Tejal Patel, Nathan Grant L Sala, Natalie A Macheret, Sophia B Glaros, Sydney D Dixon, Abby Meyers, Eleanor Mackey, Elizabeth Estrada, Stephanie T Chung
{"title":"Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use in Youth with Type 2 Diabetes: A Pilot Randomized Study.","authors":"Tejal Patel, Nathan Grant L Sala, Natalie A Macheret, Sophia B Glaros, Sydney D Dixon, Abby Meyers, Eleanor Mackey, Elizabeth Estrada, Stephanie T Chung","doi":"10.1089/dia.2024.0539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Objective:</i></b> Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) enhances diabetes self-management in insulin-treated individuals. However, the feasibility, acceptability, and benefits/burdens in youth-onset type 2 diabetes (Y-T2D) who are on infrequent self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) regimens remain unclear. <b><i>Research Design and Methods:</i></b> In Y-T2D prescribed SMBG less than or equal to twice daily, we conducted a 12-week randomized 2:1 parallel pilot trial of CGM versus fingerstick monitoring (Control). Control participants had an optional 4-week extension period to use CGM (Control-CGM). Feasibility was defined as recruitment, study participation, and retention >60% of individuals. Acceptability was defined as an individual CGM wear time of ≥60% at the end of the study. Diabetes distress and the benefits/burdens of CGM scores, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and CGM-derived glycemic variables were compared at baseline and at the end of the intervention. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The recruitment rate was 54% (52 screened eligible, 18 CGM, 10 Control; 82% female, 68% Black, 14.9 ± 3.8 years, body mass index: 36.2 ± 7.7 kg/m<sup>2</sup>, HbA1c: 7.4 ± 2.4% (mean ± standard deviation [SD]), and 8 entered the optional Control-CGM group. The most commonly cited reason for declining study participation was reluctance to wear the device (50%). The participation rate was 91% and 75%, and retention was 100% and 75% for CGM and Control-CGM, respectively. A majority of Y-T2D had ≥60% wear time at the end of the study (CGM: 56% and Control-CGM: 83%). Wear time declined during the study (1st month: 71 ± 31% vs. 2nd month: 55 ± 32% vs. 3rd month: 38 ± 34%, <i>P</i> = 0.003). There were no significant changes in glycemia, CGM burden/benefits, or diabetes distress scores (<i>P</i> > 0.05). Minor sensor adhesion adverse events were common (75%) causes of reduced wear time. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> CGM was a feasible and acceptable adjunct to diabetes self-care among >50% of Y-T2D prescribed infrequent SMBG monitoring. Unwillingness to wear a device and social stigma impeded device use. Additional research is needed to mitigate the high rates of skin adhesion-related adverse events in this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":11159,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes technology & therapeutics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes technology & therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2024.0539","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) enhances diabetes self-management in insulin-treated individuals. However, the feasibility, acceptability, and benefits/burdens in youth-onset type 2 diabetes (Y-T2D) who are on infrequent self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) regimens remain unclear. Research Design and Methods: In Y-T2D prescribed SMBG less than or equal to twice daily, we conducted a 12-week randomized 2:1 parallel pilot trial of CGM versus fingerstick monitoring (Control). Control participants had an optional 4-week extension period to use CGM (Control-CGM). Feasibility was defined as recruitment, study participation, and retention >60% of individuals. Acceptability was defined as an individual CGM wear time of ≥60% at the end of the study. Diabetes distress and the benefits/burdens of CGM scores, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and CGM-derived glycemic variables were compared at baseline and at the end of the intervention. Results: The recruitment rate was 54% (52 screened eligible, 18 CGM, 10 Control; 82% female, 68% Black, 14.9 ± 3.8 years, body mass index: 36.2 ± 7.7 kg/m2, HbA1c: 7.4 ± 2.4% (mean ± standard deviation [SD]), and 8 entered the optional Control-CGM group. The most commonly cited reason for declining study participation was reluctance to wear the device (50%). The participation rate was 91% and 75%, and retention was 100% and 75% for CGM and Control-CGM, respectively. A majority of Y-T2D had ≥60% wear time at the end of the study (CGM: 56% and Control-CGM: 83%). Wear time declined during the study (1st month: 71 ± 31% vs. 2nd month: 55 ± 32% vs. 3rd month: 38 ± 34%, P = 0.003). There were no significant changes in glycemia, CGM burden/benefits, or diabetes distress scores (P > 0.05). Minor sensor adhesion adverse events were common (75%) causes of reduced wear time. Conclusion: CGM was a feasible and acceptable adjunct to diabetes self-care among >50% of Y-T2D prescribed infrequent SMBG monitoring. Unwillingness to wear a device and social stigma impeded device use. Additional research is needed to mitigate the high rates of skin adhesion-related adverse events in this population.
期刊介绍:
Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics is the only peer-reviewed journal providing healthcare professionals with information on new devices, drugs, drug delivery systems, and software for managing patients with diabetes. This leading international journal delivers practical information and comprehensive coverage of cutting-edge technologies and therapeutics in the field, and each issue highlights new pharmacological and device developments to optimize patient care.