scholarly journals Accuracy of the Dexcom G6 Glucose Sensor during Aerobic, Resistance, and Interval Exercise in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes

Biosensors ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 138
Author(s):  
Florian H. Guillot ◽  
Peter G. Jacobs ◽  
Leah M. Wilson ◽  
Joseph El Youssef ◽  
Virginia B. Gabo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Glucose Sensor ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Interval Training ◽  
Relative Difference ◽  
Interval Exercise ◽  
Before And After ◽  
High Intensity Interval ◽  
The Impact

The accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) sensors may be significantly impacted by exercise. We evaluated the impact of three different types of exercise on the accuracy of the Dexcom G6 sensor. Twenty-four adults with type 1 diabetes on multiple daily injections wore a G6 sensor. Participants were randomized to aerobic, resistance, or high intensity interval training (HIIT) exercise. Each participant completed two in-clinic 30-min exercise sessions. The sensors were applied on average 5.3 days prior to the in-clinic visits (range 0.6–9.9). Capillary blood glucose (CBG) measurements with a Contour Next meter were performed before and after exercise as well as every 10 min during exercise. No CGM calibrations were performed. The median absolute relative difference (MARD) and median relative difference (MRD) of the CGM as compared with the reference CBG did not differ significantly from the start of exercise to the end exercise across all exercise types (ranges for aerobic MARD: 8.9 to 13.9% and MRD: −6.4 to 0.5%, resistance MARD: 7.7 to 14.5% and MRD: −8.3 to −2.9%, HIIT MARD: 12.1 to 16.8% and MRD: −14.3 to −9.1%). The accuracy of the no-calibration Dexcom G6 CGM was not significantly impacted by aerobic, resistance, or HIIT exercise.

scholarly journals Real-World Outcomes of Glucose Sensor Use in Type 1 Diabetes—Findings from a Large UK Centre

Biosensors ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 457
Author(s):  
Kyuhan Lee ◽  
Shakthi Gunasinghe ◽  
Alyson Chapman ◽  
Lynne A. Findlow ◽  
Jody Hyland ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Glucose Sensor ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Sensor Data ◽  
International Consensus ◽  
Retrospective Data Analysis ◽  
Time In Range ◽  
The Impact

Flash glucose monitoring (FGM) and real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) are increasingly used in clinical practice, with improvements in HbA1c and time in range (TIR) reported in clinical studies. We aimed to evaluate the impact of FGM and RT-CGM use on glycaemic outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) under routine clinical care. We performed a retrospective data analysis from electronic outpatient records and proprietary web-based glucose monitoring platforms. We measured HbA1c (pre-sensor vs. on-sensor data) and sensor-based outcomes from the previous three months as per the international consensus on RT-CGM reporting guidelines. Amongst the 789 adults with T1DM, HbA1c level decreased from 61.0 (54.0, 71.0) mmol/mol to 57 (49, 65.8) mmol/mol in 561 people using FGM, and from 60.0 (50.0, 70.0) mmol/mol to 58.8 (50.3, 66.8) mmol/mol in 198 using RT-CGM (p < 0.001 for both). We found that 23% of FGM users and 32% of RT-CGM users achieved a time-in-range (TIR) (3.9 to 10 mmol/L) of >70%. For time-below-range (TBR) < 4 mmol/L, 70% of RT-CGM users and 58% of FGM users met international recommendations of <4%. Our data add to the growing body of evidence supporting the use of FGM and RT-CGM in T1DM.

The impact of real-time continuous glucose monitoring on metabolic control in children with type 1 diabetes

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruxandra Calapod Ioana ◽  
Irina Bojoga ◽  
Duta Simona Gabriela ◽  
Ana-Maria Stancu ◽  
Amalia Arhire ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Metabolic Control ◽  
Continuous Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
The Impact

High-Intensity Interval Training and Hypoglycemia Minimization in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes (HIIT HYPO T1D Study)

Diabetes ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 743-P
Author(s):  
ANGELA S. LEE ◽  
KIMBERLEY L. WAY ◽  
NATHAN A. JOHNSON ◽  
STEPHEN M. TWIGG
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
High Intensity ◽  
Interval Training ◽  
High Intensity Interval Training ◽  
High Intensity Interval

scholarly journals Anxiety, depression, and glycemic control during Covid-19 pandemic in youths with type 1 diabetes

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Cusinato ◽  
Mariangela Martino ◽  
Alex Sartori ◽  
Claudia Gabrielli ◽  
Laura Tassara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Glycemic Control ◽  
Psychological Impact ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Severe Hypoglycemia ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Glucose Variability ◽  
Threshold Score ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Objectives Our study aims to assess the impact of lockdown during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on glycemic control and psychological well-being in youths with type 1 diabetes. Methods We compared glycemic metrics during lockdown with the same period of 2019. The psychological impact was evaluated with the Test of Anxiety and Depression. Results We analyzed metrics of 117 adolescents (87% on Multiple Daily Injections and 100% were flash glucose monitoring/continuous glucose monitoring users). During the lockdown, we observed an increase of the percentage of time in range (TIR) (p<0.001), with a significant reduction of time in moderate (p=0.002), and severe hypoglycemia (p=0.001), as well as the percentage of time in hyperglycemia (p<0.001). Glucose variability did not differ (p=0.863). The glucose management indicator was lower (p=0.001). 7% of youths reached the threshold-score (≥115) for anxiety and 16% for depression. A higher score was associated with lower TIR [p=0.028, p=0.012]. Conclusions Glycemic control improved during the first lockdown period with respect to the previous year. Symptoms of depression and anxiety were associated with worse glycemic control; future researches are necessary to establish if this improvement is transient and if psychological difficulties will increase during the prolonged pandemic situation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document