检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:张东辉[1] 顾楠[1] 李昂[1] 郭晓蕙[1] 张俊清[1] 王志稳[2] ZHANG Donghui;GU Nan;LI Ang(Department of Endocrinology,Peking University First Hospital,Bejing 100034,China)
机构地区:[1]北京大学第一医院内分泌科,100034 [2]北京大学护理学院
出 处:《中国糖尿病杂志》2021年第2期95-98,共4页Chinese Journal of Diabetes
摘 要:目的比较自我血糖监测(SMBG)与扫描式葡萄糖监测(FGM)系统评价T2DM患者24 h内葡萄糖在目标范围内时间(TIR)的差异。方法选取2019年11月至2020年1月于北京大学第一医院内分泌科就诊的T2DM患者47例,分为HbA_(1)c≥6.5%组16例及HbA_(1)c<6.5%组31例。两组均佩戴雅培瞬感FGM,并使用拜安进血糖仪监测7点指尖血糖。TIR血糖值设置为3.9~10.0 mmol/L。分别读取FGM报告,并计算SMBG所得7点指尖血糖的TIR、葡萄糖高于目标范围时间(TAR)、葡萄糖低于目标范围时间(TBR)及平均血糖(MBG)数值,比较SMBG及FGM数据差异。结果 HbA_(1)c≥6.5%组采用SMBG与FGM,在TIR、TAR、TBR及MBG方面比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。HbA_(1)c<6.5%组采用SMBG与FGM,在TAR、TBR及MBG方面比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),TIR无明显差异(P>0.05)。结论 SMBG 7点血糖与FGM在评价T2DM患者TIR方面结果一致。当HbA_(1)c≥6.5时,二者在评价TIR、TAR、TBR及MBG方面一致。Objective To compare the differences between self-monitoring glucose(SMBG) and flash glucose monitoring(FGM) in the evaluation of Time in Range(TIR) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus(T2DM).Methods A total of 47 patients with T2DM in the clinic of Endocrinology Department in Peking University First Hospital were enrolled in this study from November 2019 to January 2020.All the participants were divided into two groups according to their HbA_(1)c:HbA_(1)c≥6.5% group and HbA_(1)c<6.5%group.They wore Abbott FGM and monitored blood glucose at 7 fingertips with Contour Plus Blood Glucose Meter.TIR was set to be 3.9~10.0 mmol/L.FGM report was downloaded and we calculated TIR,TAR,TBR and mean blood glucose(MBG) values of SMBG at 7 fingertip.The difference of the above index was compared between the two groups.Results In HbA_(1)c≥6.5% group,TIR,TAR,TBR and MBG were not significantly different between SMBG and FGM(P>0.05).In HbA_(1)c<6.5% group,TAR,TBR and MBG were significantly different between SMBG and FGM(P<0.05), but TIR was similar(P>0.05).Conclusion SMBG 7 point blood glucose was consistent with FGM in TIR evaluation of type 2 diabetes patients.When HbA_(1)c≥6.5%,the two were consistent in TIR,TAR,TBR and MBG evaluation.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:18.221.124.95