4.7 Review

How can we monitor glycaemic variability in the clinical setting?

期刊

DIABETES OBESITY & METABOLISM
卷 15, 期 -, 页码 13-16

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/dom.12142

关键词

continuous glucose monitoring; glycaemic variability; self-monitoring of blood glucose; type 1 diabetes; type 2 diabetes

资金

  1. Bristol Meyers Squibb
  2. Eli Lilly
  3. Merck Sharp and Dohme
  4. Novartis
  5. Novo Nordisk
  6. Sanofi Aventis
  7. Takeda
  8. Abbott
  9. Bayer
  10. Chiesi Farmaceutici
  11. ForFarma
  12. Johnson & Johnson Medical
  13. Roche Diagnostics
  14. Rottapharm

向作者/读者索取更多资源

No universal consensus exists on how to express glycaemic variability. Among other parameters, standard deviation of blood glucose values, mean amplitude of glycaemic excursions (MAGE), the Low Blood Glucose Index (LBGI) and the High Blood Glucose Index (HBGI), which were subsequently combined into the Average Daily Risk Range (ADRR), mean of daily differences (MODD) and glycaemic variability index (GVI) are highlighted. The continuous glucose monitoring in research and clinical settings has been a great help for a comprehensive approach to circadian blood glucose evaluation and identification of individual patterns, mainly in type 1 diabetes, but recently also in type 2 diabetes. In everyday clinical practice the judicious use of self-monitoring of blood glucose in an educational setting involving the patient and the care team is an unreplaceable tool to effectively and safely guide behavioural and drug therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据