Nurses’ perceptions of continuous glucose monitoring in pediatric high-dependency care: a single-center survey of workflow and safety during management of an infant with hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.57177/idn.v19.344Keywords:
continuous glucose monitoring, hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia, nursing workloadAbstract
Background: Dysglycemia is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in critically ill pediatric patients. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) offers real-time glucose trend data, addressing limitations of point-of-care (POC) testing, such as intermittent readings and high workload. However, successful implementation of CGM in high-dependency (HD) pediatric care depends significantly on nurses’ perceptions and acceptance, which could better manage nursing workload.
Objective: This study explores nurses’ perceptions of CGM in a pediatric HD setting, focusing on factors that influence CGM adoption for workload management, using a case formulation framework, including predisposing, perpetuating, precipitating, and protective factors.
Methods: A single-center study was conducted at KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, involving 45 HD nurses who took part in a validated 20-item survey. Training on CGM implementation and guidelines was provided, and descriptive statistics were used to analyze survey responses. A specific case of an infant with hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia (HH) was included to illustrate CGM’s clinical application. The study was conducted in accordance with institutional guidelines, ensuring confidentiality of patient and nurse data.
Results: Most nurses (86%) reported that CGM was easy to use and reduced their workload compared to POC testing. In addition, 88% of nurses agreed that CGM, when combined with POC testing, enhanced patient safety. Despite limited familiarity with CGM prior to implementation (37% reported no prior experience), 86% of nurses felt comfortable using CGM after training, which was primarily delivered through peer-led handovers. Barriers to adoption included challenges with calibration protocols and perceived accuracy (54% reported CGM readings as accurate). Overall, 82% of nurses recommended CGM for continued use in HD care.
Conclusion: The CGM is perceived positively by nurses for its ability to enhance patient safety, improve workflow efficiency, and reduce workload in pediatric HD settings. However, successful implementation requires structured training, clear guidelines, and ongoing support to address barriers such as limited familiarity and calibration challenges. Future research should evaluate CGM’s cost-effectiveness, clinical outcomes, and long-term impact on glycemic control in acute inpatient pediatric care.
Downloads
References
1.
Khajavi L, Khademi G, Mehramiz M, Norouzy A, Safarian M. Association of dysglycemia with mortality in children receiving parenteral nutrition in paediatric intensive care unit. Turk J Pediatr 2018; 60(2): 134–41. doi: 10.24953/turkjped.2018.02.003
2.
Hirshberg E, Larsen G, Van Duker H. Alterations in glucose homeostasis in the paediatric intensive care unit: hyperglycemia and glucose variability are associated with increased mortality and morbidity. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2008; 9(4): 361–6. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0b013e318172d401
3.
Badawi O, Waite MD, Fuhrman SA, Zuckerman IH. Association between intensive care unit-acquired dysglycemia and in-hospital mortality. Crit Care Med 2012; 40(12): 3180–8. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3182656ae5
4.
Ameyaw E, Amponsah-Achiano K, Yamoah P, Chanoine JP. Abnormal blood glucose as a prognostic factor for adverse clinical outcome in children admitted to the paediatric emergency unit at komfo anokye teaching hospital, Kumasi, Ghana. Int J Pediatr 2014; 2014: 149070. doi: 10.1155/2014/149070
5.
Tran NK, LaValley C, Bagley B, Rodrigo J. Point of care blood glucose devices in the hospital setting. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 2023; 60(4): 290–9. doi: 10.1080/10408363.2023.2170316
6.
Rebel A, Rice MA, Fahy BG. Accuracy of point-of-care glucose measurements. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2012; 6(2): 396–411. doi: 10.1177/193229681200600228
7.
Boland E, Monsod T, Delucia M, Brandt CA, Fernando S, Tamborlane WV. Limitations of conventional methods of self-monitoring of blood glucose: lessons learned from 3 days of continuous glucose sensing in paediatric patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2001; 24(11): 1858–62. doi: 10.2337/diacare.24.11.1858
8.
Boom DT, Sechterberger MK, Rijkenberg S, Kreder S, Bosman RJ, Wester JP, et al. Insulin treatment guided by subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring compared to frequent point-of-care measurement in critically ill patients: a randomized controlled trial. Crit Care 2014; 18(4): 453. doi: 10.1186/s13054-014-0453-9
9.
Pott T, Jimenez-Vega J, Parker J, Fitzgerald R. Continuous glucose monitoring in paediatric diabetic ketoacidosis. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2024; 18(4): 899–903. doi: 10.1177/19322968221140430
10.
Baker RK, Filipp SL, Jacobsen LM. Type 1 diabetes continuous glucose monitoring use in the paediatric emergency department affects laboratory test frequency but not treatment timing. Diabetes Spectr 2023; 36(3): 275–80. doi: 10.2337/ds22-0061
11.
Yao Y, Zhao YH, Zheng WH, Huang HB. Subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring in critically ill patients during insulin therapy: a meta-analysis. Am J Transl Res 2022; 14(7): 4757–67.
12.
van Steen SC, Rijkenberg S, Limpens J, van der Voort PH, Hermanides J, DeVries JH. The clinical benefits and accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring systems in critically ill patients – a systematic scoping review. Sensors (Basel) 2017; 17(1): 146. doi: 10.3390/s17010146
13.
Faulds ER, Dungan KM, McNett M, Jones L, Poindexter N, Exline M, et al. Nursing perspectives on the use of continuous glucose monitoring in the intensive care unit. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2023; 17(3): 649–55.
14.
Kooij L, Peters GM, Doggen CJM, van Harten WH. Remote continuous monitoring with wireless wearable sensors in clinical practice, nurses perspectives on factors affecting implementation: a qualitative study. BMC Nurs 2022; 21(1): 53. doi: 10.1186/s12912-022-00832-2
15.
Smith MB, Albanese-O’Neill A, Macieira TGR, Yao Y, Abbatematteo JM, Lyon D, et al. Human factors associated with continuous glucose monitor use in patients with diabetes: a systematic review. Diabetes Technol Ther 2019; 21(10): 589–601. doi: 10.1089/dia.2019.0136
16.
Holden RJ, Asan O, Wozniak EM, Flynn KE, Scanlon MC. Nurses’ perceptions, acceptance, and use of a novel in-room paediatric ICU technology: testing an expanded technology acceptance model. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2016; 16(1): 145. doi: 10.1186/s12911-016-0388-y
17.
Holden RJ, Brown RL, Scanlon MC, Karsh BT. Modeling nurses’ acceptance of bar coded medication administration technology at a paediatric hospital. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2012; 19(6): 1050–8. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000754
18.
Messer LH, Cook PF, Lowe NK, Hood KK, Driscoll KA, Hernandez TL. Predicting optimal use of continuous glucose monitors in adolescents with type 1 diabetes: it’s about benefit and burden. J Pediatr Nurs 2022; 62: 23–9. doi: 10.1016/j.pedn.2021.11.016
19.
Gómez AM, Umpierrez GE, Muñoz OM, Herrera F, Rubio C, Aschner P, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring versus capillary point-of-care testing for inpatient glycemic control in type 2 diabetes patients hospitalized in the general ward and treated with a basal bolus insulin regimen. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2015; 10(2): 325–9. doi: 10.1177/1932296815602905
20.
Bridges BC, Preissig CM, Maher KO, Rigby MR. Continuous glucose monitors prove highly accurate in critically ill children. Crit Care 2010; 14(5): R176. doi: 10.1186/cc9280
21.
Worth C, Dunne M, Ghosh A, Harper S, Banerjee I. Continuous glucose monitoring for hypoglycaemia in children: perspectives in 2020. Pediatr Diabetes 2020; 21(5): 697–706. doi: 10.1111/pedi.13029
22.
Faulds ER, Jones L, McNett M, Smetana KS, May CC, Sumner L, 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): 354–61. doi: 10.1016/j.eprac.2021.01.011
23.
Rodbard D. Continuous glucose monitoring: a review of successes, challenges, and opportunities. Diabetes Technol Ther 2016; 18 (Suppl 2): S3–13. doi: 10.1089/dia.2015.0417
24.
Veríssimo D, Pereira BR, Vinhais J, Ivo C, Martins AC, Silva JN, et al. Cost-effectiveness of inpatient continuous glucose monitoring. Cureus 2024; 16(3): e55999. doi: 10.7759/cureus.55999
25.
Buschur EO, Faulds E, Dungan K. CGM in the hospital: is it ready for prime time? Curr Diab Rep 2022; 22(9): 451–60. doi: 10.1007/s11892-022-01484-x
26.
Reutrakul S, Genco M, Salinas H, Sargis RM, Paul C, Eisenberg Y, et al. Feasibility of inpatient continuous glucose monitoring during the COVID-19 pandemic: early experience. Diabetes Care 2020; 43(10): e137–8. doi: 10.2337/dc20-1503
27.
Dillmann C, Amoura L, Fall Mostaine F, Coste A, Bounyar L, Kessler L. Feasibility of real-time continuous glucose monitoring telemetry system in an inpatient diabetes unit: a pilot study. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2022; 16(4): 955–61. doi: 10.1177/1932296821994586
28.
Wallia A, Umpierrez GE, Nasraway SA, Klonoff DC, Investigators P. Round table discussion on inpatient use of continuous glucose monitoring at the international hospital diabetes meeting. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2016; 10(5): 1174–81. doi: 10.1177/1932296816656380
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Soo Ting Joyce Lim, Yuen Ching Angela Hui, Nazimah Binte Mohamed Sani, Daniel Chan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
