Use of a real time continuous glucose monitoring system as a motivational device for poorly controlled type 2 diabetes

Yoo, Hyun Jung; An, Hyonggin; Park, S. Y.; Ryu, Ohk Hyun; Kim, H. Y.; Seo, Ji A; Hong, Eun Gyoung; Shin, Dong Hyun; Kim, Y. H.; Kim, Sin Gon; Choi, Kyung Mook; Park, I. B.; Yu, Jae Myung; Baik, Sei-Hyun

doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2008.06.015

Cited by 172 publications

(168 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

162

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In a larger study of 65 patients with poorly controlled diabetes, individuals randomised to CGM showed superior improvement in HbA 1c over a period of 3 months compared with SMBG. 22 However, patients included were a mixture of insulin and non-insulin users, and so the study failed to clarify whether CGM is useful in patients with longer duration of diabetes and who require insulin therapy. 22 Therefore, our study remains the largest to date to use CGM in MDI-treated type 2 diabetes patients for an extended period of time, and to utilise AGP to improve glycaemia.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…19,20 In addition to HbA 1c , previous work demonstrated that CGM can reduce glucose variability compared with SMBG. [21][22][23][24] However, studies analysing the effectiveness of CGM in improving glycaemia in MDI-treated patients with type 2 diabetes remain scarce, so CGM is not routinely used in this group of patients. Moreover, it is unclear at present whether the outcome in type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients is similar when identical CGM monitoring and management strategies are used.…”

Section: Sensor and Software Use For The Glycaemic Management Of Insumentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sensor and software use for the glycaemic management of insulin-treated type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients

Ajjan

Abougila

Bellary

et al. 2016

Diabetes and Vascular Disease Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lowering glucose levels, while avoiding hypoglycaemia, can be challenging in insulin-treated patients with diabetes. We evaluated the role of ambulatory glucose profile in optimising glycaemic control in this population. Insulin-treated patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes were recruited into a prospective, multicentre, 100-day study and randomised to control (n = 28) or intervention (n = 59) groups. The intervention group used ambulatory glucose profile, generated by continuous glucose monitoring, to assess daily glucose levels, whereas the controls relied on capillary glucose testing. Patients were reviewed at days 30 and 45 by the health care professional to adjust insulin therapy. Comparing first and last 2 weeks of the study, ambulatory glucose profile-monitored type 2 diabetes patients (n = 28) showed increased time in euglycaemia (mean ± standard deviation) by 1.4 ± 3.5 h/day (p = 0.0427) associated with reduction in HbA 1c from 77 ± 15 to 67 ± 13 mmol/ mol (p = 0.0002) without increased hypoglycaemia. Type 1 diabetes patients (n = 25) showed reduction in hypoglycaemia from 1.4 ± 1.7 to 0.8 ± 0.8 h/day (p = 0.0472) associated with a marginal HbA 1c decrease from 75 ± 10 to 72 ± 8 mmol/mol (p = 0.0508). Largely similar findings were observed comparing intervention and control groups at end of study. In conclusion, ambulatory glucose profile helps glycaemic management in insulin-treated diabetes patients by increasing time spent in euglycaemia and decreasing HbA 1c in type 2 diabetes patients, while reducing hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sensor and Software Use For The Glycaemic Management Of Insumentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensor and software use for the glycaemic management of insulin-treated type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients

Ajjan

Abougila

Bellary

et al. 2016

Diabetes and Vascular Disease Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, because the survey did not obtain information about frequency of CGM use, we were unable to determine how frequently respondents were actually using CGM. Although numerous studies have shown that use of CGM improves glycemic control, 5,[12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] clinical benefits were seen mainly in those individuals who regularly wore their CGM devices at least 6 days per week. 5,6,13,14,[24][25][26] Another limitation was that our study design did not allow us to assess changes in treatment satisfaction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High Reported Treatment Satisfaction in People With Type 1 Diabetes Switching to Latest Generation Insulin Pump Regardless of Previous Therapy

Barnard

Bromba

Lange

et al. 2015

J Diabetes Sci Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The effects of transition by individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) to more recently available continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)-enabled insulin pumps from either multiple daily insulin injections (MDI) or older insulin pumps on treatment satisfaction have not been well studied. We conducted a survey to assess treatment satisfaction among users of the Animas ® Vibe™ insulin pump, a latest generation insulin pump (LGIP) system (CGM-enabled), after switching from MDI or earlier generation insulin pumps.Methods: Individuals with T1D from 141 centers in 5 countries and 4 language areas participated in the survey. Treatment satisfaction was assessed by the Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (ITSQ), which was included in a 50-item online questionnaire that also assessed preference for using the LGIP compared with previous treatment and satisfaction with key LGIP features.Results: A total of 356 individuals, ages 12-79 years, responded to the survey: mean (SD) age 38.4 (16.1) years; diabetes duration 19.1 (13.3) years; female 59%; previously treated with MDI 58%. Overall mean (SD) ITSQ scores were high among all respondents regardless of prior treatment: 95.1 (23.2) (scale: 0-132). No differences between previous-treatment groups were seen. Most (83%) of respondents rated the LGIP to be better than their previous insulin delivery system: "much better" (65%), "a bit better" (18%) regardless of age, and 95% would recommend using the LGIP to others. Conclusions:Use of the Animas Vibe was associated with high treatment satisfaction and perceived as a better method of insulin delivery regardless of previous insulin therapy or age.

show abstract

“…The improvement was sustained (although attenuated) over a 40-week observational follow-up period (0.8 6 1.5 vs. 0.2 6 1.3% [8.7 6 16.3 vs. 2.1 6 14.1 mmol/mol]) (15). These data require replication using other CGM devices and in other populations with T2D but provide support for periodic use of CGM in those using basal insulin (16).…”

Section: Type 2 Diabetesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving the Clinical Value and Utility of CGM Systems: Issues and Recommendations

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The first systems for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) became available over 15 years ago. Many then believed CGM would revolutionize the use of intensive insulin therapy in diabetes; however, progress toward that vision has been gradual. Although increasing, the proportion of individuals using CGM rather than conventional systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose on a daily basis is still low in most parts of the world. Barriers to uptake include cost, measurement reliability (particularly with earlier-generation systems), human factors issues, lack of a standardized format for displaying results, and uncertainty on how best to use CGM data to make therapeutic decisions. This Scientific Statement makes recommendations for systemic improvements in clinical use and regulatory (pre-and postmarketing) handling of CGM devices. The aim is to improve safety and efficacy in order to support the advancement of the technology in achieving its potential to improve quality of life and health outcomes for more people with diabetes.

show abstract

Use of a real time continuous glucose monitoring system as a motivational device for poorly controlled type 2 diabetes

Cited by 172 publications

References 26 publications

Sensor and software use for the glycaemic management of insulin-treated type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients

Sensor and software use for the glycaemic management of insulin-treated type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients

High Reported Treatment Satisfaction in People With Type 1 Diabetes Switching to Latest Generation Insulin Pump Regardless of Previous Therapy

Improving the Clinical Value and Utility of CGM Systems: Issues and Recommendations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About