ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2013
Evaluation of point-of-care blood glucose measurements in patients with diabetic ketoacidosis or hyperglycemic hyperosmolar syndrome admitted to a critical care unit.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative performance assessment of point-of-care testing devices for measuring glucose and ketones at the patient bedside.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPoint-of-care (POC) blood glucose (BG) measurement is currently not recommended in the treatment of patients presenting with diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) or hyperglycemic hyperosmolar syndrome (HHS).
methodsWe prospectively evaluated and compared capillary and venous POC BG values with laboratory venous glucose in patients with DKA or HHS admitted to one critical care unit over 8 months.
resultsVenous laboratory glucose was strongly correlated with venous (r = 0.98) and capillary (r = 0.96) POC glucose values, though POC glucose values were higher than venous laboratory values (venous POC 21 ± 3 mg/dl, capillary POC 30 ± 4 mg/dl; both p < .001). Increased plasma osmolality had no effect on glucose meter error, while acidemia (pH < 7.3) was associated with greater glucose meter error (p = .04) independent of glucose levels. Comparing hypothetical insulin infusion rates based on laboratory venous glucose to actual infusion rates based on POC glucose values showed that 33/61 insulin infusion rates would have been unchanged, while 28 out of 61 rates were on average 7% ± 2% higher. There were no instances of hypoglycemia in any of the patients.
conclusionsOverall, both venous and capillary POC BG values were safe for the purpose of titrating insulin infusions in patients with severe hyperglycemia. Acidemia, but not hyperosmolality, increased POC BG value errors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.