ArticleJournal of diabetes science and technology2020
Clinical Reliability of Point-of-Care Glucose Testing in Critically Ill Patients.
Article in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stress Hyperglycemia as a Prognostic Indicator of the Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Stroke: A Comprehensive Literature Review.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Review
- Avoidable Blood Loss in Critical Care and Patient Blood Management: Scoping Review of Diagnostic Blood Loss.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Accuracy of point-of-care capillary blood sugar measurements in critically ill patients: An observational study.International journal of critical illness and injury scienceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPoint-of-care (POC) glucometers are commonly used in intensive care units (ICUs). The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services have called into question the accuracy of POC glucometers in critically ill patients. This study sought to identify specific characteristics within our facility's ICU patients that were associated with inaccuracies in POC glucose measurements.
methodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study that compared POC capillary blood glucose samples with venous samples collected in our ICU. All nonpregnant patients >18 years old admitted to the ICU with orders for daily laboratory testing that included blood glucose were eligible for inclusion.
resultsA total of 46 patients were enrolled and 85 samples were collected. The mean difference between venous and POC samples was 5.23 mg/dL (95% CI, 3.16-7.3 mg/dL). Measurement inaccuracies would have altered treatment in 7/85 instances (8.2%). The only clinically significant inaccuracy found was the omission of 2 units of insulin in 1 hyperglycemic patient. Measurement inconsistencies generally underestimated low blood glucose values (2/2 instances) and overestimated high blood glucose values (4/5 instances).
conclusionsIn our study, the mean difference between venous and POC glucose samples was small. Similarly, measurement inaccuracies that would have altered treatment were rare and only one instance was deemed clinically significant. We conclude that POC capillary glucose testing within our cohort and in similar critically ill patients is likely safe and effective.
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.