Criteria for Personalised Choice of a Continuous Glucose Monitoring System: An Expert Opinion.

Choice-driving factors Continuous glucose monitoring Diabetes technology Sensor features

Journal

Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders
ISSN: 1869-6953
Titre abrégé: Diabetes Ther
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101539025

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
30 Sep 2024
Historique:
received: 12 07 2024
accepted: 09 09 2024
medline: 30 9 2024
pubmed: 30 9 2024
entrez: 30 9 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Despite the growing evidence supporting the outpatient use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for improving glycaemic control and reducing hypoglycaemia, there is a need for a detailed understanding of the specific features of CGM devices that best meet individual patient needs. This expert opinion, based on a comprehensive literature review and the personal perspectives of clinicians, aims to provide the healthcare professionals (HCPs) with a comprehensive framework for selecting CGM devices. It evaluates the current state of CGM technology, categorizing features into essential features, major drivers of choice, and additional/useful features. Moreover, the practical model presented outlines a patient's journey with CGM, emphasising the importance of aligning device features with patient needs. This includes understanding the patient's lifestyle, clinical conditions, and personal preferences to optimize CGM use and improve diabetes management outcomes.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39347900
doi: 10.1007/s13300-024-01654-y
pii: 10.1007/s13300-024-01654-y
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

Internal Diabetes Federation, IDF diabetes atlas, 10th edition. Brussels, Belgium: 2021 IDF Diabetes Atlas.
Lee I, Probst D, Klonoff D, Sode K. Continuous glucose monitoring systems—current status and future perspectives of the flagship technologies in biosensor research. Biosens Bioelectron. 2021;181:113054.
pubmed: 33775474 doi: 10.1016/j.bios.2021.113054
Mihai D, Stefan D, Stegaru D, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring devices: a brief presentation (review). Exp Ther Med. 2021;23:174.
pubmed: 35069855 doi: 10.3892/etm.2021.11097
Talbo MK, Katz A, Hill L, Peters TM, Yale J-F, Brazeau A-S. Effect of diabetes technologies on the fear of hypoglycaemia among people living with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. eClinicalMedicine. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102119 .
doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102119 pubmed: 37593226
Dicembrini I, Cosentino C, Monami M, Mannucci E, Pala L. Effects of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Acta Diabetol. 2021;58:401–10.
pubmed: 32789691 doi: 10.1007/s00592-020-01589-3
Castellana M, Parisi C, Di Molfetta S, et al. Efficacy and safety of flash glucose monitoring in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2020;8:e001092.
pubmed: 32487593 doi: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2019-001092
Di Molfetta S, Caruso I, Cignarelli A, et al. Professional continuous glucose monitoring in patients with diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2023;25:1301–10.
pubmed: 36661362 doi: 10.1111/dom.14981
Charleer S, Mathieu C, Nobels F, Gillard P. Accuracy and precision of flash glucose monitoring sensors inserted into the abdomen and upper thigh compared with the upper arm. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2018;20:1503–7.
pubmed: 29381253 doi: 10.1111/dom.13239
Ang E, Lee ZX, Moore S, Nana M. Flash glucose monitoring (FGM): a clinical review on glycaemic outcomes and impact on quality of life. J Diabetes Complicat. 2020;34:107559.
doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2020.107559
Lu J, Ying Z, Wang P, Fu M, Han C, Zhang M. Effects of continuous glucose monitoring on glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2024;26:362–72.
pubmed: 37828805 doi: 10.1111/dom.15328
Jancev M, Vissers TACM, Visseren FLJ, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetologia. 2024;67:798–810.
pubmed: 38363342 doi: 10.1007/s00125-024-06107-6
Klupa T, Czupryniak L, Dzida G, et al. Expanding the role of continuous glucose monitoring in modern diabetes care beyond type 1 disease. Diabetes Ther. 2023;14:1241–66.
pubmed: 37322319 doi: 10.1007/s13300-023-01431-3
American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 7. Diabetes technology: standards of care in diabetes-2024. Diabetes Care. 2024;47:S126–44.
doi: 10.2337/dc24-S007
Reddy M, Oliver N. The role of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in diabetes management and how it should link to integrated personalized diabetes management. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2024;26:46–56.
pubmed: 38441367 doi: 10.1111/dom.15504
Ajjan RA, Cummings MH, Jennings P, Leelarathna L, Rayman G, Wilmot EG. Accuracy of flash glucose monitoring and continuous glucose monitoring technologies: implications for clinical practice. Diab Vasc Dis Res. 2018;15:175–84.
pubmed: 29446646 doi: 10.1177/1479164118756240
Ng SM. NICE and NHS England leads the way to improve diabetes care with access to continuous glucose monitoring for people with type 1 diabetes. BMC Med. 2023;21:295.
pubmed: 37553627 doi: 10.1186/s12916-023-03014-2
Societá italiana di Diabetologia. Ruolo del monitoraggio in continuo del glucosio nella gestione del diabete: nuovi scenari, nuove applicazioni. 2023;35:1–18
Klonoff DC, Gabbay M, Moon SJ, Wilmot EG. 2024. Importance of FDA-integrated continuous glucose monitors to ensure accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring. J Diabetes Sci Technol. https://doi.org/10.1177/19322968241250357 .
Heinemann L, Schoemaker M, Schmelzeisen-Redecker G, et al. Benefits and limitations of MARD as a performance parameter for continuous glucose monitoring in the interstitial space. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2020;14:135–50.
pubmed: 31216870 doi: 10.1177/1932296819855670
Muñoz Fabra E, Díez J-L, Bondia J, Laguna Sanz AJ. A comprehensive review of continuous glucose monitoring accuracy during exercise periods. Sensors. 2021;21:479.
pubmed: 33445438 doi: 10.3390/s21020479
Pemberton JS, Wilmot EG, Barnard-Kelly K, et al. CGM accuracy: contrasting CE marking with the governmental controls of the USA (FDA) and Australia (TGA): a narrative review. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2023;25:916–39.
pubmed: 36585365 doi: 10.1111/dom.14962
Feig DS, Donovan LE, Corcoy R, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes (CONCEPTT): a multicentre international randomised controlled trial. Lancet Lond Engl. 2017;390:2347–59.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32400-5
Majewska A, Stanirowski PJ, Wielgoś M, Bomba-Opoń D. Efficacy of continuous glucose monitoring on glycaemic control in pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus-a systematic review. J Clin Med. 2022;11:2932.
pubmed: 35629058 doi: 10.3390/jcm11102932
García-Moreno RM, Benítez-Valderrama P, Barquiel B, et al. Efficacy of continuous glucose monitoring on maternal and neonatal outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Diabet Med. 2022;39: e14703.
pubmed: 34564868 doi: 10.1111/dme.14703
Benhalima K, Beunen K, Siegelaar SE, et al. Management of type 1 diabetes in pregnancy: update on lifestyle, pharmacological treatment, and novel technologies for achieving glycaemic targets. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2023;11:490–508.
pubmed: 37290466 doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(23)00116-X
Eichenlaub M, Pleus S, Rothenbühler M, et al. Comparator data characteristics and testing procedures for the clinical performance evaluation of continuous glucose monitoring systems. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2024;26:263–75.
pubmed: 38194227 doi: 10.1089/dia.2023.0465
Pickup JC, Ford Holloway M, Samsi K. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes: a qualitative framework analysis of patient narratives. Diabetes Care. 2015;38:544–50.
pubmed: 25552422 doi: 10.2337/dc14-1855
Shivers JP, Mackowiak L, Anhalt H, Zisser H. “Turn it Off!”: diabetes device alarm fatigue considerations for the present and the future. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013;7:789–94.
pubmed: 23759412 doi: 10.1177/193229681300700324
Ciechański M, Witkowska E, Ostańska A, et al. Pros and cons of continous glucose monitoring. J Med Sci. 2024;93:e873–e873.
Miller E, Midyett LK. Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should … now. A practical approach to counseling persons with diabetes on use of optional CGM alarms. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021;23:S66–71.
pubmed: 34546081 doi: 10.1089/dia.2021.0192
Mastrototaro J, Welsh JB, Lee S. Practical considerations in the use of real-time continuous glucose monitoring alerts. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2010;4:733–9.
pubmed: 20513341 doi: 10.1177/193229681000400329
Abraham SB, Arunachalam S, Zhong A, Agrawal P, Cohen O, McMahon CM. Improved real-world glycemic control with continuous glucose monitoring system predictive alerts. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2021;15:91–7.
pubmed: 31272204 doi: 10.1177/1932296819859334
Marigliano M, Piona C, Mancioppi V, Morotti E, Morandi A, Maffeis C. Glucose sensor with predictive alarm for hypoglycaemia: Improved glycaemic control in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2024;26:1314–20.
pubmed: 38177091 doi: 10.1111/dom.15432
Puhr S, Derdzinski M, Parker AS, Welsh JB, Price DA. Real-world hypoglycemia avoidance with a predictive low glucose alert does not depend on frequent screen views. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2020;14:83–6.
pubmed: 30943780 doi: 10.1177/1932296819840691
Rilstone S, Oliver N, Godsland I, Tanushi B, Thomas M, Hill N. A Randomized controlled trial assessing the impact of continuous glucose monitoring with a predictive hypoglycemia alert function on hypoglycemia in physical activity for people with type 1 diabetes (PACE). Diabetes Technol Ther. 2024;26:95–102.
pubmed: 37943579 doi: 10.1089/dia.2023.0376
Tejera-Pérez C, Chico A, Azriel-Mira S, et al. Connected insulin pens and caps: an expert’s recommendation from the area of diabetes of the Spanish Endocrinology and Nutrition Society (SEEN). Diabetes Ther. 2023;14:1077–91.
pubmed: 37188930 doi: 10.1007/s13300-023-01417-1
Jendle J, Adolfsson P, Choudhary P, et al. A narrative commentary about interoperability in medical devices and data used in diabetes therapy from an academic EU/UK/US perspective. Diabetologia. 2024;67:236–45.
pubmed: 38041737 doi: 10.1007/s00125-023-06049-5
Adolfsson P, Hartvig NV, Kaas A, Møller JB, Hellman J. Increased time in range and fewer missed bolus injections after introduction of a smart connected insulin pen. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2020;22:709–18.
pubmed: 32003590 doi: 10.1089/dia.2019.0411
Simonson GD, Criego AB, Battelino T, et al. Expert panel recommendations for a standardized ambulatory glucose profile report for connected insulin pens. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2024.0107 .
doi: 10.1089/dia.2024.0107 pubmed: 38758213
Adolfsson P, Björnsson V, Hartvig NV, Kaas A, Møller JB, Ogionwo Lange E. Improved glycemic control observed in children with type 1 diabetes following the introduction of smart insulin pens: a real-world study. Diabetes Ther. 2022;13:43–56.
pubmed: 34748170 doi: 10.1007/s13300-021-01177-w
Cranston I, Jamdade V, Liao B, Newson RS. Clinical, economic, and patient-reported benefits of connected insulin pen systems: a systematic literature review. Adv Ther. 2023;40:2015–37.
pubmed: 36928495 doi: 10.1007/s12325-023-02478-1
Biester T, Tauschmann M, Chobot A, et al. The automated pancreas: a review of technologies and clinical practice. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2022;24(Suppl 1):43–57.
pubmed: 34658126 doi: 10.1111/dom.14576
Grunberger G, Sherr J, Allende M, et al. American Association of Clinical Endocrinology clinical practice guideline: the use of advanced technology in the management of persons with diabetes mellitus. Endocr Pract. 2021;27:505–37.
pubmed: 34116789 doi: 10.1016/j.eprac.2021.04.008
Longo R, Sperling S. Personal versus professional continuous glucose monitoring: when to use which on whom. Diabetes Spectr. 2019;32:183–93.
pubmed: 31462872 doi: 10.2337/ds18-0093
Ospelt E, Noor N, Sanchez J, et al. Facilitators and barriers to smart insulin pen use: a mixed-method study of multidisciplinary stakeholders from diabetes teams in the United States. Clin Diabetes. 2022;41:56–67.
pubmed: 36714258 doi: 10.2337/cd22-0068
Polonsky WH, Fortmann AL. Impact of real-time continuous glucose monitoring data sharing on quality of life and health outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021;23:195–202.
pubmed: 32991199 doi: 10.1089/dia.2020.0466
Welsh JB, Derdzinski M, Parker AS, Puhr S, Jimenez A, Walker T. Real-time sharing and following of continuous glucose monitoring data in youth. Diabetes Ther. 2019;10:751–5.
pubmed: 30701468 doi: 10.1007/s13300-019-0571-0
Singh LG, Satyarengga M, Marcano I, et al. Reducing inpatient hypoglycemia in the general wards using real-time continuous glucose monitoring: the glucose telemetry system, a randomized clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2020;43:2736–43.
pubmed: 32759361 doi: 10.2337/dc20-0840
Irace C, Coluzzi S, Di Cianni G, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in a non-Icu hospital setting: the patient’s journey. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2023;33:2107–18.
pubmed: 37574433 doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2023.06.021
Fortmann AL, Spierling Bagsic SR, Talavera L, et al. Glucose as the fifth vital sign: a randomized controlled trial of continuous glucose monitoring in a non-ICU hospital setting. Diabetes Care. 2020;43:2873–7.
pubmed: 32855160 doi: 10.2337/dc20-1016
Akturk HK, Snell-Bergeon JK, Shah VN. Continuous glucose monitor with Siri integration improves glycemic control in legally blind patients with diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021;23:81–3.
pubmed: 32758007 doi: 10.1089/dia.2020.0320
Deiss D, Szadkowska A, Gordon D, et al. Clinical practice recommendations on the routine use of eversense, the first long-term implantable continuous glucose monitoring system. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019;21:254–64.
pubmed: 31021180 doi: 10.1089/dia.2018.0397
Mustonen J, Rautiainen P, Lamidi M-L, Lavikainen P, Martikainen J, Laatikainen T. Long-term health economic evaluation of intermittently scanned glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring blood glucose in a real-world setting in Finnish adult individuals with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2024.0102 .
doi: 10.1089/dia.2024.0102 pubmed: 38842899
Visser MM, Van Muylder A, Charleer S, et al. Cost-utility analysis of Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring versus FreeStyle Libre 1 intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes in Belgium. Diabetologia. 2024;67:650–62.
pubmed: 38236409 doi: 10.1007/s00125-023-06084-2
Choudhary P, de Portu S, Delbaere A, Lyon J, Pickup JC. A modelling study of the budget impact of improved glycaemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes in the UK. Diabet Med. 2019;36:988–94.
pubmed: 30710449 doi: 10.1111/dme.13924
Castro JC, Pouvourville GD, Greenberg D, et al. P45 internal, external, and cross-validation of the DEDUCE model, a cost-utility tool using patient-level microsimulation to evaluate sensor-based glucose monitoring systems in type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Value Health. 2022;25:S11.
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2022.09.057
Del Prato S, Giorgino F, Szafranski K, Poon Y. Cost-utility analysis of a flash continuous glucose monitoring system in the management of people with type 2 diabetes mellitus on basal insulin therapy—an Italian healthcare system perspective. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2024;26:3633–41.
pubmed: 38853717 doi: 10.1111/dom.15703
Mennini FS, Sciattella P, Marcellusi A, et al. An analysis of the distribution of direct cost of diabetes care in selected districts in Italy. Diabetes Ther. 2024;15:1417–34.
pubmed: 38668998 doi: 10.1007/s13300-024-01580-z
Barnard-Kelly KD, Martínez-Brocca MA, Glatzer T, Oliver N. Identifying the deficiencies of currently available CGM to improve uptake and benefit. Diabet Med. 2024;41(8): e15338.
pubmed: 38736324 doi: 10.1111/dme.15338
Heinemann L, Klonoff DC. Diabetes technology and waste: a complex story. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2021;16:1381–4.
pubmed: 34137289 doi: 10.1177/19322968211022321
Thomassian B. Troubleshooting CGM accuracy—diabetes education services. https://diabetesed.net/troubleshooting-cgm-accuracy/ . Accessed 27 Aug 2024.
Sehgal S, De Bock M, Jones S, Frewen C, Wheeler BJ. User experiences during the transition to calibration-free sensors with remote monitoring while using automated insulin delivery—a qualitative study. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2794220/v1 .
Heinemann L. Interferences with CGM systems: practical relevance? J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2022;16:271–4.
pubmed: 34911382 doi: 10.1177/19322968211065065
Asarani NAM, Reynolds AN, Boucher SE, De Bock M, Wheeler BJ. Cutaneous complications with continuous or flash glucose monitoring use: systematic review of trials and observational studies. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2020;14:328–37.
pubmed: 31452386 doi: 10.1177/1932296819870849
Novak-Bilić G, Vučić M, Japundžić I, Meštrović-Štefekov J, Stanić-Duktaj S, Lugović-Mihić L. Irritant and allergic contact dermatitis—skin lesion characteristics. Acta Clin Croat. 2018;57:713–20.
pubmed: 31168208
Cameli N, Silvestri M, Mariano M, Messina C, Nisticò SP, Cristaudo A. Allergic contact dermatitis, an important skin reaction in diabetes device users: a systematic review. Dermatitis. 2022;33:110–5.
pubmed: 35245221 doi: 10.1097/DER.0000000000000861
Berg AK, Olsen BS, Thyssen JP, et al. High frequencies of dermatological complications in children using insulin pumps or sensors. Pediatr Diabetes. 2018;19:733–40.
pubmed: 29484783 doi: 10.1111/pedi.12652
American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. Diabetes technology: standards of care in diabetes—2024. Diabetes Care. 2024;47:S126–44.
Bruttomesso D, Laviola L, Avogaro A, et al. The use of real time continuous glucose monitoring or flash glucose monitoring in the management of diabetes: a consensus view of Italian diabetes experts using the Delphi method. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis NMCD. 2019;29:421–31.
pubmed: 30952574 doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2019.01.018
Ehrmann D, Priesterroth L-S, Olesen B, Haak T, Kulzer B, Hermanns N. More frequent use of glucose alarms is associated with continuous glucose monitoring-specific diabetes education: findings from the Dia·Link diabetes panel. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2024;26:59–64.
pubmed: 37902781 doi: 10.1089/dia.2023.0333
Smith MB, Albanese-O’Neill A, Yao Y, Wilkie DJ, Haller MJ, Keenan GM. Feasibility of the web-based intervention designed to educate and improve adherence through learning to use continuous glucose monitor (IDEAL CGM) training and follow-up support intervention: randomized controlled pilot study. JMIR Diabetes. 2021;6:e15410.
pubmed: 33560234 doi: 10.2196/15410

Auteurs

Sergio Di Molfetta (S)

Department of Precision and Regenerative Medicine and Ionian Area, Section of Internal Medicine, Endocrinology, Andrology and Metabolic Diseases, University of Bari Aldo Moro, 70124, Bari, Italy.

Antonio Rossi (A)

IRCCS Ospedale Galeazzi-Sant'Ambrogio, Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, University of Milan, 20157, Milan, Italy.

Federico Boscari (F)

Unit of Metabolic Diseases, University Hospital of Padua, 35128, Padua, Italy.

Concetta Irace (C)

Department of Health Science, University Magna Græcia Catanzaro, Viale Europa Località Germaneto, 88100, Catanzaro, Italy. irace@unicz.it.

Luigi Laviola (L)

Department of Precision and Regenerative Medicine and Ionian Area, Section of Internal Medicine, Endocrinology, Andrology and Metabolic Diseases, University of Bari Aldo Moro, 70124, Bari, Italy.

Daniela Bruttomesso (D)

Department of Health Science, University Magna Græcia Catanzaro, Viale Europa Località Germaneto, 88100, Catanzaro, Italy.

Classifications MeSH