Bedside Glucose Monitoring - Is it Safe? A New, Regulatory-Compliant Risk Assessment Evaluation Protocol in Critically Ill Patient Care Settings∗

Jeffrey Anton Dubois, Robbert Jan Slingerland, Marion Fokkert, Alain Roman, Nam Tran, William Clarke, David Alan Sartori, Tina L Palmieri, Andrei Malic, Martha Elizabeth Lyon, Andrew William Lyon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: New data have emerged from ambulatory and acute care settings about adverse patient events, including death, attributable to erroneous blood glucose meter measurements and leading to questions over their use in critically ill patients. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration published new, more stringent guidelines for glucose meter manufacturers to evaluate the performance of blood glucose meters in critically ill patient settings. The primary objective of this international, multicenter, multidisciplinary clinical study was to develop and apply a rigorous clinical accuracy assessment algorithm, using four distinct statistical tools, to evaluate the clinical accuracy of a blood glucose monitoring system in critically ill patients. Design: Observational study. Setting: Five international medical and surgical ICUs. Patients: All patients admitted to critical care settings in the centers. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Glucose measurements were performed on 1,698 critically ill patients with 257 different clinical conditions and complex treatment regimens. The clinical accuracy assessment algorithm comprised four statistical tools to assess the performance of the study blood glucose monitoring system compared with laboratory reference methods traceable to a definitive standard. Based on POCT12-A3, the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute standard for hospitals about hospital glucose meter procedures and performance, and Parkes error grid clinical accuracy performance criteria, no clinically significant differences were observed due to patient condition or therapy, with 96.1% and 99.3% glucose results meeting the respective criteria. Stratified sensitivity and specificity analysis (10 mg/dL glucose intervals, 50-150 mg/dL) demonstrated high sensitivity (mean = 95.2%, sd = ± 0.02) and specificity (mean = 95. 8%, sd = ± 0.03). Monte Carlo simulation modeling of the study blood glucose monitoring system showed low probability of category 2 and category 3 insulin dosing error, category 2 = 2.3% (41/1,815) and category 3 = 1.8% (32/1,815), respectively. Patient trend analysis demonstrated 99.1% (223/225) concordance in characterizing hypoglycemic patients. Conclusions: The multicomponent, clinical accuracy assessment algorithm demonstrated that the blood glucose monitoring system was acceptable for use in critically ill patient settings when compared to the central laboratory reference method. This clinical accuracy assessment algorithm is an effective tool for comprehensively assessing the validity of whole blood glucose measurement in critically ill patient care settings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)567-574
Number of pages8
JournalCritical Care Medicine
Volume45
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2017

Fingerprint

Critical Illness
Patient Care
Glucose
Blood Glucose
United States Food and Drug Administration
Critical Care
Ambulatory Care
Hypoglycemic Agents
Observational Studies
Guidelines
Insulin
Sensitivity and Specificity

Keywords

  • blood glucose monitoring
  • critically ill
  • insulin dosing error
  • Monte Carlo simulation modeling
  • stratified glycemic accuracy analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Bedside Glucose Monitoring - Is it Safe? A New, Regulatory-Compliant Risk Assessment Evaluation Protocol in Critically Ill Patient Care Settings∗. / Dubois, Jeffrey Anton; Slingerland, Robbert Jan; Fokkert, Marion; Roman, Alain; Tran, Nam; Clarke, William; Sartori, David Alan; Palmieri, Tina L; Malic, Andrei; Lyon, Martha Elizabeth; Lyon, Andrew William.

In: Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 45, No. 4, 01.04.2017, p. 567-574.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Dubois, Jeffrey Anton ; Slingerland, Robbert Jan ; Fokkert, Marion ; Roman, Alain ; Tran, Nam ; Clarke, William ; Sartori, David Alan ; Palmieri, Tina L ; Malic, Andrei ; Lyon, Martha Elizabeth ; Lyon, Andrew William. / Bedside Glucose Monitoring - Is it Safe? A New, Regulatory-Compliant Risk Assessment Evaluation Protocol in Critically Ill Patient Care Settings∗. In: Critical Care Medicine. 2017 ; Vol. 45, No. 4. pp. 567-574.
@article{8cf5e6fa251f48948f3dba5334240f04,
title = "Bedside Glucose Monitoring - Is it Safe? A New, Regulatory-Compliant Risk Assessment Evaluation Protocol in Critically Ill Patient Care Settings∗",
abstract = "Objectives: New data have emerged from ambulatory and acute care settings about adverse patient events, including death, attributable to erroneous blood glucose meter measurements and leading to questions over their use in critically ill patients. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration published new, more stringent guidelines for glucose meter manufacturers to evaluate the performance of blood glucose meters in critically ill patient settings. The primary objective of this international, multicenter, multidisciplinary clinical study was to develop and apply a rigorous clinical accuracy assessment algorithm, using four distinct statistical tools, to evaluate the clinical accuracy of a blood glucose monitoring system in critically ill patients. Design: Observational study. Setting: Five international medical and surgical ICUs. Patients: All patients admitted to critical care settings in the centers. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Glucose measurements were performed on 1,698 critically ill patients with 257 different clinical conditions and complex treatment regimens. The clinical accuracy assessment algorithm comprised four statistical tools to assess the performance of the study blood glucose monitoring system compared with laboratory reference methods traceable to a definitive standard. Based on POCT12-A3, the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute standard for hospitals about hospital glucose meter procedures and performance, and Parkes error grid clinical accuracy performance criteria, no clinically significant differences were observed due to patient condition or therapy, with 96.1{\%} and 99.3{\%} glucose results meeting the respective criteria. Stratified sensitivity and specificity analysis (10 mg/dL glucose intervals, 50-150 mg/dL) demonstrated high sensitivity (mean = 95.2{\%}, sd = ± 0.02) and specificity (mean = 95. 8{\%}, sd = ± 0.03). Monte Carlo simulation modeling of the study blood glucose monitoring system showed low probability of category 2 and category 3 insulin dosing error, category 2 = 2.3{\%} (41/1,815) and category 3 = 1.8{\%} (32/1,815), respectively. Patient trend analysis demonstrated 99.1{\%} (223/225) concordance in characterizing hypoglycemic patients. Conclusions: The multicomponent, clinical accuracy assessment algorithm demonstrated that the blood glucose monitoring system was acceptable for use in critically ill patient settings when compared to the central laboratory reference method. This clinical accuracy assessment algorithm is an effective tool for comprehensively assessing the validity of whole blood glucose measurement in critically ill patient care settings.",
keywords = "blood glucose monitoring, critically ill, insulin dosing error, Monte Carlo simulation modeling, stratified glycemic accuracy analysis",
author = "Dubois, {Jeffrey Anton} and Slingerland, {Robbert Jan} and Marion Fokkert and Alain Roman and Nam Tran and William Clarke and Sartori, {David Alan} and Palmieri, {Tina L} and Andrei Malic and Lyon, {Martha Elizabeth} and Lyon, {Andrew William}",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/CCM.0000000000002252",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "45",
pages = "567--574",
journal = "Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "0090-3493",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bedside Glucose Monitoring - Is it Safe? A New, Regulatory-Compliant Risk Assessment Evaluation Protocol in Critically Ill Patient Care Settings∗

AU - Dubois, Jeffrey Anton

AU - Slingerland, Robbert Jan

AU - Fokkert, Marion

AU - Roman, Alain

AU - Tran, Nam

AU - Clarke, William

AU - Sartori, David Alan

AU - Palmieri, Tina L

AU - Malic, Andrei

AU - Lyon, Martha Elizabeth

AU - Lyon, Andrew William

PY - 2017/4/1

Y1 - 2017/4/1

N2 - Objectives: New data have emerged from ambulatory and acute care settings about adverse patient events, including death, attributable to erroneous blood glucose meter measurements and leading to questions over their use in critically ill patients. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration published new, more stringent guidelines for glucose meter manufacturers to evaluate the performance of blood glucose meters in critically ill patient settings. The primary objective of this international, multicenter, multidisciplinary clinical study was to develop and apply a rigorous clinical accuracy assessment algorithm, using four distinct statistical tools, to evaluate the clinical accuracy of a blood glucose monitoring system in critically ill patients. Design: Observational study. Setting: Five international medical and surgical ICUs. Patients: All patients admitted to critical care settings in the centers. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Glucose measurements were performed on 1,698 critically ill patients with 257 different clinical conditions and complex treatment regimens. The clinical accuracy assessment algorithm comprised four statistical tools to assess the performance of the study blood glucose monitoring system compared with laboratory reference methods traceable to a definitive standard. Based on POCT12-A3, the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute standard for hospitals about hospital glucose meter procedures and performance, and Parkes error grid clinical accuracy performance criteria, no clinically significant differences were observed due to patient condition or therapy, with 96.1% and 99.3% glucose results meeting the respective criteria. Stratified sensitivity and specificity analysis (10 mg/dL glucose intervals, 50-150 mg/dL) demonstrated high sensitivity (mean = 95.2%, sd = ± 0.02) and specificity (mean = 95. 8%, sd = ± 0.03). Monte Carlo simulation modeling of the study blood glucose monitoring system showed low probability of category 2 and category 3 insulin dosing error, category 2 = 2.3% (41/1,815) and category 3 = 1.8% (32/1,815), respectively. Patient trend analysis demonstrated 99.1% (223/225) concordance in characterizing hypoglycemic patients. Conclusions: The multicomponent, clinical accuracy assessment algorithm demonstrated that the blood glucose monitoring system was acceptable for use in critically ill patient settings when compared to the central laboratory reference method. This clinical accuracy assessment algorithm is an effective tool for comprehensively assessing the validity of whole blood glucose measurement in critically ill patient care settings.

AB - Objectives: New data have emerged from ambulatory and acute care settings about adverse patient events, including death, attributable to erroneous blood glucose meter measurements and leading to questions over their use in critically ill patients. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration published new, more stringent guidelines for glucose meter manufacturers to evaluate the performance of blood glucose meters in critically ill patient settings. The primary objective of this international, multicenter, multidisciplinary clinical study was to develop and apply a rigorous clinical accuracy assessment algorithm, using four distinct statistical tools, to evaluate the clinical accuracy of a blood glucose monitoring system in critically ill patients. Design: Observational study. Setting: Five international medical and surgical ICUs. Patients: All patients admitted to critical care settings in the centers. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Glucose measurements were performed on 1,698 critically ill patients with 257 different clinical conditions and complex treatment regimens. The clinical accuracy assessment algorithm comprised four statistical tools to assess the performance of the study blood glucose monitoring system compared with laboratory reference methods traceable to a definitive standard. Based on POCT12-A3, the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute standard for hospitals about hospital glucose meter procedures and performance, and Parkes error grid clinical accuracy performance criteria, no clinically significant differences were observed due to patient condition or therapy, with 96.1% and 99.3% glucose results meeting the respective criteria. Stratified sensitivity and specificity analysis (10 mg/dL glucose intervals, 50-150 mg/dL) demonstrated high sensitivity (mean = 95.2%, sd = ± 0.02) and specificity (mean = 95. 8%, sd = ± 0.03). Monte Carlo simulation modeling of the study blood glucose monitoring system showed low probability of category 2 and category 3 insulin dosing error, category 2 = 2.3% (41/1,815) and category 3 = 1.8% (32/1,815), respectively. Patient trend analysis demonstrated 99.1% (223/225) concordance in characterizing hypoglycemic patients. Conclusions: The multicomponent, clinical accuracy assessment algorithm demonstrated that the blood glucose monitoring system was acceptable for use in critically ill patient settings when compared to the central laboratory reference method. This clinical accuracy assessment algorithm is an effective tool for comprehensively assessing the validity of whole blood glucose measurement in critically ill patient care settings.

KW - blood glucose monitoring

KW - critically ill

KW - insulin dosing error

KW - Monte Carlo simulation modeling

KW - stratified glycemic accuracy analysis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85011876554&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85011876554&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002252

DO - 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002252

M3 - Article

C2 - 28169943

AN - SCOPUS:85011876554

VL - 45

SP - 567

EP - 574

JO - Critical Care Medicine

JF - Critical Care Medicine

SN - 0090-3493

IS - 4

ER -