Jessica Castle, United States of America

Oregon Health & Science University Dept of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology

Presenter of 1 Presentation

ACCURACY OF THE DEXCOM G6 SYSTEM DURING AEROBIC, RESISTANCE, AND INTERVAL EXERCISE IN ADULTS WITH TYPE 1 DIABETES

Abstract

Background and Aims

Accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems may be impacted by exercise. We evaluated the impact of three different types of exercise on the Dexcom G6 system.

Methods

Twenty-four adults with type 1 diabetes on multiple daily injections wore two Dexcom G6 systems. Participants were randomized to aerobic, resistance, or high intensity interval exercise. Each participant completed 2 in-clinic sessions. The CGM systems were inserted a mean 5.3 days prior. Capillary blood glucose measurements were performed with a Contour Next meter. No CGM calibrations were performed.

Results

The mean absolute relative difference (MARD) of the G6 CGM system as compared to the Contour Next CBG measurements did not differ statistically using a paired Wilcoxon rank test from baseline across all exercise types (see table with mean±SD). The mean relative difference (MRD) was significantly different than baseline only for aerobic exercise at 45 min and for resistance at 30 min (P<0.05).

Conclusions

The accuracy of the no-calibration Dexcom G6 CGM system was not impacted by aerobic, anaerobic, or high intensity interval exercise.

Start

10 min

20 min

30 min

45 min

60 min

Aerobic

MARD (%)

11.6±10.4

13.9±12.7

12.2±10.8

15.9±12.9

13.4±8.9

13.3±7.8

MRD (%)

-0.2±15.9

2.6±19.0

3.2±16.3

3.6±20.5

-6.4±15.0*

-4.8±15.0

Resistance

MARD (%)

11.2±9.5

11.2±8.4

11.8±8.4

13.1±12.8

10.4±5.5

11.8±8.3

MRD (%)

-7.8±12.6

-5.3±13.2

-4.0±14.3

1.1±18.6*

-5.2±10.8

-7.1±12.8

Start

10 min

20 min

35 min

50 min

High Intensity Intervals

MARD

13.9±9.8

12.0±6.7

12.3±6.5

13.5±10.2

11.1±7.1

MRD (%)

-10.3±13.8

-9.2±10.4

-10.8±8.9

-12.6±11.4

-7.7±10.9

*P<0.05 as compared to the start of exercise.

Hide