Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background:

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is a method of estimating blood glucose values from those recorded in the interstitial fluid. Because increasingly longer CGM measurements are possible, errors and data loss become more and more likely and potentially more damaging to accurate calculations of glycemic variability (GV) indices. Our research investigates the resistance of the CGM recording to data loss.

Methods:

We collected 71 CGM recordings (duration of min: 2, max: 265, median: 42 days) from patients with type 1 diabetes and used three algorithms to introduce missing data. We calculated mean and standard deviation (SD) of absolute percentage error of 12 variability indices and correlated those with the percentage of missing data and duration of the measurements.

Results:

Mean absolute percentage error of variability indices increased linearly with the percentage of missing data along with SD of absolute percentage error. Except for mean amplitude of glycemic excursions and time spent in hypoglycemia, all absolute errors never exceeded 25%, while mean absolute errors stayed below 5%. The gradient removal algorithm introduced errors larger than the single datapoint and block removal algorithms. The absolute percentage error of variability indices correlated negatively with the duration of the CGM measurements.

Conclusions:

Standard GV measurements in long-term glucose monitoring are robustly resistant to data loss.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Nathan

, Cleary

, Backlund

, et al.; Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) Study Research Group., Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med, 2005; 353:2643–2653.

Heinemann

Finger pricking and pain: a never ending story. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2008; 2:919–921.

Cradock

, Hawthorn

. Pain, distress and blood glucose monitoring. J Diabetes Nurs, 2002; 6:188–191.

Damiano

, McKeon

, El-Khatib

, et al. A comparative effectiveness analysis of three continuous glucose monitors. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2014; 8:699–708.

Vaddiraju

, Burgess

, Tomazos

, et al. Technologies for continuous glucose monitoring: current problems and future promises. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2010; 4:1540–1562.

Guerra

, Facchinetti

, Sparacino

, et al. Enhancing the accuracy of subcutaneous glucose sensors: a real-time deconvolution-based approach. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng, 2012; 59:1658–1669.

Wentholt

IME

, Kulik

, Michels

RPJ

, et al. Glucose fluctuations and activation of oxidative stress in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetologia, 2008; 51:183–190.

Dasari

, Gandomani

, Teague

, et al. Glycemic variability is associated with markers of vascular stress in adolescents. J Pediatr, 2016; 172:47–55.e2.

Vigersky

RA.

The benefits, limitations, and cost-effectiveness of advanced technologies in the management of patients with diabetes mellitus. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2015; 9:320–330.

10.

Cavalot

Do data in the literature indicate that glycaemic variability is a clinical problem? Glycaemic variability and vascular complications of diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab, 2013; 15 Suppl 2:3–8.

11.

Reddy

, Godsland

, Barnard

, et al. Glycemic variability and its impact on quality of life in adults with type 1 diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2016; 10:60–66.

12.

Jung

HS.

Clinical implications of glucose variability: chronic complications of diabetes. Endocrinol Metab (Seoul), 2015; 30:167–174.

13.

Rodbard

Clinical interpretation of indices of quality of glycemic control and glycemic variability. Postgrad Med, 2011; 123:107–118.

14.

Ibrahim

, Chu

, Chen

M-H

. Missing data in clinical studies: issues and methods. J Clin Oncol, 2012; 30:3297–3303.

15.

Little

RJA

, Rubin

. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002. DOI:10.1002/9781119013563.

16.

Kang

The prevention and handling of the missing data. Korean J. Anesthesiol, 2013; 64:402–406.

17.

Rubin

DB.

Inference and missing data. Biometrika, 1976; 63:581–592.

18.

Fonda

, Lewis

, Vigersky

. Minding the gaps in continuous glucose monitoring: a method to repair gaps to achieve more accurate glucometrics. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2013; 7:88–92.

19.

Baghurst

, Rodbard

, Cameron

. The minimum frequency of glucose measurements from which glycemic variation can be consistently assessed. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2010; 4:1382–1385.

20.

Neylon

, Baghurst

, Cameron

. The minimum duration of sensor data from which glycemic variability can be consistently assessed. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2014; 8:273–276.

21.

Baghurst

PA.

Calculating the mean amplitude of glycemic excursion from continuous glucose monitoring data: an automated algorithm. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2011; 13:296–302.

22.

Luijf

, Mader

, Doll

, et al.; on behalf of the AP@home consortium, Accuracy and reliability of continuous glucose monitoring systems: a head-to-head comparison. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2013; 15:721–726.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

3.62 MB

0.00 MB

Resistance to Data Loss of Glycemic Variability Measurements in Long-Term Continuous Glucose Monitoring