|The following article is part of conference coverage from the American Diabetes Association’s 78th Scientific Sessions (ADA 2018) in Orlando,Florida. Endocrinology Advisor’s staff will report on medical research and technological advances in diabetes and diabetes education, conducted by experts in the field. Check back for the latest news from ADA 2018.|
ORLANDO — Individuals with type 1 diabetes who use continuous glucose monitoring compared with glucometer had better glycemic control, spent longer time in range, and had a lower risk for hypoglycemia in real-life clinical practice. This research was presented at the American Diabetes Association’s 78th Scientific Sessions held in Orlando, Florida, June 22-26, 2018.
A study sample of 33 adults with type 1 diabetes was divided into in 2 groups: 15 using continuous glucose monitoring and 18 using glucometer, or finger-stick glucose monitoring. Participants were evaluated by completing demographic questionnaires, surveys assessing fear of hypoglycemia and hypoglycemic unawareness, and problem areas in diabetes questionnaire. Glycemic control was measured by glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c).
Study results showed that participants using continuous glucose monitoring had better glycemic control with an HbA1c measurement of 7.5%, but glucometer-users had an average HbA1c of 8.5%. Of the participants using continuous glucose monitoring, 40% experienced clinically significant hypoglycemic episodes vs 66% using glucometer.
In addition, participants using continuous glucose monitoring spent longer time in range than those using a glucometer. Hypoglycemia unawareness was reported more frequently by continuous glucose monitoring users (44% compared with 14% of glucometer-users); this group also reported checking self-monitoring blood glucose levels >6 times a day and spent more time worrying about nocturnal hypoglycemia (81% compared with 57%).
Despite more time worrying about hypoglycemia and greater hypoglycemic unawareness, participants who used continuous glucose monitoring demonstrated lower diabetes-related stress, according to their problem areas in diabetes questionnaire scores. This—along with better glycemic control results, more time spent in range, and lower risk for hypoglycemia—indicates that individuals with type 1 diabetes can benefit more from continuous glucose monitoring in real-life clinical practice compared with finger-stick glucose monitoring.
This study was supported by Sanofi.
For more coverage of ADA 2018, click here.
Munshi M, Toschi E, Slyne C, et al. Use of real time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in real life clinical practice compared with finger-stick glucose monitoring. Poster presentation at: ADA 2018 78th Scientific Sessions; June 22-26, 2018; Orlando, FL. Poster 959.