Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28169943›Full record

Observational studyCritical care medicine2017

Bedside Glucose Monitoring-Is it Safe? A New, Regulatory-Compliant Risk Assessment Evaluation Protocol in Critically Ill Patient Care Settings.

Jeffrey Anton DuBois, Robbert Jan Slingerland, Marion Fokkert, Alain Roman, Nam Khoa Tran, William Clarke, David Alan Sartori, Tina Louise Palmieri, Andrei Malic, Martha Elizabeth Lyon and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Critical care medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Comparison of Accuracy Guidelines for Hospital Glucose Meters.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2020
    Review
  10. Accuracy of Blood Glucose Measurement and Blood Glucose Targets.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2020
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Evaluation of point-of-care capillary and venous blood glucose concentrations in hospitalized neonatal foals.Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001)
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Jeffrey Anton DuBois1Department of Medical and Scientific Affairs, Nova Biomedical, Waltham, MA.2Department of Clinical Chemistry, Isala, Zwolle, Netherlands.3Department of Surgical Intensive Care, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Saint-Pierre University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium.4Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA.5Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Johns Hopkins Medical Center, Baltimore, MD.6Division of Burn and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA.7Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Saskatoon Health Region, Saskatoon, SK.
Robbert Jan Slingerland
Marion Fokkert
Alain Roman
Nam Khoa Tran
William Clarke
David Alan Sartori
Tina Louise Palmieri
Andrei Malic
Martha Elizabeth Lyon
Andrew William Lyon
Isala · NLJohns Hopkins University · USCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Pierre · BEUniversity of California, Davis · US

Funding

UC Davis Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR001860 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI KENYON, NICHOLAS J., LYLES, COURTNEY REES · 2016 to 2025
$47.3M
UC Davis Clinical and Translational Science CenterUL1TR000002 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI BERGLUND, LARS F · 2012 to 2015
$12.2M
DANGER: Developing the Next Generation of Emergency Medicine ResearchersK12HL108964 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI HOLMES, JAMES F., KUPPERMANN, NATHAN · 2011 to 2015
$3.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000002NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001860NHLBI NIH HHS K12 HL108964
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesNew data have emerged from ambulatory and acute care settings about adverse patient events, including death, attributable to erroneous blood glucose meter measurements and leading to questions over their use in critically ill patients. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration published new, more stringent guidelines for glucose meter manufacturers to evaluate the performance of blood glucose meters in critically ill patient settings. The primary objective of this international, multicenter, multidisciplinary clinical study was to develop and apply a rigorous clinical accuracy assessment algorithm, using four distinct statistical tools, to evaluate the clinical accuracy of a blood glucose monitoring system in critically ill patients.

designObservational study.

settingFive international medical and surgical ICUs. PATIENTS: All patients admitted to critical care settings in the centers.

interventionsNone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

resultsGlucose measurements were performed on 1,698 critically ill patients with 257 different clinical conditions and complex treatment regimens. The clinical accuracy assessment algorithm comprised four statistical tools to assess the performance of the study blood glucose monitoring system compared with laboratory reference methods traceable to a definitive standard. Based on POCT12-A3, the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute standard for hospitals about hospital glucose meter procedures and performance, and Parkes error grid clinical accuracy performance criteria, no clinically significant differences were observed due to patient condition or therapy, with 96.1% and 99.3% glucose results meeting the respective criteria. Stratified sensitivity and specificity analysis (10 mg/dL glucose intervals, 50-150 mg/dL) demonstrated high sensitivity (mean = 95.2%, SD = ± 0.02) and specificity (mean = 95. 8%, SD = ± 0.03). Monte Carlo simulation modeling of the study blood glucose monitoring system showed low probability of category 2 and category 3 insulin dosing error, category 2 = 2.3% (41/1,815) and category 3 = 1.8% (32/1,815), respectively. Patient trend analysis demonstrated 99.1% (223/225) concordance in characterizing hypoglycemic patients.

conclusionsThe multicomponent, clinical accuracy assessment algorithm demonstrated that the blood glucose monitoring system was acceptable for use in critically ill patient settings when compared to the central laboratory reference method. This clinical accuracy assessment algorithm is an effective tool for comprehensively assessing the validity of whole blood glucose measurement in critically ill patient care settings.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBlood GlucoseChildChild, PreschoolClinical Laboratory TechniquesCritical CareFemaleHumansHypoglycemiaHypoglycemic AgentsInfantInsulinBlood GlucoseHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin

Identifiers

PMID28169943
PMCPMC5345889
OpenAlexW2589109051

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.