The one-center experience comparing glucose monitoring in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus utilizing flash glucose monitoring (FGM) versus traditional self-blood glucose monitoring (SBGM).

Magdalena K Kwiatkowska, Marianna Kopka, Nina Cyganek, Bartlomiej Matejko, Magdalena Krawczyk, Przemyslaw Witek, Katarzyna Cyganek
{"title":"The one-center experience comparing glucose monitoring in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus utilizing flash glucose monitoring (FGM) versus traditional self-blood glucose monitoring (SBGM).","authors":"Magdalena K Kwiatkowska, Marianna Kopka, Nina Cyganek, Bartlomiej Matejko, Magdalena Krawczyk, Przemyslaw Witek, Katarzyna Cyganek","doi":"10.5603/gpl.104033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The most prevalent condition affecting the metabolism of carbohydrates during pregnancy is gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Continuous glycemia monitoring systems that use sensors are currently replacing the conventional self-monitoring of glycemia with a glucometer. Poland's insurance coverage has made new technologies possible for continuous glycemia monitoring. Our retrospective study compared the effects of two glycemic measurement techniques on patient preferences and maternal and pediatric clinical outcomes: traditional methods using a glucometer and utilizing a sensor for scanning continuous glycemic monitoring (Flash Glucose Monitoring, or FGM).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>In a retrospective analysis of 277 women with GDM treated in the Department of Metabolic Diseases, University Hospital in Cracow, Poland, in January 2023 we compared the effectiveness of using of sensor FreeStyle Libra (FGM) vs self-blood glucose monitoring (SBGM) by glucometer in improving clinical maternal outcomes measured by daily insulin dose, body weight gain, mean blood glucose and newborns outcomes assessed by body weight, APGAR score, caesarean sections.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We examined 224 women from the SBGM (self-blood glucose monitoring) group, 53 from the FGM group, and 277 from the GDM ladies. The SBGM group was diagnosed with GDM later in pregnancy [24 (10-25) vs 11 (8-23.5) weeks; p < 0.001], was admitted at the first pregnancy visit [26 (14-29) vs 20 (12-27) weeks; p = 0.001], and was slightly older [33 (30-36) vs 32 (29-34) years; p = 0,027]. The pre-pregnancy body weight [70 (60-83) vs 67 (59-79) kg; p = 0.358] and the number of pregnancies [2 (1-3) vs 2 (1-3); p = 0.118] did not differ between the two groups. Women who used SMGB gained less weight throughout pregnancy [10 (5.5-13.0) vs 12 (8-14.8) kg; p = 0.0333] and had fewer prenatal checkups [5 (4-7) vs 8 (5-9) weeks; p < 0.001], including fewer teleconsultations [1 (0-3)]. Women in the FGM group received insulin treatment earlier [15 (11.5-27) vs 27 (16-30) week of pregnancy; p < 0,001] and used it more often [52 (98.1%) vs 183 (81.3%); p = 0.005]. There was no significant difference in daily insulin dose per kg of weight [26.5 (11.5-39.2) vs 21 (9-39) U/d; p = 0.325]. The groups did not differ in birth weight [SBGM 3243 +/- 485 vs FGM 3331 +/- 359 g; p = 0.206] and a gestational week at delivery [38 (38-39) vs 39 (38-39) week; p = 0.092], There was no difference in obstetric outcomes: caesarean sections, preterm births, week of delivery, mean birth weight or prevalence of perinatal complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>When comparing traditional SBGM to flash continuous glucose monitoring in this real-world observation, we have found no changes in the outcomes for mothers and newborns between the groups. There were more teleconsultations for women who used FCGM.</p>","PeriodicalId":94021,"journal":{"name":"Ginekologia polska","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ginekologia polska","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/gpl.104033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The most prevalent condition affecting the metabolism of carbohydrates during pregnancy is gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Continuous glycemia monitoring systems that use sensors are currently replacing the conventional self-monitoring of glycemia with a glucometer. Poland's insurance coverage has made new technologies possible for continuous glycemia monitoring. Our retrospective study compared the effects of two glycemic measurement techniques on patient preferences and maternal and pediatric clinical outcomes: traditional methods using a glucometer and utilizing a sensor for scanning continuous glycemic monitoring (Flash Glucose Monitoring, or FGM).

Material and methods: In a retrospective analysis of 277 women with GDM treated in the Department of Metabolic Diseases, University Hospital in Cracow, Poland, in January 2023 we compared the effectiveness of using of sensor FreeStyle Libra (FGM) vs self-blood glucose monitoring (SBGM) by glucometer in improving clinical maternal outcomes measured by daily insulin dose, body weight gain, mean blood glucose and newborns outcomes assessed by body weight, APGAR score, caesarean sections.

Results: We examined 224 women from the SBGM (self-blood glucose monitoring) group, 53 from the FGM group, and 277 from the GDM ladies. The SBGM group was diagnosed with GDM later in pregnancy [24 (10-25) vs 11 (8-23.5) weeks; p < 0.001], was admitted at the first pregnancy visit [26 (14-29) vs 20 (12-27) weeks; p = 0.001], and was slightly older [33 (30-36) vs 32 (29-34) years; p = 0,027]. The pre-pregnancy body weight [70 (60-83) vs 67 (59-79) kg; p = 0.358] and the number of pregnancies [2 (1-3) vs 2 (1-3); p = 0.118] did not differ between the two groups. Women who used SMGB gained less weight throughout pregnancy [10 (5.5-13.0) vs 12 (8-14.8) kg; p = 0.0333] and had fewer prenatal checkups [5 (4-7) vs 8 (5-9) weeks; p < 0.001], including fewer teleconsultations [1 (0-3)]. Women in the FGM group received insulin treatment earlier [15 (11.5-27) vs 27 (16-30) week of pregnancy; p < 0,001] and used it more often [52 (98.1%) vs 183 (81.3%); p = 0.005]. There was no significant difference in daily insulin dose per kg of weight [26.5 (11.5-39.2) vs 21 (9-39) U/d; p = 0.325]. The groups did not differ in birth weight [SBGM 3243 +/- 485 vs FGM 3331 +/- 359 g; p = 0.206] and a gestational week at delivery [38 (38-39) vs 39 (38-39) week; p = 0.092], There was no difference in obstetric outcomes: caesarean sections, preterm births, week of delivery, mean birth weight or prevalence of perinatal complications.

Conclusions: When comparing traditional SBGM to flash continuous glucose monitoring in this real-world observation, we have found no changes in the outcomes for mothers and newborns between the groups. There were more teleconsultations for women who used FCGM.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Is it possible to predict severe postpartum hemorrhage and the need for massive transfusion in placenta previa cases? Classification of hemostatic methods and their efficacy in placenta increta. Effects of gestational diabetes mellitus with different birth weight on genetic metabolism of newborns. A retrospective cohort study. Major opinion about motherhood among women with Turner syndrome. Nonpharmacological mental health interventions for adolescent patients with polycystic ovary syndrome: a scoping review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1