Literature DB >> 28828487

Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Usual Care in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Receiving Multiple Daily Insulin Injections: A Randomized Trial.

Roy W Beck1, Tonya D Riddlesworth1, Katrina Ruedy1, Andrew Ahmann1, Stacie Haller1, Davida Kruger1, Janet B McGill1, William Polonsky1, David Price1, Stephen Aronoff1, Ronnie Aronson1, Elena Toschi1, Craig Kollman1, Richard Bergenstal1.   

Abstract

Background: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), which studies have shown is beneficial for adults with type 1 diabetes, has not been well-evaluated in those with type 2 diabetes receiving insulin. Objective: To determine the effectiveness of CGM in adults with type 2 diabetes receiving multiple daily injections of insulin. Design: Randomized clinical trial. (The protocol also included a type 1 diabetes cohort in a parallel trial and subsequent second trial.) (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02282397). Setting: 25 endocrinology practices in North America. Patients: 158 adults who had had type 2 diabetes for a median of 17 years (interquartile range, 11 to 23 years). Participants were aged 35 to 79 years (mean, 60 years [SD, 10]), were receiving multiple daily injections of insulin, and had hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels of 7.5% to 9.9% (mean, 8.5%). Intervention: Random assignment to CGM (n = 79) or usual care (control group, n = 79). Measurements: The primary outcome was HbA1c reduction at 24 weeks.
Results: Mean HbA1c levels decreased to 7.7% in the CGM group and 8.0% in the control group at 24 weeks (adjusted difference in mean change, -0.3% [95% CI, -0.5% to 0.0%]; P = 0.022). The groups did not differ meaningfully in CGM-measured hypoglycemia or quality-of-life outcomes. The CGM group averaged 6.7 days (SD, 0.9) of CGM use per week. Limitation: 6-month follow-up.
Conclusion: A high percentage of adults who received multiple daily insulin injections for type 2 diabetes used CGM on a daily or near-daily basis for 24 weeks and had improved glycemic control. Because few insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes currently use CGM, these results support an additional management method that may benefit these patients. Primary Funding Source: Dexcom.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28828487     DOI: 10.7326/M16-2855

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  121 in total

1.  Continuous Glucose Monitoring As a Behavior Modification Tool.

Authors:  Nicole Ehrhardt; Enas Al Zaghal
Journal:  Clin Diabetes       Date:  2020-04

Review 2.  Benefits and Challenges of Diabetes Technology Use in Older Adults.

Authors:  Elena Toschi; Medha N Munshi
Journal:  Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am       Date:  2019-11-18       Impact factor: 4.741

3.  The Fallacy of Average: How Using HbA1c Alone to Assess Glycemic Control Can Be Misleading.

Authors:  Roy W Beck; Crystal G Connor; Deborah M Mullen; David M Wesley; Richard M Bergenstal
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 19.112

4.  Elderly Patients With Diabetes: Special Aspects to Consider.

Authors:  Lutz Heinemann; David C Klonoff; Thomas Kubiak
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2019-03-10

5.  Comment on Grino et al: Suitability of Flash Glucose Monitoring for Detection of Hypoglycemia.

Authors:  Alexander Seibold; Robert Brines
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2019-03-31

6.  Real-time continuous glucose monitoring decreases the risk of severe hypoglycemia in people with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycemia.

Authors:  Paola Lucidi; Francesca Porcellati; Geremia B Bolli; Carmine G Fanelli
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-12

7.  Response to "Blood Glucose Monitoring Data Should Be Reported in Detail When Studies About Efficacy of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems Are Published".

Authors:  Michel Grino; Quentin Alitta; Charles Oliver
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2018-10-16

8.  Accuracy of a Factory-Calibrated, Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring System During 10 Days of Use in Youth and Adults with Diabetes.

Authors:  R Paul Wadwa; Lori M Laffel; Viral N Shah; Satish K Garg
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2018-06-14       Impact factor: 6.118

Review 9.  Continuous Glucose Monitoring Integration in Clinical Practice: A Stepped Guide to Data Review and Interpretation.

Authors:  Grazia Aleppo; Kimberly Webb
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2018-11-19

Review 10.  Measures of Accuracy for Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Blood Glucose Monitoring Devices.

Authors:  Guido Freckmann; Stefan Pleus; Mike Grady; Steven Setford; Brian Levy
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2018-11-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.