Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Dec;3(4):100193.
doi: 10.1016/j.chstcc.2025.100193. Epub 2025 Sep 24.

The Role of Calibration Practices in Optimizing Continuous Glucose Monitor Accuracy in Critically Ill Patients

Melanie Natasha Rayan  1 , Eileen R Faulds  1 , Brooke Lee  1 , Molly McNett  1 , Matthew Exline  1 , Chyongchiou J Lin  1 , Laureen Jones  1 , Amanie Rasul  1 , Kathleen M Dungan  1
Affiliations

The Role of Calibration Practices in Optimizing Continuous Glucose Monitor Accuracy in Critically Ill Patients

Melanie Natasha Rayan et al. CHEST Crit Care. 2025 Dec.

Abstract

Background: In the ICU, continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) may improve glycemia and reduce the need for point-of-care blood glucose (POC BG) monitoring, but face challenges because of clinical conditions that affect accuracy.

Research question: What is the feasibility of using POC BG calibration to improve CGM accuracy?

Study design and methods: This feasibility study pooled data from a retrospective study of patients with COVID-19 in the ICU and a prospective single-arm clinical trial of patients in the ICU. Our sample included 110 patients receiving IV insulin monitored using a hybrid CGM plus POC BG protocol with a factory-calibrated Dexcom G6 CGM (Dexcom, Inc.). Validation was required for initial and ongoing nonadjunctive use or for standalone use and was defined as CGM ± 20% of POC BG measurement for values of ≥ 100 mg/dL or ± 20 mg/dL for values of < 100 mg/dL. In the cohort with COVID-19, calibration was performed at the nurse's discretion. In the prospective study, calibration was performed after persistent failure to achieve validation.

Results: A total of 55 patients (50%) underwent 167 calibrations. Those with a calibration had a mean age of 57.9 ± 13.6 years, 49% were male, 83% were White, and 60% had type 2 diabetes. After calibration, validation was achieved in 72.6%, 66.7%, and 77.8% of patients at 6, 12, and 24 hours after calibration, respectively. The mean absolute relative difference (MARD) was 25% at calibration, decreasing to 9.6%, 12.7%, and 13.2% at 6, 12, and 24 hours. Similar percentages were observed after eliminating pairs with multiple calibrations. Calibration was timely, within 5 minutes of the POC BG measurement in 70% and < 10 minutes in 83%. No statistical difference in MARD was found between timely and late calibrations or based on sensor rate of change at the time of calibration.

Interpretation: Our feasibility study demonstrated an improvement in CGM accuracy with POC BG calibrations in ICU patients. Further research is needed to understand optimal implementation strategies and impact on outcomes. CHEST Critical Care 2025; 3(4):100193.

Keywords: CGM; COVID-19; ICU; MARD; calibration; continuous glucose monitor; glucose variability; hybrid CGM-POC monitor; hybrid protocol; inpatient diabetes; inpatient hyperglycemia; intensive care unit; mean absolute relative difference; point-of-care blood glucose; sensor rate of change.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1 –
Figure 1 –
Mean absolute relative difference at prior to (time 0) and after calibration.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Maiorino MI, Signoriello S, Maio A, et al. Effects of continuous glucose monitoring on metrics of glycemic control in diabetes: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(5):1146–1156. - PubMed
    1. Grunberger G, Sherr J, Allende M, et al. American Association of Clinical Endocrinology clinical practice guideline: the use of advanced technology in the management of persons with diabetes mellitus. Endocr Pract. 2021;27(6):505–537. - PubMed
    1. Karges B, Tittel SR, Bey A, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring versus blood glucose monitoring for risk of severe hypoglycaemia and diabetic ketoacidosis in children, adolescents, and young adults with type 1 diabetes: a population-based study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2023;11(5):314–323. - PubMed
    1. Faulds ER, Jones L, McNett M, et al. Facilitators and barriers to nursing implementation of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Endocr Pract. 2021;27(4):354–361. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chow KW, Kelly DJ, Gupta R, Miller JD. Use of continuous glucose monitoring to assess parenteral nutrition-induced hyperglycemia in an adult patient with severe COVID-19. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 2021;45(1):208–211. - PubMed