larry A Fox; Lisa K Gilliam; Irl B Hirsch; Elbert S Huang; Craig Kollman; Aaron J Kowalski; Lori Laffel; Jean M Lawrence; Joyce Lee; Nelly Mauras; Michael O'Grady; Katrina J Ruedy; Michael Tansey; Eva Tsalikian; Stuart Weinzimer; Darrell M Wilson; Howard Wolpert; Tim Wysocki; Dongyuan Xing Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-09-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michelle M Perfect; Dean Beebe; Deborah Levine-Donnerstein; Sara S Frye; Grai P Bluez; Stuart F Quan Journal: Clin Pract Pediatr Psychol Date: 2016-06