Continuous glucose monitoring-guided insulin infusion in critically ill patients promotes safety, improves time efficiency, and enhances provider satisfaction
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the integration of real-time CGM (rtCGM) into an insulin infusion computer calculator (IICC) to improve glycemic control, time efficiency, safety, and clinician workflow in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 35 critically ill adult patients requiring insulin infusion in the surgical and medical ICUs. Dexcom G7 rtCGM values were integrated into an institution-developed IICC using an ongoing validation protocol, allowing for nonadjunctive CGM use. The accuracy of rtCGM was assessed by comparing matched CGM and point-of-care (POC) glucose values using mean absolute relative difference (MARD), surveillance error grid, and Parkes Error Grid analyses. CGM time-in-range metrics, clinician turnaround time for glucose monitoring, and nurse satisfaction were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 1291 matched glucose pairs were analyzed. The rtCGM system demonstrated a MARD of 12.5%, with 99.6% of the values falling within clinically acceptable error zones (A+B) on the Parkes Error Grid. Patients in the rtCGM-IICC protocol had mean glucose 141.9 mg/dL, with mean time in range (70-180 mg/dL) 82.8%, time above range (> 180 mg/dL) 14.5%, and time below range (< 70 mg/dL) 0.5%. Clinician time efficiency improved significantly, with POC testing requiring a mean turnaround time of nearly 5 minutes compared to 3-second CGM retrieval. All surveyed nurses (n = 20) reported rtCGM increased efficiency and improved safety and preferred rtCGM with POC over POC testing alone. CONCLUSION: Integrating rtCGM with an IICC protocol in the ICU enhances glycemic control, improves workflow efficiency, and reduces clinician workload while maintaining high accuracy.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Hospital CGM was successfully used in conjunction with periodic POC monitoring in hybrid protocols used for intravenous insulin titrations, decreasing the burden of hourly POC testing.
“However, hospital CGM was successfully used in conjunction with periodic POC monitoring in hybrid protocols used for intravenous insulin titrations, decreasing the burden of hourly POC testing (54)(55)(56).”
From 16. Diabetes Care in the Hospital: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2026 (2026) · cites this paper as [55]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965 · see citing works
Battelino, T., Danne, T., Bergenstal, R. M., Amiel, S. A., Beck, R., Biester, T., Bosi, E., Buckingham, B. A., Cefalu, W. T., Close, K. L., et al. (2019) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dci19-0028 · Cited by 4,032 · see citing works
Maiorino, M. I., Signoriello, S., Maio, A., Chiodini, P., Bellastella, G., Scappaticcio, L., Longo, M., Giugliano, D., & Esposito, K. (2020) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc19-1459 · Cited by 364 · see citing works
Technical Aspects of the Parkes Error Grid
Pfützner, A., Klonoff, D. C., Pardo, S., & Parkes, J. L. (2013) · Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology · doi:10.1177/193229681300700517 · Cited by 122 · see citing works
Davis, G. M., Faulds, E., Walker, T., Vigliotti, D., Rabinovich, M., Hester, J., Peng, L., McLean, B., Hannon, P., Poindexter, N., et al. (2021) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc20-2085 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Faulds, E. R., Boutsicaris, A., Sumner, L., Jones, L., McNett, M., Smetana, K. S., May, C. C., Buschur, E., Exline, M. C., Ringel, M. D., et al. (2021) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/clinem/dgab409 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Lee, M. Y., Seav, S. M., Ongwela, L., Lee, J. J., Aubyrn, R., Cao, F. Y., Kalinsky, A., Aparicio Ramos, O., Gu, Y., Kingston, K., et al. (2024) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc24-0626 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 15
- [1]Van den Berghe G, Wouters P, Weekers F, Intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2001; 345: 1359– 1367. 11794168
- [2]Finfer S, Chittock DR, Su SY, Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360(13): 1283– 1297. 19318384
- [6]Faulds ER, Dungan KM, McNett M, Nursing perspectives on the use of continuous glucose monitoring in the intensive care unit. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2023; 17(3): 649– 655. 37081831 PMC10210097
- [7]Lu M, Zuo Y, Guo J, Wen X, Kang Y. Continuous glucose monitoring system can improve the quality of glucose control and glucose variability compared with point-of-care measurement in critically ill patients: a randomized controlled trial. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018; 97(36): e12138. 30200106 PMC6133393
- [8]Preiser JC, Lheureux O, Thooft A, Brimioulle S, Goldstein J, Vincent JL. Near-continuous glucose monitoring makes glycemic control safer in ICU patients. Crit Care Med. 2018; 46(8): 1224– 1229. 29677007
- [11]Kulasa K, Serences B, Nies M, El-Kareh R, Kurashige K, Box K. Insulin infusion computer calculator programmed directly into electronic health record medication administration record. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2021; 15(2): 214– 221. 33118415 PMC8256066
- [12]Clarke WL. The original Clarke error grid analysis (EGA). Diabetes Technol Ther. 2005; 7(5): 776– 779. 16241881
- [13]Klonoff DC, Lias C, Vigersky R, The surveillance error grid. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2014; 8(4): 658– 672. 25562886 PMC4764212
- [17]Ferreira FL, Bota DP, Bross A, Mélot C, Vincent J. Serial evaluation of the SOFA score to predict outcome in critically ill patients. JAMA. 2001; 286(14): 1754– 1758. 11594901
- [19]Le HT, Harris NS, Estilong AJ, Olson A, Rice MJ. Blood glucose measurement in the intensive care unit: what is the best method? J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013; 7(2): 489– 499. 23567008 PMC3737651
- [20]Rajendran R, Rayman G. Point-of-care blood glucose testing for diabetes care in hospitalized patients: an evidence-based review. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2014; 8(6): 1081– 1090. 25355711 PMC4455482
- [21]Ang L, Lin YK, Schroeder LF, Feasibility and performance of continuous glucose monitoring to guide computerized insulin infusion therapy in cardiovascular intensive care unit. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2024; 18(3): 562– 569. 38563491 PMC11089859
- [22]Voglová Hagerf B, Protus M, Nemetova L, Accuracy and feasibility of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in critically ill patients after abdominal surgery and solid organ transplantation. Diabetes Care. 2024; 47(6): 956– 963. 38412005 PMC11116916
- [23]Bann SA, Hercus JC, Atkins P, Accuracy of a continuous glucose monitor in the intensive care unit: a proposed accuracy standard and calibration protocol for inpatient use. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2024; 26(11): 797– 805. 38913325
- [24]Finn E, Schlichting L, Grau L, Douglas IS, Pereira RI. Real-world accuracy of CGM in inpatient critical and noncritical care settings at a safety-net hospital. Diabetes Care. 2023; 46(10): 1825– 1830. 37561954 PMC10516250
Cited by
Sorted by citations
16. Diabetes Care in the Hospital: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2026
American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee for Diabetes*, Bajaj, M., McCoy, R. G., Balapattabi, K., Bannuru, R. R., Bellini, N. J., Bennett, A. K., Beverly, E. A., Briggs Early, K., ChallaSivaKanaka, S., et al. (2026) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc26-s016 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
- Authors
- Giovannetti, E. R., Lee, R. O., Thomas, R. L., Wolinsky, T., Talbot, A. V., Ali, R. S., Cavaiola, T. S., Kulasa, K., & Boeder, S. C.
- Affiliations
- UC San Diego Health System (US)
- University of California, Davis (US)
- University of California San Diego (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kulasa, Kristen
- Venue
- Endocrine Practice
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2025-09
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1143-1149
- ISSN
- 1530-891X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC13043021
- OpenAlex
- W4411566994
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7
- FWCI
- 4.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Endocrine Practice (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Division of Diabetes Endocrinology and Metabolic Diseases (K12DK133995, P30 DK063491)
- Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (2T32DK007044-41)
- JDRF
- Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation United States of America (5-ECR-2022-1177-A-N)
- Dexcom
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
- National Institutes of Health
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Hyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patients
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
- Keywords
- continuous glucose monitoring, intensive care unit, critically ill patients, glycemic control, CGM accuracy, time in range, point-of-care glucose testing, nursing satisfaction, Dexcom G7
- MeSH terms
- Continuous Glucose Monitoring, Adult, Aged, Blood Glucose, Female, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Insulin, Insulin Infusion Systems, Intensive Care Units, Male, Middle Aged, Monitoring, Physiologic, Retrospective Studies, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Critical Illness
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review