BACKGROUND: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has the potential to provide useful data for behavioral interventions targeting non-insulin-using, sedentary individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The aims of this study were to describe CGM in terms of (1) feasibility and acceptability and (2) dietary- and exercise-teaching events. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were analyzed from 27 non-insulin-using adults with T2DM who wore CGM for 72 h as part of a larger study on using CGM for exercise counseling in this population. Feasibility data included accuracy of entering daily self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) readings and events (e.g., meals, exercise), sensor failures, alarms, optimal accuracy of glucose data, and download failures. Acceptability data included CGM satisfaction and wearing difficulties. Dietary- and exercise-teaching events were identified from CGM and activity monitor data. RESULTS: CGM graphs showed 141 dietary- and 71 exercise-teaching events. About half the participants (52%) reported difficulty remembering to enter events into CGM monitors, but most (82%) kept an accurate paper log of events. Insufficient SMBG entries resulted in 32 CGM graphs with "use clinical judgment" warnings. Eighty-three percent of missed SMBG entries were from 18 participants 55-77 years old. Missing correlation coefficients resulted from glucose concentrations varying <100 mg/dL. A majority of participants (n = 19) were willing to wear CGM again despite reporting minor discomfort at sensor site and with wearing the monitor. CONCLUSIONS: CGM data provided several teaching opportunities in non-insulin-using adults with T2DM. Overall, CGM was acceptable and feasible. Some identified problems may be eliminated by newer technology.
BACKGROUND: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has the potential to provide useful data for behavioral interventions targeting non-insulin-using, sedentary individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The aims of this study were to describe CGM in terms of (1) feasibility and acceptability and (2) dietary- and exercise-teaching events. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were analyzed from 27 non-insulin-using adults with T2DM who wore CGM for 72 h as part of a larger study on using CGM for exercise counseling in this population. Feasibility data included accuracy of entering daily self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) readings and events (e.g., meals, exercise), sensor failures, alarms, optimal accuracy of glucose data, and download failures. Acceptability data included CGM satisfaction and wearing difficulties. Dietary- and exercise-teaching events were identified from CGM and activity monitor data. RESULTS:CGM graphs showed 141 dietary- and 71 exercise-teaching events. About half the participants (52%) reported difficulty remembering to enter events into CGM monitors, but most (82%) kept an accurate paper log of events. Insufficient SMBG entries resulted in 32 CGM graphs with "use clinical judgment" warnings. Eighty-three percent of missed SMBG entries were from 18 participants 55-77 years old. Missing correlation coefficients resulted from glucose concentrations varying <100 mg/dL. A majority of participants (n = 19) were willing to wear CGM again despite reporting minor discomfort at sensor site and with wearing the monitor. CONCLUSIONS:CGM data provided several teaching opportunities in non-insulin-using adults with T2DM. Overall, CGM was acceptable and feasible. Some identified problems may be eliminated by newer technology.
Authors: Richard L Weinstein; Sherwyn L Schwartz; Ronald L Brazg; Jolyon R Bugler; Thomas A Peyser; Geoffrey V McGarraugh Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2007-03-02 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: William H Herman; Liza L Ilag; Susan L Johnson; Catherine L Martin; Joyce Sinding; Abdulaziz Al Harthi; Cynthia D Plunkett; Frankie B LaPorte; Ray Burke; Morton B Brown; Jeffery B Halter; Philip Raskin Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Helen R Murphy; Gerry Rayman; Katherine Duffield; Karen S Lewis; Susan Kelly; Balroop Johal; Duncan Fowler; Rosemary C Temple Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2007-07-31 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Behiye Özcan; Pieter J M Leenen; Patric J D Delhanty; Lucy Y Baldéon-Rojas; Sebastian J Neggers; Aart Jan van der Lely Journal: Diabetol Metab Syndr Date: 2017-05-31 Impact factor: 3.320