Technology and Continuous Glucose Monitoring Access, Literacy, and Use Among Patients at the Diabetes Center of an Inner-City Safety-Net Hospital: Mixed Methods Study

Abstract

Background Despite the existence of an increasing array of digital technologies and tools for diabetes management, there are disparities in access to and uptake and use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices, particularly for those most at risk of poor diabetes outcomes. Objective This study aims to assess communication technology and CGM access, literacy, and use among patients receiving treatment for diabetes at an inner-city safety-net hospital. Methods A survey on digital technology ownership and use was self-administered by 75 adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes at the diabetes clinic of Grady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia. In-depth interviews were conducted with 16% (12/75) of these patient participants and 6 health care providers (HCPs) to obtain additional insights into the use of communication technology and CGM to support diabetes self-management. Results Most participants were African American (66/75, 88%), over half (39/75, 52%) were unemployed or working part time, and 29% (22/75) had no health insurance coverage, while 61% (46/75) had federal coverage. Smartphone ownership and use were near universal; texting and email use were common (63/75, 84% in both cases). Ownership and use of tablets and computers and use and daily use of various forms of media were more prevalent among younger participants and those with type 1 diabetes, who also rated them as easier to use. Technology use specifically for diabetes and health management was low. Participants were supportive of a potential smartphone app for diabetes management, with a high interest in such an app helping them track blood sugar levels and communicate with their care teams. Younger participants showed higher levels of interest, perceived value, and self-efficacy for using an app with these capabilities. History of CGM use was reported by 56% (42/75) of the participants, although half (20/42, 48%) had discontinued use, above all due to the cost of the device and issues with its adhesive. Nonuse was primarily due to not being offered CGM by their HCP. Reasons given for continued use included convenience, improved blood glucose control, and better tracking of blood glucose. The in-depth interviews (n=18) revealed high levels of satisfaction with CGM by users and supported the survey findings regarding reasons for continued use. They also highlighted the value of CGM data to enhance communication between patients and HCPs. Conclusions Smartphone ownership was near universal among patients receiving care at an inner-city hospital. Alongside the need to address barriers to CGM access and continued use, there is an opportunity to leverage increased access to communication technology in combination with CGM to improve diabetes outcomes among underresourced populations.