Меню
Идёт набор NCT06473480

Continuous Bloodsugar Monitoring System With a Sensor Compared to Fingerstick Bloodsugar Monitoring

Без фазы С лечением Diabetes Mellitus Hypoglycemia (Diabetic) Hypoglycemia Night Hyperglycemia

Ориентир для пациента и семьи

Простыми словами

Автоматическая сводка по структурированным данным реестра. Она помогает сориентироваться, но не заменяет официальный протокол или оценку врача.

Что изучают
В протоколе указаны: Abbott FreeStyle Libre System 2 Plus, Abbott Freestyle Libre Pro.
Кому может быть актуально
Состояния в реестре: Diabetes Mellitus, Hypoglycemia (Diabetic), Hypoglycemia Night, Hyperglycemia. Базовые параметры: 18 лет — 110 лет · Все.
Что важно проверить
Возраст, диагноз и пол — только базовые ориентиры. Предыдущее лечение, анализы и другие обязательные условия указаны ниже в критериях участия.
Где проводится
Дания
Следующий шаг
Сохраните исследование, покажите его лечащему врачу и уточните актуальный статус у исследовательского центра. Расходы, документы и поездка →
Официальное название

Continuous GLUCOse Monitoring System With a SENSor Compared to Fingerstick Glucose Monitoring in Surgical Wards (GLUCOSENS)

Обзор

This clinical trial aims to compare a continuous glucose monitoring system with traditional fingerstick blood glucose monitoring. The study focuses on adult patients in general surgical wards who need regular blood glucose checks due to the risk of low or high blood sugar levels. The goal is to learn if using a continuous glucose monitoring system is better than fingerstick monitoring in managing glucose levels, preventing complications, improving patient satisfaction and experience, reducing nursing staff workload, and improving nursing staff' experience. The study also compares the accuracy of glucose readings from the continuous glucose monitoring system with those from fingerstick tests and blood samples. The hypothesis is that CGMS is accurate and effective for monitoring glucose levels in surgical patients. This could lead to better blood sugar control, fewer complications, shorter hospital stays, and improved experiences for both patients and nursing staff.

Подробное описание

Glucose control in surgical patients at risk of hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia is essential, as these conditions can lead to infections, poor surgical outcomes, prolonged hospital stays, and death. In 2022, the prevalence of diagnosed diabetes in Denmark was 6.2%. With the global incidence of diabetes on the rise, the number of patients requiring glucose control during surgical admissions is increasing.

Point-of-care (POC) fingerstick capillary glucose monitoring (FSGM) is standard in many hospitals; however, FSGM can be painful, disrupt sleep, and increase postoperative stress for patients. Additionally, it can be time-consuming, requiring up to two hours of nursing work per patient daily. This makes timely and prescribed glucose monitoring challenging in busy surgical wards, potentially leading to untreated hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia. Moreover, FSGM provides only a snapshot of glucose levels, without indicating whether glucose is stable, rising, or falling.

An alternative to FSGM is continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGMS), which measure glucose levels via a subcutaneous sensor every few minutes. CGMS is predominantly used in ambulatory settings and has been shown to improve glucose regulation. Several studies have confirmed the accuracy of CGMS compared to FSGM in surgical and medical wards, reporting an overall mean absolute relative difference ranging from 9.4 to 12.9, making it acceptable for use in surgical wards. Other studies have reported that CGMS in surgical and medical wards results in superior glycemic control, reduced hypoglycemia, insulin usage, and in-hospital complications, and detected significant duration of both hypo- and hyperglycemia despite protocolized perioperative diabetes management compared to FSGM.

Studies on patients' perspectives of CGMS have been limited to everyday life and outpatient settings. One review on patients with type 1 and 2 diabetes experienced improved convenience, control, and freedom by the use of CGMS but were also overwhelmed by data and frustrated by inaccuracy, and technical issues, which is consistent with findings from another review of patients with diabetes type 2. Another study reported that patients with type 2 diabetes found the technology helpful for disease management, although it could also serve as an unpleasant reminder of disease progression and cause discomfort.

One case report has described nurses' experiences with CGMS in hospital wards for patients with type 1 diabetes. The nurses experienced an increased workload due to difficulties hearing the device receiver, leading to more frequent patient observations.

In summary, CGMS has been reported to be safe and beneficial in ambulatory settings, while challenges and knowledge gaps remain in hospital wards. To date, no studies have compared glucose levels from CGMS with those from a laboratory plasma glucose analyzer as the reference. This study aims to investigate the effect of CGMS compared to FSGM in patients with hyperglycemia in general surgical wards on glucose levels, complications, length of hospital stay, and patient satisfaction and experience with glucose management during hospitalization and up to three months after discharge. Additionally, the study will investigate the nursing staff's workload and experience in the surgical ward, and the accuracy of CGMS throughout hospitalization, including during surgical procedures and medical imaging.

Seven substudies will be conducted:

Substudy 1 - Glucose levels and management for surgical patients in relation to hospitalization: Compares point-of-care glucose levels and management using point-of-care FSGM and point-of-care CGMS during hospitalization and FSGM and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) up to three months after discharge.

Substudy 2 - Patient satisfaction with glucose monitoring and management in surgical wards: Compares patient satisfaction with glucose monitoring and management for surgical patients using point-of-care FSGM and point-of-care CGMS during hospitalization.

Substudy 3 - Nursing staff's glucose monitoring and management workload in the surgical ward: Compares the nursing staff's workload with point-of-care FSGM to point-of-care CGMS for surgical patients.

Substudy 4 (qualitative study) - Patient experience of glucose monitoring and management in relation to hospitalization in surgical wards: Compares the patient experience with point-of-care FSGM to point-of-care CGMS and glucose management during hospitalization in the surgical ward and one compares the patient experience of FSGM with CGM one month after discharge.

Substudy 5 - Continuous glucose level for surgical patients in relation to hospitalization in the surgical ward: Compares the continuous glucose levels when glucose monitoring and management are performed by point-of-care FSGM and point-of-care CGMS in the surgical ward. Further, it compares continuous glucose levels using point-of-care FSGM and CGM after discharge.

Substudy 6 - Accuracy of CGMS for surgical patients during hospitalization: Investigates the accuracy of CGMS by comparing CGMS data with FSGM and plasma glucose data.

Substudy 7 (qualitative study) - Nursing staff's experience with fingerstick monitoring and CGSM for surgical patients: Compares the nursing staff's experience with point-of-care FSGM to point-of-care CGMS and glucose management for surgical patients.

Вмешательства

  • Устройство Abbott FreeStyle Libre System 2 Plus
    The sensor is placed subcutaneously at the back of the participant's upper arm with one insertion and measures the subcutaneous glucose concentration.
  • Устройство Abbott Freestyle Libre Pro
    The sensor is placed subcutaneously at the back of the participant's upper arm with one insertion and measures the subcutaneous glucose concentration.

Первичные конечные точки

  • Substudy 1: Mean daytime and nocturnal point-of-care glucose levels [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 2: Patient-reported outcome on the convenience of glucose monitoring [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 3: Mean minutes surgical nursing staff spent on bedside glucose monitoring [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 5: Percentage of time in range (3.9-10.0 mmol/l) during the entire hospital stay [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 6: Differences in interstitial and plasma glucose [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
Вторичные конечные точки (12)
  • Substudy 1: • Mean dose of short-acting insulin (IE) [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 1: Mean dose of long-acting insulin (IE) [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • eGFR [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 1: Complication: Sepsis [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 1: Complication: Acute kidney failure [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 1: Complication: First acute transfer to intensive care unit [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 1: Complication: Second acute transfer to intensive care unit [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 1: Complication: Infections [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 1: Complication: Antibiotics [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 1: Complication: Bedsore [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 1: Complication: Diabetes ketoacidosis [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]
  • Substudy 1: Complication: Anastomotic leak [Срок оценки: During hospitalization (up to 30 days)]

Критерии участия

Критерии включения

  • Hospitalized patients (≥ 18 years old) in surgical wards
  • Glucose measurements at least 4 times (OUH) and 3 times (SUH) daily for at least three days, prescribed by surgeon
  • Expected hospitalization for at least three days
  • Communicates in Danish
  • Signed a declaration of consent to study participation
  • At risk of hypo- and hyperglycemia (with or without a diabetes diagnosis)
  • Specific for substudy 4 inclusion criteria as above with the following add on: Patients being treated with insulin at discharge and patients residing within the OUH admission area.

Критерии исключения

  • Cognitively impaired patients
  • Indication for glucose monitoring solely because of parenteral nutrition treatment
  • Patients admitted with a CGMS
  • Patients from the point-of-care fingerstick capillary glucose monitoring group cannot be included in the continuous glucose monitoring system group

Eligibility criteria solely for substudy 7

Критерии включения

  • Nursing staff with at least one month of experience with both point-of-care fingerstick capillary glucose monitoring and continuous glucose monitoring system and are registered nurses or certified nursing assistants

Критерии приведены из реестра в оригинале (на английском). Окончательную оценку соответствия проводит исследовательский центр.

Здоровые добровольцы: Нет

Дизайн исследования

Распределение
Нерандомизированное
Модель
Последовательный дизайн
Маскирование
Открытое
Основная цель
Лечение

Центры проведения

Дания · 2 центра
  • Department of Surgery, Zealand University Hospital — Køge
  • The Department of Surgery, Odense Univeristy Hospital — Odense

Публикации

  • Berrios-Torres SI, Umscheid CA, Bratzler DW, Leas B, Stone EC, Kelz RR, Reinke CE, Morgan S, Solomkin JS, Mazuski JE, Dellinger EP, Itani KMF, Berbari EF, Segreti J, Parvizi J, Blanchard J, Allen G, Kluytmans JAJW, Donlan R, Schecter WP; Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Guideline for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection, 201 PMID 28467526
  • Kotagal M, Symons RG, Hirsch IB, Umpierrez GE, Dellinger EP, Farrokhi ET, Flum DR; SCOAP-CERTAIN Collaborative. Perioperative hyperglycemia and risk of adverse events among patients with and without diabetes. Ann Surg. 2015 Jan;261(1):97-103. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000688. PMID 25133932
  • Carstensen B, Ronn PF, Jorgensen ME. Prevalence, incidence and mortality of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in Denmark 1996-2016. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2020 May;8(1):e001071. doi: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2019-001071. PMID 32475839
  • Carstensen B, Ronn PF, Jorgensen ME. Components of diabetes prevalence in Denmark 1996-2016 and future trends until 2030. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2020 Aug;8(1):e001064. doi: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2019-001064. PMID 32784246
  • Stahl-Pehe A, Kamrath C, Prinz N, Kapellen T, Menzel U, Kordonouri O, Schwab KO, Bechtold-Dalla Pozza S, Rosenbauer J, Holl RW. Prevalence of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in children and adolescents in Germany from 2002 to 2020: A study based on electronic health record data from the DPV registry. J Diabetes. 2022 Dec;14(12):840-850. doi: 10.1111/1753-0407.13339. Epub 2022 Dec 14. PMID 36515004
  • Galindo RJ, Migdal AL, Davis GM, Urrutia MA, Albury B, Zambrano C, Vellanki P, Pasquel FJ, Fayfman M, Peng L, Umpierrez GE. Comparison of the FreeStyle Libre Pro Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) System and Point-of-Care Capillary Glucose Testing in Hospitalized Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Basal-Bolus Insulin Regimen. Diabetes Care. 2020 Nov;43(11):2730-2735. doi: 10.2337/dc PMID 32641372
  • American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 16. Diabetes Care in the Hospital: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2022. Diabetes Care. 2022 Jan 1;45(Suppl 1):S244-S253. doi: 10.2337/dc22-S016. PMID 34964884
  • Mianowska B, Mlynarski W, Szadkowska I, Szadkowska A. Evaluation of Three Lancing Devices: What Do Blood Volume and Lancing Pain Depend On? J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2021 Sep;15(5):1076-1083. doi: 10.1177/1932296820949930. Epub 2020 Aug 17. PMID 32856497

Идентификаторы

NCT: NCT06473480 · GLUCOSENS

Первоисточники (государственные реестры)

Открыть это исследование на ClinicalTrials.gov ↗