| Literature DB >> 31921360 |
Luis Eduardo P Calliari1, Marcio Krakauer2, Andre Gustavo Daher Vianna3, Yashesvini Ram4, Douglas Eugenio Barbieri4, Yongjin Xu4, Timothy C Dunn4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: New technologies are changing diabetes treatment and contributing better outcomes in developed countries. To our knowledge, no previous studies have investigated the comparative effect of sensor-based monitoring on glycemic markers in developing countries like Brazil. The present study aims to evaluate the use of intermittent Continuous Glucose Measurements (iCGM) in a developing country, Brazil, regarding (i) frequency of glucose scans, (ii) its association with glycemic markers and (iii) comparison with these findings to those observed in global population data.Entities:
Keywords: Blood glucose monitoring frequency; Continuous glucose monitoring; Flash glucose monitoring; Glycemic measures; Real-world data
Year: 2020 PMID: 31921360 PMCID: PMC6947827 DOI: 10.1186/s13098-019-0513-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diabetol Metab Syndr ISSN: 1758-5996 Impact factor: 3.320
Data collected from Sep 2014 through Dec 2018 (in absolute numbers)
| Brazil | All countries | |
|---|---|---|
| Readers | 17,691 | 688,640 |
| Sensors | 147,166 | 7,329,052 |
| Glucose scans | 26.5 million | 1.10 billion |
| Monitoring hours | 43.2 million | 2.14 billion |
| Automatically-recorded glucose readings | 173 million | 8.55 billion |
Fig. 1Daily scans per reader: a comparison of cumulative frequency by number of daily scans for users of the CGM device worldwide compared users in Brazil. The scan frequency of Brazilian users was significantly (p < 0.01) greater than the scan frequency of users worldwide
Binned mean scan frequency (scans/day)
| Bin No. | Brazil | All countries |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.56 | 3.40 |
| 2 | 4.91 | 4.45 |
| 3 | 5.91 | 5.19 |
| 4 | 6.75 | 5.86 |
| 5 | 7.56 | 6.51 |
| 6 | 8.38 | 7.15 |
| 7 | 9.17 | 7.80 |
| 8 | 9.87 | 8.45 |
| 9 | 10.52 | 9.10 |
| 10 | 11.18 | 9.72 |
| 11 | 11.92 | 10.34 |
| 12 | 12.69 | 10.97 |
| 13 | 13.62 | 11.65 |
| 14 | 14.73 | 12.42 |
| 15 | 16.00 | 13.33 |
| 16 | 17.66 | 14.51 |
| 17 | 19.88 | 16.12 |
| 18 | 22.80 | 18.51 |
| 19 | 27.69 | 22.69 |
| 20 | 43.07 | 37.81 |
Fig. 2Estimated HbA1c: a comparison of estimated HbA1c by number of daily scans for CGM users worldwide compared to users in Brazil
Fig. 3Time above 180 mg/dL: a comparison of mean hours per day in hyperglycemia by number of daily scans for CGM users worldwide compared to users in Brazil
Fig. 4Time within 70–180 mg/dL: a comparison of mean time in range per day by number of daily scans for CGM users worldwide compared to users in Brazil
Fig. 5Time at or below 54 mg/dL: a comparison of mean minutes per day in hypoglycemia by number of daily scans for CGM users worldwide compared to users in Brazil