Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

ACC 2024 Congress

Catch up on all the top stories and latest evidence in cardiology research with our ACC 2024 Congress hub page.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Advances in Therapy
Published in: Advances in Therapy 3/2019

Open Access 01-03-2019 | Insulins | Review

Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Brief Review for Primary Care Practitioners

Authors: Ramzi Ajjan, David Slattery, Eugene Wright

Published in: Advances in Therapy | Issue 3/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is routinely used as a marker of average glycemic control, but it fails to provide data on hypoglycemia and glycemic variability, both of which are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), particularly in insulin-treated patients, is a cornerstone in the management of patients with diabetes. SMBG helps with treatment decisions that aim to reduce high glucose levels while avoiding hypoglycemia and limiting glucose variability. However, repeated SMBG can be inconvenient to patients and difficult to maintain in the long term. By contrast, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides a convenient, comprehensive assessment of blood glucose levels, allowing the identification of high and low glucose levels, in addition to evaluating glycemic variability. CGM using newer detection and visualization systems can overcome many of the limitations of an HbA1c-based approach while addressing the inconvenience and fragmented glucose data associated with SMBG. When used together with HbA1c monitoring, CGM provides complementary information on glucose levels, thus facilitating the optimization of diabetes therapy while reducing the fear and risk of hypoglycemia. Here we review the capabilities and benefits of CGM, including cost-effectiveness data, and discuss the potential limitations of this glucose-monitoring strategy for the management of patients with diabetes.

Funding

Sanofi US, Inc.
Literature
1.
Gebel E. The start of something good: the discovery of HbA1c and the American Diabetes Association Samuel Rahbar Outstanding Discovery Award. Diabetes Care. 2012;35:2429–31.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
2.
Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:977–86.CrossRef
3.
UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet. 1998;352:837–53.CrossRef
4.
UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Effect of intensive blood-glucose control with metformin on complications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 34). Lancet. 1998;352:854–65.CrossRef
5.
Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Research Group, Lachin JM, Genuth S, Cleary P, Davis MD, Nathan DM. Retinopathy and nephropathy in patients with type 1 diabetes four years after a trial of intensive therapy. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:381–9.CrossRef
6.
Writing Team for the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Research Group. Effect of intensive therapy on the microvascular complications of type 1 diabetes mellitus. JAMA. 2002;287:2563–9.CrossRef
7.
Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT)/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) Study Research Group. Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular outcomes in type 1 diabetes: the DCCT/EDIC study 30-year follow-up. Diabetes Care. 2016;39:686–93.CrossRef
8.
American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes—2018. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(Suppl. 1):S1–153.
9.
Garber AJ, Abrahamson MJ, Barzilay JI, et al. Consensus statement by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology on the comprehensive type 2 diabetes management algorithm—2018 executive summary. Endocr Pract. 2018;24:91–120.PubMedCrossRef
10.
11.
Ajjan RA. How can we realize the clinical benefits of continuous glucose monitoring? Diabetes Technol Ther. 2017;19:S27–36.PubMedCrossRef
12.
13.
Patton SR, Clements MA. Continuous glucose monitoring versus self-monitoring of blood glucose in children with type 1 diabetes—are there pros and cons for both? US Endocrinol. 2012;8:27–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
14.
Nathan DM, Kuenen J, Borg R, Zheng H, Schoenfeld D, Heine RJ, A1c-Derived Average Glucose Study Group. Translating the A1C assay into estimated average glucose values. Diabetes Care. 2008;31:1473–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
15.
Rayman G. Glycaemic control, glucose variability and the triangle of diabetes care. Br J Diabetes. 2016;16(Suppl. 11):S3–6.CrossRef
16.
17.
Hirsch IB, Verderese CA. Professional flash continuous glucose monitoring with ambulatory glucose profile reporting to supplement A1C: rationale and practical implementation. Endocr Pract. 2017;23:1333–44.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Clarke SF, Foster JR. A history of blood glucose meters and their role in self-monitoring of diabetes mellitus. Br J Biomed Sci. 2012;69:83–93.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Brazg RL, Klaff LJ, Parkin CG. Performance variability of seven commonly used self-monitoring of blood glucose systems: clinical considerations for patients and providers. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013;7:144–52.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
20.
Miller KM, Beck RW, Bergenstal RM, et al. Evidence of a strong association between frequency of self-monitoring of blood glucose and hemoglobin A1c levels in T1D exchange clinic registry participants. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:2009–14.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
Schütt M, Kern W, Krause U, et al. Is the frequency of self-monitoring of blood glucose related to long-term metabolic control? Multicenter analysis including 24,500 patients from 191 centers in Germany and Austria. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2006;114:384–8.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Karter AJ, Ackerson LM, Darbinian JA, et al. Self-monitoring of blood glucose levels and glycemic control: the Northern California Kaiser Permanente Diabetes registry. Am J Med. 2001;111:1–9.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Malanda UL, Welschen LM, Riphagen II, Dekker JM, Nijpels G, Bot SD. Self-monitoring of blood glucose in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are not using insulin. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;1:CD005060.PubMed
24.
Moström P, Ahlén E, Imberg H, Hansson PO, Lind M. Adherence of self-monitoring of blood glucose in persons with type 1 diabetes in Sweden. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2017;5:e000342.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
25.
Mazze RS, Shamoon H, Pasmantier R, et al. Reliability of blood glucose monitoring by patients with diabetes mellitus. Am J Med. 1984;77:211–7.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Kalergis M, Nadeau J, Pacaud D, Yared Z, Yale J-F. Accuracy and reliability of reporting self-monitoring of blood glucose results in adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Can J Diabetes. 2006;30:241–7.CrossRef
27.
Blackwell M, Tomlinson PA, Rayns J, Hunter J, Sjoeholm A, Wheeler BJ. Exploring the motivations behind misreporting self-measured blood glucose in adolescents with type 1 diabetes—a qualitative study. J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2016;15:16.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
28.
Blackwell M, Wheeler BJ. Clinical review: the misreporting of logbook, download, and verbal self-measured blood glucose in adults and children with type I diabetes. Acta Diabetol. 2017;54:1–8.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Cryer PE. Glycemic goals in diabetes: trade-off between glycemic control and iatrogenic hypoglycemia. Diabetes. 2014;63:2188–95.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Khunti K, Alsifri S, Aronson R, et al. Impact of hypoglycaemia on patient-reported outcomes from a global, 24-country study of 27,585 people with type 1 and insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2017;130:121–9.PubMedCrossRef
31.
32.
van Dalem J, Brouwers MC, Stehouwer CD, et al. Risk of hypoglycaemia in users of sulphonylureas compared with metformin in relation to renal function and sulphonylurea metabolite group: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2016;354:i3625.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
33.
King R, Ajjan R. Hypoglycaemia, thrombosis and vascular events in diabetes. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2016;14:1099–101.PubMedCrossRef
34.
35.
Brands AMA, Biessels GJ, de Haan EHF, Kappelle LJ, Kessels RPC. The effects of type 1 diabetes on cognitive performance. A meta-analysis. Diabetes Care. 2005;28:726–35.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Blasetti A, Chiuri RM, Tocco AM, et al. The effect of recurrent severe hypoglycemia on cognitive performance in children with type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis. J Child Neurol. 2011;26:1383–91.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Khunti K, Davies M, Majeed A, Thorsted BL, Wolden ML, Paul SK. Hypoglycemia and risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality in insulin-treated people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a cohort study. Diabetes Care. 2015;38:316–22.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Elwen FR, Huskinson A, Clapham L, et al. An observational study of patient characteristics and mortality following hypoglycemia in the community. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2015;3:e000094.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
39.
McCoy RG, Van Houten HK, Ziegenfuss JY, Shah ND, Wermers RA, Smith SA. Increased mortality of patients with diabetes reporting severe hypoglycemia. Diabetes Care. 2012;35:1897–901.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
40.
Pieber TR, Marso SP, McGuire DK, et al. DEVOTE 3: temporal relationships between severe hypoglycaemia, cardiovascular outcomes and mortality. Diabetologia. 2018;61:58–65.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Ismail-Beigi F, Craven T, Banerji MA, et al. Effect of intensive treatment of hyperglycaemia on microvascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: an analysis of the ACCORD randomised trial. Lancet. 2010;376:419–30.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
42.
Zoungas S, Patel A, Chalmers J, et al. Severe hypoglycemia and risks of vascular events and death. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1410–8.PubMedCrossRef
43.
44.
Martín-Timón I, Del Cañizo-Gómez FJ. Mechanisms of hypoglycemia unawareness and implications in diabetic patients. World J Diabetes. 2015;6:912–26.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
45.
Monnier L, Colette C, Owens DR. The application of simple metrics in the assessment of glycaemic variability. Diabetes Metab. 2018;44:313–9.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Freckmann G, Pleus S, Link M, Haug C. Accuracy of BG meters and CGM systems: possible influence factors for the glucose prediction based on tissue glucose concentrations. In: Kirchsteiger H, Jørgensen JB, Renard E, del Re L, editors. Prediction methods for blood glucose concentration: design, use and evaluation. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016. p. 31–42.CrossRef
47.
48.
Mendez CE, Mok KT, Ata A, Tanenberg RJ, Calles-Escandon J, Umpierrez GE. Increased glycemic variability is independently associated with length of stay and mortality in noncritically ill hospitalized patients. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:4091–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
Gorst C, Kwok CS, Aslam S, et al. Long-term glycemic variability and risk of adverse outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Care. 2015;38:2354–69.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Hirakawa Y, Arima H, Zoungas S, et al. Impact of visit-to-visit glycemic variability on the risks of macrovascular and microvascular events and all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetes: the ADVANCE trial. Diabetes Care. 2014;37:2359–65.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Monnier L, Colette C. Glycemic variability: should we and can we prevent it? Diabetes Care. 2008;31(Suppl. 2):S150–4.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Kovatchev BP. Metrics for glycaemic control—from HbA(1c) to continuous glucose monitoring. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2017;13:425–36.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Petrie JR, Peters AL, Bergenstal RM, Holl RW, Fleming GA, Heinemann L. Improving the clinical value and utility of CGM systems: issues and recommendations: a joint statement of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association Diabetes Technology Working Group. Diabetes Care. 2017;40:1614–21.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Acciaroli G, Vettoretti M, Facchinetti A, Sparacino G. Calibration of minimally invasive continuous glucose monitoring sensors: state-of-the-art and current perspectives. Biosensors (Basel). 2018;8:E24.CrossRef
55.
Schmelzeisen-Redeker G, Schoemaker M, Kirchsteiger H, Freckmann G, Heinemann L, Del Re L. Time delay of CGM sensors: relevance, causes, and countermeasures. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015;9:1006–15.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
56.
Sinha M, McKeon KM, Parker S, et al. A comparison of time delay in three continuous glucose monitors for adolescents and adults. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017;11:1132–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
57.
Carlson AL, Mullen DM, Bergenstal RM. Clinical use of continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2017;19:S4–11.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Riddlesworth TD, Beck RW, Gal RL, et al. Optimal sampling duration for continuous glucose monitoring to determine long-term glycemic control. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018;20:314–6.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Edelman SV, Argento NB, Pettus J, Hirsch IB. Clinical implications of real-time and intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care. 2018;41:2265–74.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Rodbard D, Bailey T, Jovanovic L, Zisser H, Kaplan R, Garg SK. Improved quality of glycemic control and reduced glycemic variability with use of continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2009;11:717–23.PubMedCrossRef
61.
Pepper GM, Steinsapir J, Reynolds K. Effect of short-term iPRO continuous glucose monitoring on hemoglobin A1c levels in clinical practice. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2012;14:654–7.PubMedCrossRef
62.
Rodbard D. Continuous glucose monitoring: a review of recent studies demonstrating improved glycemic outcomes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2017;19:S25–37.PubMedCrossRef
63.
Bailey TS. Clinical implications of accuracy measurements of continuous glucose sensors. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2017;19:S51–4.PubMedCrossRef
64.
Bailey T, Bode BW, Christiansen MP, Klaff LJ, Alva S. The performance and usability of a factory-calibrated flash glucose monitoring system. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2015;17:787–94.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
65.
Kovatchev BP, Patek SD, Ortiz EA, Breton MD. Assessing sensor accuracy for non-adjunct use of continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2015;17:177–86.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
66.
Aleppo G, Ruedy KJ, Riddlesworth TD, et al. REPLACE-BG: a randomized trial comparing continuous glucose monitoring with and without routine blood glucose monitoring in adults with well-controlled type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2017;40:538–45.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
67.
Bailey TS, Grunberger G, Bode BW, et al. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology 2016 outpatient glucose monitoring consensus statement. Endocr Pract. 2016;22:231–61.PubMedCrossRef
68.
Hirsch IB. Professional flash continuous glucose monitoring as a supplement to A1C in primary care. Postgrad Med. 2017;129:781–90.PubMedCrossRef
69.
Cappon G, Acciaroli G, Vettoretti M, Facchinetti A, Sparacino G. Wearable continuous glucose monitoring sensors: a revolution in diabetes treatment. Electronics. 2017;6:65.CrossRef
70.
71.
Reddy M, Jugnee N, El Laboudi A, Spanudakis E, Anantharaja S, Oliver N. A randomized controlled pilot study of continuous glucose monitoring and flash glucose monitoring in people with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia. Diabet Med. 2018;35:483–90.PubMedCrossRef
72.
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group, Tamborlane WV, Beck RW, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring and intensive treatment of type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1464–76.CrossRef
73.
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group, Beck RW, Buckingham B, et al. Factors predictive of use and of benefit from continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2009;32:1947–53.PubMedCentralCrossRef
74.
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group. Effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in a clinical care environment: evidence from the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation continuous glucose monitoring (JDRF-CGM) trial. Diabetes Care. 2010;33:17–22.CrossRef
75.
Deiss D, Bolinder J, Riveline JP, et al. Improved glycemic control in poorly controlled patients with type 1 diabetes using real-time continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:2730–2.PubMedCrossRef
76.
Beck RW, Riddlesworth T, Ruedy K, et al. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes using insulin injections: the DIAMOND randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;317:371–8.PubMedCrossRef
77.
Gandhi GY, Kovalaske M, Kudva Y, et al. Efficacy of continuous glucose monitoring in improving glycemic control and reducing hypoglycemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011;5:952–65.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
78.
Yeh HC, Brown TT, Maruthur N, et al. Comparative effectiveness and safety of methods of insulin delivery and glucose monitoring for diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157:336–47.PubMedCrossRef
79.
Lind M, Polonsky W, Hirsch IB, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring vs conventional therapy for glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections: the GOLD randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;317:379–87.PubMedCrossRef
80.
Little SA, Leelarathna L, Walkinshaw E, et al. Recovery of hypoglycemia awareness in long-standing type 1 diabetes: a multicenter 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial comparing insulin pump with multiple daily injections and continuous with conventional glucose self-monitoring (HypoCOMPaSS). Diabetes Care. 2014;37:2114–22.PubMedCrossRef
81.
van Beers CA, DeVries JH, Kleijer SJ, Smits MM, Geelhoed-Duijvestijn PH, Kramer MH, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring for patients with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IN CONTROL): a randomised, open-label, crossover trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016;4:893–902.PubMedCrossRef
82.
Heinemann L, Freckmann G, Ehrmann D, et al. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes and impaired hypoglycaemia awareness or severe hypoglycaemia treated with multiple daily insulin injections (HypoDE): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2018;391:1367–77.PubMedCrossRef
83.
Bergenstal RM, Bailey TS, Rodbard D, et al. Comparison of insulin glargine 300 U/mL and 100 U/mL in adults with type 1 diabetes: continuous glucose monitoring profiles and variability using morning or evening injections. Diabetes Care. 2017;40:554–60.PubMedCrossRef
84.
Argento NB, Nakamura K. Glycemic effects of SGLT-2 inhibitor canagliflozin in type 1 diabetes patients using the Dexcom G4 PLATINUM CGM. Endocr Pract. 2016;22:315–22.PubMedCrossRef
85.
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group, Beck RW, Lawrence JM, Laffel L, et al. Quality-of-life measures in children and adults with type 1 diabetes: Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation continuous glucose monitoring randomized trial. Diabetes Care. 2010;33:2175–7.PubMedCentralCrossRef
86.
Polonsky WH, Hessler D, Ruedy KJ, Beck RW, Group DS. The impact of continuous glucose monitoring on markers of quality of life in adults with type 1 diabetes: further findings from the DIAMOND randomized clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2017;40:736–41.PubMedCrossRef
87.
Kubiak T, Mann CG, Barnard KC, Heinemann L. Psychosocial aspects of continuous glucose monitoring: connecting to the patients’ experience. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2016;10:859–63.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
88.
89.
Charleer S, Mathieu C, Nobels F, et al. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control, acute admissions, and quality of life: a real-world study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2018;103:1224–32.PubMedCrossRef
90.
Beck RW, Riddlesworth TD, Ruedy K, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring versus usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving multiple daily insulin injections: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2017;167:365–74.PubMedCrossRef
91.
Ehrhardt NM, Chellappa M, Walker MS, Fonda SJ, Vigersky RA. The effect of real-time continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011;5:668–75.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
92.
Vigersky RA, Fonda SJ, Chellappa M, Walker MS, Ehrhardt NM. Short- and long-term effects of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2012;35:32–8.PubMedCrossRef
93.
Ruedy KJ, Parkin CG, Riddlesworth TD, Graham C, DIAMOND Study Group. Continuous glucose monitoring in older adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes using multiple daily injections of insulin: results from the DIAMOND trial. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017;11:1138–46.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
94.
Bolinder J, Antuna R, Geelhoed-Duijvestijn P, Kröger J, Weitgasser R. Novel glucose-sensing technology and hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes: a multicentre, non-masked, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;388:2254–63.PubMedCrossRef
95.
Haak T, Hanaire H, Ajjan R, Hermanns N, Riveline JP, Rayman G. Flash glucose-sensing technology as a replacement for blood glucose monitoring for the management of insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: a multicenter, open-label randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8:55–73.PubMedCrossRef
96.
Anjana RM, Kesavadev J, Neeta D, Tiwaskar M, Pradeepa R, Jebarani S, et al. A multicenter real-life study on the effect of flash glucose monitoring on glycemic control in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2017;19(9):533–40.PubMedCrossRef
97.
Dunn TC, Xu Y, Hayter G, Ajjan RA. Real-world flash glucose monitoring patterns and associations between self-monitoring frequency and glycaemic measures: a European analysis of over 60 million glucose tests. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2018;137:37–46.PubMedCrossRef
98.
Reddy M, Jugnee N, Anantharaja S, Oliver N. Switching from flash glucose monitoring to continuous glucose monitoring on hypoglycemia in adults with type 1 diabetes at high hypoglycemia risk: the extension phase of the I HART CGM study. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018;20:751–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
99.
100.
Riemsma R, Corro Ramos I, Birnie R, et al. Integrated sensor-augmented pump therapy systems [the MiniMed®Paradigm™ Veo system and the Vibe™ and G4®PLATINUM CGM (continuous glucose monitoring) system] for managing blood glucose levels in type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2016;20:1–251.PubMedCentralCrossRef
101.
Chase HP, Beck RW, Xing D, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring in youth with type 1 diabetes: 12-month follow-up of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation continuous glucose monitoring randomized trial. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2010;12:507–15.PubMedCrossRef
102.
Engler R, Routh TL, Lucisano JY. Adoption barriers for continuous glucose monitoring and their potential reduction with a fully implanted system: results from patient preference surveys. Clin Diabetes. 2018;36:50–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
103.
Messer LH, Johnson R, Driscoll KA, Jones J. Best friend or spy: a qualitative meta-synthesis on the impact of continuous glucose monitoring on life with type 1 diabetes. Diabet Med. 2018;35:409–18.PubMedCrossRef
104.
Miller KM, Foster NC, Beck RW, et al. Current state of type 1 diabetes treatment in the US: updated data from the T1D exchange clinic registry. Diabetes Care. 2015;38:971–8.PubMedCrossRef
105.
Peters AL, Ahmann AJ, Battelino T, et al. Diabetes technology-continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion therapy and continuous glucose monitoring in adults: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2016;101:3922–37.PubMedCrossRef
106.
Agiostratidou G, Anhalt H, Ball D, et al. Standardizing clinically meaningful outcome measures beyond HbA1C for type 1 diabetes: a consensus report of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, the American Association of Diabetes Educators, the American Diabetes Association, the Endocrine Society, JDRF International, The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust, the Pediatric Endocrine Society, and the T1D Exchange. Diabetes Care. 2017;40:1622–30.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
107.
108.
Health Quality Ontario. Continuous monitoring of glucose for type 1 diabetes: a health technology assessment. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2018;18(2):1–160.
109.
Pickup JC, Freeman SC, Sutton AJ. Glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes during real time continuous glucose monitoring compared with self monitoring of blood glucose: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials using individual patient data. BMJ. 2011;343:d3805.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
110.
Wan W, Skandari MR, Minc A, et al. Cost-effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring for adults with type 1 diabetes compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose: the DIAMOND randomized trial. Diabetes Care. 2018;41:1227–34.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
111.
Chaugule S, Oliver N, Klinkenbijl B, Graham C. An economic evaluation of continuous glucose monitoring for people with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia within North West London Clinical Commissioning Groups in England. Eur Endocrinol. 2017;13:81–8.PubMedPubMedCentral
112.
Fonda SJ, Graham C, Munakata J, Powers JM, Price D, Vigersky RA. The cost-effectiveness of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) in type 2 diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2016;10:898–904.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
113.
Weisman A, Bai JW, Cardinez M, Kramer CK, Perkins BA. Effect of artificial pancreas systems on glycaemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of outpatient randomised controlled trials. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017;5:501–12.PubMedCrossRef
114.
Metadata
Title
Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Brief Review for Primary Care Practitioners
Authors
Ramzi Ajjan
David Slattery
Eugene Wright
Publication date
01-03-2019
Publisher
Springer Healthcare
Published in
Advances in Therapy / Issue 3/2019
Print ISSN: 0741-238X
Electronic ISSN: 1865-8652
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-0870-x

Other articles of this Issue 3/2019

Advances in Therapy 3/2019 Go to the issue

Original Research

Safety Profile of HTX-019 Administered as an Intravenous Push in Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Review

Original Research

Clinical Management of High and Very High Risk Patients with Hyperlipidaemia in Central and Eastern Europe: An Observational Study

Review

Characterizing the Health-Related Quality of Life Burden of Overactive Bladder Using Disease-Specific Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: A Systematic Literature Review

Original Research

Prospective Observational Cohort Study to Describe the Use of Panitumumab in Combination with Chemotherapy in Real-World Clinical Practice for Patients with Wild-Type RAS mCRC

Original Research

SOFA Score Can Effectively Predict the Incidence of Sepsis and 30-Day Mortality in Liver Transplant Patients: A Retrospective Study

Original Research

Intravitreal Ranibizumab for the Treatment of Visual Impairment Due to Choroidal Neovascularization Associated with Rare Diseases: Cost-Effectiveness in the UK

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Cardiology Video

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Watch now

Watch official videos from the ACC congress summarizing key highlights from the last year in heart failure, cardiomyopathies, valvular disease, pulmonary vascular disease, and pediatric cardiology.

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

16-04-2024 Type 2 Diabetes News

Incentivised to exercise

11-04-2024 Lifestyle Modifications News

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

10-04-2024 Myocardial Infarction News

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

Image Credits