English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate whether continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) sensors worn on the active muscle may provide enhanced insight into glucose control in non‐diabetic participants during cycling exercise compared to traditional sensor placement on the arm. Data from 9 healthy participants (F:3) was recorded using CGM sensors on the arm ( triceps brachii ) and leg ( vastus medialis ) following 100 g glucose ingestion during 30 min experimental visits of: resting control, graded cycling, electrically stimulated quadriceps contractions, and passive whole‐body heating. Finger capillary glucose was used to assess sensor accuracy. Under control conditions, the traditional arm sensor better reflected capillary glucose, with a mean absolute relative difference (MARD) of 12.4 ± 9.3% versus 18.3 ± 11.4% in the leg ( P  = 0.02). For the intended use during exercise, the sensor‐site difference was attenuated, with similar MARDs during cycling (arm:15.5 ± 12% versus leg:16.7 ± 10.8%,  P  = 0.96) and quadriceps stimulation (arm:15.5 ± 14.8% versus leg:13.9 ± 9.5%,  P  = 0.9). At rest, glucose at the leg was consistently lower than the arm ( P  = 0.01); whereas, during graded cycling, the leg‐glucose was lower only after maximal intensity exercise ( P  = 0.02). There was no difference between sensors during quadriceps stimulation ( P  = 0.8). Passive heating caused leg‐skin temperature to increase by 3.1 ± 1.8°C versus 1.1 ± 0.72°C at the arm ( P  = 0.002), elevating MARD in the leg (23.5 ± 16.2%) and lowering glucose in the leg ( P  &lt; 0.001). At rest, traditional placement of CGM sensors on the arm may best reflect blood glucose; however, during cycling, placement on the leg may offer greater insight to working muscle glucose concentrations, and this is likely due to greater blood‐flow rather than muscle contractions.

Investigating sensor location on the effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring during exercise in a non‐diabetic population