Real‐world glycaemic outcomes in adult persons with type 1 diabetes using a real‐time continuous glucose monitor compared to an intermittently scanned glucose monitor: A retrospective observational study from the Canadian LMC diabetes registry (REAL‐CGM‐T1D)

• Published in: Diabetic medicine Vol. 39; no. 11; pp. e14937 - n/a
• Main Authors: Brown, Ruth E., Chu, Lisa, Norman, Gregory J., Abitbol, Alexander
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.11.2022; John Wiley and Sons Inc
• Subjects: Adult; Blood Glucose; Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring; Canada - epidemiology; continuous blood glucose monitoring; Diabetes; Diabetes mellitus (insulin dependent); Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 - drug therapy; Glucose; Glucose monitoring; glycaemic control; Glycated Hemoglobin - analysis; HbA1c; Humans; hypoglycaemia; Hypoglycemia; Hypoglycemic Agents - therapeutic use; Observational studies; Registries; Research: Epidemiology; Sensors; type 1 diabetes; Canada; type 1 diabetes; glycaemic control; hypoglycaemia; HbA1c; continuous blood glucose monitoring
• ISSN: 0742-3071; 1464-5491
• DOI: 10.1111/dme.14937

Real‐time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) and intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM) have both been shown to improve glycaemic outcomes in people with T1D. The aim of this study was to compare real‐world glycaemic outcomes at 6–12 months in a propensity score matched cohort of CGM naïve adults with T1D who initiated a rtCGM or an isCGM. Among the matched rtCGM and isCGM cohorts (n = 143/cohort), rtCGM users had a significantly greater HbA1c benefit compared to isCGM users (adjusted difference, −3 mmol/mol [95% CI, −5 to −1]; −0.3% [95% CI, −0.5 to −0.1]; p = 0.01). There was a significantly greater lowering of HbA1c for rtCGM compared to isCGM when baseline HbA1c was <69 mmol/mol (8.5%) (adjusted difference, −4 mmol/mol [95% CI, −7 mmol/mol to −2 mmol/mol]; −0.4% [95% CI, −0.6% to −0.2%]; p < 0.001), and in MDI users (adjusted difference, −3 mmol/mol [95% CI, −6 mmol/mol to −0 mmol/mol]; −0.3% [95% CI ‐0.5% to 0.0%], p = 0.04). The rtCGM cohort had significantly greater time in range (58.3 ± 16.1% vs. 54.5 ± 17.1%, p = 0.03), lower time below range (2.1 ± 2.7% vs. 6.1 ± 5.0%, p < 0.001) and lower glycaemic variability compared to the isCGM cohort. In this real‐world analysis of adults with T1D, rtCGM users had a significantly greater reduction in HbA1c at 6–12 months compared to isCGM, and significantly greater time in range, lower time below range and lower glycaemic variability, compared to a matched cohort of isCGM users.