Bolus Insulin Dose Error Distributions Based on Results From Two Clinical Trials Comparing Blood Glucose Monitoring Systems

基于两项比较血糖监测系统的临床试验结果的胰岛素追加剂量误差分布

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In 2 previous clinical trials, fingertip capillary blood samples were evaluated using prespecified blood glucose monitoring systems (BGMSs) and a reference YSI glucose analyzer. In post hoc analyses, hypothetical insulin doses were calculated using these blood glucose measurements; dosing errors were compared for each trial. METHOD: For each blood glucose measurement, premeal bolus insulin dosing was determined for a hypothetical person, assuming a 60-g carbohydrate meal and 100-mg/dL target blood glucose level (adjusting 1/25 insulin sensitivity and 1/15 insulin:carbohydrate ratio inputs to account for BGMS measurement error). Dosing error was the difference between doses calculated using the BGMS and YSI results. RESULTS: In Clinical Trial 1, 95% dose error ranges (in units of insulin) were: CONTOUR(®)NEXT EZ BGMS (EZ), -0.9 to 0.5; Accu-Chek(®) Aviva BGMS (ACA), -0.5 to 1.8; FreeStyle Freedom Lite(®) BGMS (FFL), -3.2 to -0.3; OneTouch(®) Ultra(®)2 BGMS (OTU2), -4.1 to 0.3; and Truetrack(®) BGMS (TT), -3.9 to 2.2. In Clinical Trial 2, these ranges were: CONTOUR(®)NEXT BGMS (CN), -0.7 to 1.7; Accu-Chek(®) Aviva Nano BGMS (ACAN), -1.3 to 1.8; FreeStyle Lite(®) BGMS (FSL), -5.1 to 0.2; OTU2, -1.9 to 1.2; OneTouch(®) Verio(®) Pro BGMS (OTVP), -1.0 to 1.9; and TT, -5.1 to 1.7. Within each trial, EZ and CN had statistically significantly smaller insulin dose error ranges than other BGMSs ( P <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The ranges of insulin dose errors were statistically significantly smaller with EZ and CN than with all other BGMSs in this post hoc analysis. Differences in BGMS accuracy could result in clinically important differences in insulin dosing.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。