Next Article in Journal
Impact of Breakfast Skipping and Breakfast Choice on the Nutrient Intake and Body Mass Index of Australian Children
Previous Article in Journal
Effects of Maternal Chromium Restriction on the Long-Term Programming in MAPK Signaling Pathway of Lipid Metabolism in Mice
Open AccessArticle

Accuracy of Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) during Continuous and High-Intensity Interval Exercise in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus

Institute of Sports Sciences, Exercise Physiology, Training & Training Therapy Research Group, University of Graz, Max-Mell-Allee 11/III, Graz 8010, Austria
Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology & Diabetology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 15, Graz 8036, Austria
Institute of Health and Tourism Management, Sports Science Laboratory, FH JOANNEUM—University of Applied Sciences, Kaiser-Franz-Josef Straße 24, Bad Gleichenberg 8344, Austria
Center of Sports Medicine & Sports Orthopedics, University Outpatient Clinic, University of Potsdam, Am Neuen Palais 12, Potsdam 14469, Germany
Department of Haematology, Oncology and Palliative Care, Klinikum Ernst von Bergmann, Charlottenstraße 72, Potsdam 14467, Germany
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors are contributed equally.
Nutrients 2016, 8(8), 489;
Received: 30 May 2016 / Revised: 19 July 2016 / Accepted: 28 July 2016 / Published: 10 August 2016
Continuous exercise (CON) and high-intensity interval exercise (HIIE) can be safely performed with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Additionally, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems may serve as a tool to reduce the risk of exercise-induced hypoglycemia. It is unclear if CGM is accurate during CON and HIIE at different mean workloads. Seven T1DM patients performed CON and HIIE at 5% below (L) and above (M) the first lactate turn point (LTP1), and 5% below the second lactate turn point (LTP2) (H) on a cycle ergometer. Glucose was measured via CGM and in capillary blood (BG). Differences were found in comparison of CGM vs. BG in three out of the six tests (p < 0.05). In CON, bias and levels of agreement for L, M, and H were found at: 0.85 (−3.44, 5.15) mmol·L−1, −0.45 (−3.95, 3.05) mmol·L−1, −0.31 (−8.83, 8.20) mmol·L−1 and at 1.17 (−2.06, 4.40) mmol·L−1, 0.11 (−5.79, 6.01) mmol·L−1, 1.48 (−2.60, 5.57) mmol·L−1 in HIIE for the same intensities. Clinically-acceptable results (except for CON H) were found. CGM estimated BG to be clinically acceptable, except for CON H. Additionally, using CGM may increase avoidance of exercise-induced hypoglycemia, but usual BG control should be performed during intense exercise. View Full-Text
Keywords: continuous glucose monitoring; exercise; diabetes; blood glucose continuous glucose monitoring; exercise; diabetes; blood glucose
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

MDPI and ACS Style

Moser, O.; Mader, J.K.; Tschakert, G.; Mueller, A.; Groeschl, W.; Pieber, T.R.; Koehler, G.; Messerschmidt, J.; Hofmann, P. Accuracy of Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) during Continuous and High-Intensity Interval Exercise in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus. Nutrients 2016, 8, 489.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

Back to TopTop