2021
DOI: 10.1089/dia.2021.0211
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Real-World Studies Support Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Independently of Treatment Regimen

Abstract: Numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated the glycemic benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes. Although RCTs remain the gold standard clinical study design, findings from these trials do not necessarily reflect the effectiveness of CGM or reveal the feasibility and wider applications for use in broader real-life settings. This review evaluates recent real-world evidence (RWE) demonstrating the value of CGM to improve clini… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[1][2][3] CGM technology has demonstrated significant improvement in glycemic management, higher glucose monitoring satisfaction, and reduced incidence of diabetes complications, such as severe hypoglycemia (SH) and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] The increasing body of literature, both in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world evidence (RWE), supports CGM use for pediatric, adolescent, and adult persons with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). 8,12 The American Diabetes Association (ADA) Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes 13 recommends considering initiation of CGM technology for all patients with DM requiring insulin therapy, and to sustain CGM access across all third-payer insurance types.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[1][2][3] CGM technology has demonstrated significant improvement in glycemic management, higher glucose monitoring satisfaction, and reduced incidence of diabetes complications, such as severe hypoglycemia (SH) and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] The increasing body of literature, both in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world evidence (RWE), supports CGM use for pediatric, adolescent, and adult persons with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). 8,12 The American Diabetes Association (ADA) Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes 13 recommends considering initiation of CGM technology for all patients with DM requiring insulin therapy, and to sustain CGM access across all third-payer insurance types.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4-11 The increasing body of literature, both in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world evidence (RWE), supports CGM use for pediatric, adolescent, and adult persons with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). 8,12 The American Diabetes Association (ADA) Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes 13 recommends considering initiation of CGM technology for all patients with DM requiring insulin therapy, and to sustain CGM access across all third-payer insurance types.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Personal CGM, including real‐time CGM and intermittently scanned CGM, provides immediate feedback on glucose levels and has been associated with improvements in several clinical outcomes, including glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), glucose variability, hypoglycaemia prevalence, overall well‐being, treatment satisfaction, and fear of hypoglycaemia, in both randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and real‐world studies, as compared to self‐monitored blood glucose (SMBG) 2,3 . Indeed, personal CGM is currently recommended by national and international guidelines as the standard for glucose monitoring in both youth and adults with type 1 diabetes 4,5 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…overall well-being, treatment satisfaction, and fear of hypoglycaemia, in both randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and real-world studies, as compared to self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG). 2,3 Indeed, personal CGM is currently recommended by national and international guidelines as the standard for glucose monitoring in both youth and adults with type 1 diabetes. 4,5 However, it requires long-term supply, continuous wear of monitoring devices, and constant patient commitment.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2 A growing number of real-world studies support the use of CGM in type 1 and type 2 diabetes independent of the treatment regimen. 3,4 However, older adults aged ≥60 years are often underrepresented or not included in clinical studies. With increasing numbers of elderly individuals with diabetes there is a need for more data from national and regional sources on this population subset.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%