Cited by 94Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality ControlHyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patientsDiabetes Management and Research

Glucose meter performance criteria for tight glycemic control estimated by simulation modeling

Karon, Brad S, Boyd, James C, Klee, George G·2010·Clinical Chemistry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Glucose meter analytical performance criteria required for safe and effective management of patients on tight glycemic control (TGC) are not currently defined. We used simulation modeling to relate glucose meter performance characteristics to insulin dosing errors during TGC. METHODS: We used 29,920 glucose values from patients on TGC at 1 institution to represent the expected distribution of glucose values during TGC, and we used 2 different simulation models to relate glucose meter analytical performance to insulin dosing error using these 29,920 initial glucose values and assuming 10%, 15%, or 20% total allowable error (TEa) criteria. RESULTS: One-category insulin dosing errors were common under all error conditions. Two-category insulin dosing errors occurred more frequently when either 20% or 15% TEa was assumed compared with 10% total error. Dosing errors of 3 or more categories, those most likely to result in hypoglycemia and thus patient harm, occurred infrequently under all error conditions with the exception of 20% TEa. CONCLUSIONS: Glucose meter technologies that operate within a 15% total allowable error tolerance are unlikely to produce large (>or=3-category) insulin dosing errors during TGC. Increasing performance to 10% TEa should reduce the frequency of 2-category insulin dosing errors, although additional studies are necessary to determine the clinical impact of such errors during TGC. Current criteria that allow 20% total allowable error in glucose meters may not be optimal for patient management during TGC.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1373/clinchem.2010.145367

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Karon et al. found that if there were a total measurement error of 20%, 1- and 2-step errors in insulin dose would occur 45% and 6% of the time, respectively, in a tight glycemic control protocol.

    “Karon et al. (18) translated these measurement errors into potential insulin-dosing errors using simulation modeling and found that if there were a total measurement error of 20%, 1- and 2-step errors in insulin dose would occur 45% and 6% of the time, respectively, in a tight glycemic control protocol.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Karon, B. S., Boyd, J. C., & Klee, G. G.
Affiliations
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • University of Virginia Health System (US)
Corresponding author
Klee, George G
Venue
Clinical Chemistry
Published
2010-07-01
Volume
56
Issue
7
Pages
1091-1097
ISSN
  • 0009-9147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8561
OpenAlex
W2116027030
Cited by
94
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 13
FWCI
7.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
World Anti-Doping Agency
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control
  • 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
Keywords
blood glucose meters, tight glycemic control, insulin dosing errors, total allowable error, hypoglycemia, diabetes management, computer simulation, blood glucose measurement
MeSH terms
Blood Chemical Analysis, Blood Glucose, Computer Simulation, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Insulin, Intensive Care Units, Monitoring, Physiologic, 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