Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use in Youth with Type 2 Diabetes: A Pilot Randomized Study

<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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics
Published
2025-03-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2024.0539
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Diabetes Management and Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.88
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use in Youth with Type 2 Diabetes: A Pilot Randomized Study

Stephanie T. Chung, Tejal Patel, Eleanor R. Mackey, Elizabeth Estrada et al.
3 citations
Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics
Diabetes Management and Research
3.88
article

Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use in Youth with Type 2 Diabetes: A Pilot Randomized Study

Stephanie T. Chung, Tejal Patel, Eleanor R. Mackey, Elizabeth Estrada, Sydney A Dixon, Abby G. Meyers, Sophia B. Glaros, Natascia Sala, NATALIE A. MACHERET
article en
3 citations

Abstract

<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.

Diabetes Technology & TherapeuticsVol. 27(8)
Children's National (US), National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (US), Washington School of Psychiatry (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Diabetes Management and Research
3.88
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.