The Longer, the Better: Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use for ≥90% Is Superior to 70%-89% in Achieving Tighter Glycemic Outcomes in Children with Type 1 Diabetes
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
PubMed
39761072
DOI
10.1089/dia.2024.0472
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- CGM, glucose monitoring, pediatrics, registry, type 1 diabetes,
- MeSH
- časové faktory MeSH
- diabetes mellitus 1. typu * krev farmakoterapie MeSH
- dítě MeSH
- glykovaný hemoglobin analýza MeSH
- hypoglykemika terapeutické užití MeSH
- kontinuální monitorování glukózy MeSH
- krevní glukóza * analýza MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- předškolní dítě MeSH
- registrace MeSH
- regulace glykemie * metody MeSH
- selfmonitoring glykemie * metody MeSH
- Check Tag
- dítě MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- předškolní dítě MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- Geografické názvy
- Česká republika MeSH
- Názvy látek
- glykovaný hemoglobin MeSH
- hemoglobin A1c protein, human MeSH Prohlížeč
- hypoglykemika MeSH
- krevní glukóza * MeSH
Objective: The recommended threshold for the time spent on continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is established at 70%. However, glucose outcomes in children with type 1 diabetes (CwD) using CGM for a different proportion of time within this threshold have not been evaluated yet. The study aims to compare glycemic parameters among CwD who spent 70%-89% and ≥90% on CGM using the population-wide data from the Czech national pediatric diabetes registry ČENDA. Methods: CwD aged <19 years who used real-time CGM >70% of the time and did not change the type of therapy throughout the year 2023 were included and divided into two groups based on the time they spent on CGM-70%-89% versus ≥90%. HbA1c, times in standard glycemic ranges, mean glucose, and coefficient of variability (CV) were compared between the groups and by treatment modalities. Results: Data from 1977 CwD (1035 males and 942 females) were evaluated. Among them, 404 participants (20.4%) used CGM 70%-89% of the time, and 1573 participants (79.6%) ≥90% of the time. Compared with the 70-89% group, the ≥90% CGM users achieved significantly lower HbA1c levels (51 mmol/mol, 6.8% vs. 58 mmol/mol, 7.4%, P < 0.001), higher time in range (72% vs. 60%, P < 0.001), and lower mean glucose and CV (8.1 mmol/L, 146 mg/dL vs. 9.1 mmol/L, 164 mg/dL and 37% vs. 40%, respectively, both P < 0.001). Analogous results were seen irrespective of the treatment modality. The differences persisted after propensity score adjustment. Conclusion: CGM use for ≥90% is associated with tighter glycemic control compared with 70%-89% use. Therefore, it is essential to motivate CwD to use CGM for the longest possible time and search for suitable options to overcome barriers in uninterrupted CGM monitoring.
1st Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czechia
Department of Pediatrics Hospital Ceske Budejovice Budejovice Czechia
Department of Pediatrics Masaryk Hospital Usti nad Labem Czechia
Department of Pediatrics Motol University Hospital and 2 Faculty of Medicine Prague Czechia
Department of Pediatrics Motol University Hospital and 2nd Faculty of Medicine Prague Czechia
Department of Pediatrics University Hospital Brno Brno Czechia
Department of Pediatrics University Hospital Hradec Kralove Kralove Czechia
Department of Pediatrics University Hospital Olomouc Olomouc Czechia
Department of Pediatrics University Hospital Ostrava Ostrava Czechia
Department of Pediatrics University Hospital Plzen Plzen Czechia
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
Global Inequities in Diabetes Technology and Insulin Access and Glycemic Outcomes