2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.nutres.2006.07.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

No difference between venous and capillary blood sampling and the Minimed continuous glucose monitoring system for determining the blood glucose response to food

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…At times when blood glucose concentrations are changing at very high rates (>27 mmol/l per min), the delay may result in an underestimation of the rate of change in blood glucose concentrations [40] or failure to detect rapid, transitory excursions [41]. However, CGMS has been validated against measures of venous and capillary blood as a tool to measure glycaemic responses to meal ingestion [42], and exercise does not appear to influence the duration of the lag time between changes in capillary and interstitial glucose [38], the relative difference (~15%) in CGMS and glucometer recordings [41], or the rate of accurately identifying hypoglycaemic excursions in patients with type 1 diabetes [41]. Thus, it is unlikely that exercise appreciably influenced the accuracy or reliability of the CGMS measures in the present study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At times when blood glucose concentrations are changing at very high rates (>27 mmol/l per min), the delay may result in an underestimation of the rate of change in blood glucose concentrations [40] or failure to detect rapid, transitory excursions [41]. However, CGMS has been validated against measures of venous and capillary blood as a tool to measure glycaemic responses to meal ingestion [42], and exercise does not appear to influence the duration of the lag time between changes in capillary and interstitial glucose [38], the relative difference (~15%) in CGMS and glucometer recordings [41], or the rate of accurately identifying hypoglycaemic excursions in patients with type 1 diabetes [41]. Thus, it is unlikely that exercise appreciably influenced the accuracy or reliability of the CGMS measures in the present study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A larger variation in the blood glucose rate of change indicates a more rapid and pronounced blood glucose fluctuation. Validation studies indicated that the Minimed CGMS is adequate for testing the glucose response to foods [ 24 , 25 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Even though this approach differs from the traditional method recommended by the WHO, 7 previous studies have shown high correlation in GI outcomes between both methods, 32,33 and the accuracy of the CGMS was proven. [34][35][36][37] The fact that test meals were eaten both for breakfast and for dinner led to a higher number of tests in one test period. 19 In addition, at-home food testing provided a more relaxed atmosphere for all subjects compared to the traditional laboratory setting.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%