Cargando…

Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Brief Review for Primary Care Practitioners

ABSTRACT: Glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is routinely used as a marker of average glycemic control, but it fails to provide data on hypoglycemia and glycemic variability, both of which are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), particularly in insulin-tr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ajjan, Ramzi, Slattery, David, Wright, Eugene
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6824352/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30659511
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-0870-x
_version_ 1783464722678415360
author Ajjan, Ramzi
Slattery, David
Wright, Eugene
author_facet Ajjan, Ramzi
Slattery, David
Wright, Eugene
author_sort Ajjan, Ramzi
collection PubMed
description ABSTRACT: Glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is routinely used as a marker of average glycemic control, but it fails to provide data on hypoglycemia and glycemic variability, both of which are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), particularly in insulin-treated patients, is a cornerstone in the management of patients with diabetes. SMBG helps with treatment decisions that aim to reduce high glucose levels while avoiding hypoglycemia and limiting glucose variability. However, repeated SMBG can be inconvenient to patients and difficult to maintain in the long term. By contrast, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides a convenient, comprehensive assessment of blood glucose levels, allowing the identification of high and low glucose levels, in addition to evaluating glycemic variability. CGM using newer detection and visualization systems can overcome many of the limitations of an HbA1c-based approach while addressing the inconvenience and fragmented glucose data associated with SMBG. When used together with HbA1c monitoring, CGM provides complementary information on glucose levels, thus facilitating the optimization of diabetes therapy while reducing the fear and risk of hypoglycemia. Here we review the capabilities and benefits of CGM, including cost-effectiveness data, and discuss the potential limitations of this glucose-monitoring strategy for the management of patients with diabetes. FUNDING: Sanofi US, Inc.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6824352
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68243522019-11-06 Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Brief Review for Primary Care Practitioners Ajjan, Ramzi Slattery, David Wright, Eugene Adv Ther Review ABSTRACT: Glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is routinely used as a marker of average glycemic control, but it fails to provide data on hypoglycemia and glycemic variability, both of which are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), particularly in insulin-treated patients, is a cornerstone in the management of patients with diabetes. SMBG helps with treatment decisions that aim to reduce high glucose levels while avoiding hypoglycemia and limiting glucose variability. However, repeated SMBG can be inconvenient to patients and difficult to maintain in the long term. By contrast, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides a convenient, comprehensive assessment of blood glucose levels, allowing the identification of high and low glucose levels, in addition to evaluating glycemic variability. CGM using newer detection and visualization systems can overcome many of the limitations of an HbA1c-based approach while addressing the inconvenience and fragmented glucose data associated with SMBG. When used together with HbA1c monitoring, CGM provides complementary information on glucose levels, thus facilitating the optimization of diabetes therapy while reducing the fear and risk of hypoglycemia. Here we review the capabilities and benefits of CGM, including cost-effectiveness data, and discuss the potential limitations of this glucose-monitoring strategy for the management of patients with diabetes. FUNDING: Sanofi US, Inc. Springer Healthcare 2019-01-18 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6824352/ /pubmed/30659511 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-0870-x Text en © The Author(s) 2019 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Review
Ajjan, Ramzi
Slattery, David
Wright, Eugene
Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Brief Review for Primary Care Practitioners
title Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Brief Review for Primary Care Practitioners
title_full Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Brief Review for Primary Care Practitioners
title_fullStr Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Brief Review for Primary Care Practitioners
title_full_unstemmed Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Brief Review for Primary Care Practitioners
title_short Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Brief Review for Primary Care Practitioners
title_sort continuous glucose monitoring: a brief review for primary care practitioners
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6824352/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30659511
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-019-0870-x
work_keys_str_mv AT ajjanramzi continuousglucosemonitoringabriefreviewforprimarycarepractitioners
AT slatterydavid continuousglucosemonitoringabriefreviewforprimarycarepractitioners
AT wrighteugene continuousglucosemonitoringabriefreviewforprimarycarepractitioners