ArticleBMJ open2025
GLUCOSENS study protocol: a continuous glucose monitoring system compared to fingerstick glucose monitoring in surgical wards - a two-centre before-after clinical trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06473480 (Continuous GLUCOse Monitoring System With a SENSor Compared to Fingerstick Glucose Monitoring in Surgical Wards), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Continuous GLUCOse Monitoring System With a SENSor Compared to Fingerstick Glucose Monitoring in Surgical Wards (GLUCOSENS)
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEffective glucose control in surgical patients at risk of hyperglycaemia and hypoglycaemia is crucial, as these conditions can lead to surgical site infections, prolonged hospital stays and death. Fingerstick glucose monitoring (FSGM), the standard measurement of glucose, can be painful for patients and time-consuming for nursing staff, especially with hourly monitoring around surgery. Continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGMS) offer a less invasive alternative with better glucose regulation in outpatients.The GLUCOSENS study compares the effects of CGMS and FSGM on point-of-care measurements and time-in-range (3.9-10.0 mmol/l) glucose levels (primary outcome), patient satisfaction and experience and nursing staff workload and experience in surgical wards. Furthermore, it evaluates CGMS accuracy during perioperative periods and medical imaging. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This Danish two-centre study will be conducted at the general surgical wards of Odense and Zealand University Hospital and will involve 305 patients over 18 months. The study is divided into three periods: first, a standard care period with point-of-care FSGM (110 patients); second, an intervention period with point-of-care CGMS (110 patients); third, another standard care period with point-of-care FSGM combined with a blinded sensor for comparing continuous glucose data from this period with continuous glucose data from the intervention period (85 patients). Furthermore, the study will include 24 nursing staff.Data will be collected through medical file reviews on glucose levels, patient satisfaction questionnaires, a patient field study, an observation study of the nursing staff's workload and qualitative interviews of nursing staff. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is registered with the Records of Processing Activities in the Region of Southern Denmark for research and quality projects (ID number: 23/36734) and has been approved by the Regional Scientific Ethical Committee in Southern Denmark (ID number: S-20240041). The results will be published in international peer-reviewed journals. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT06473480).
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.