Comparison of the clinical effects of intermittently scanned and real‐time continuous glucose monitoring in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: A retrospective cohort study

AIMS/INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to compare two continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM) and real‐time CGM (rtCGM), to determine which system achieved better glycemic control in pediatric patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We carried out a retrospective cohort study of children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes, and compared the time in range (70–180 mg/dL), time below range (<70 mg/dL) and time above range (>180 mg/dL), and estimated glycated hemoglobin levels between patients on isCGM and rtCGM. RESULTS: Of the 112 participants, 76 (67.9%) used isCGM and 36 (32.1%) used rtCGM for glycemic management. Patients on rtCGM had significantly greater time in range (57.7 ± 12.3% vs 52.3 ± 12.3%, P = 0.0368), and had significantly lower time below range (4.3 ± 2.7% vs 10.2% ± 5.4%, P < 0.001) than those on isCGM, but there was no significant difference in the time above range (37.4 ± 12.9% vs 38.0% ± 12.5%, P = 0.881) or the glycosylated hemoglobin A1c levels (7.4 ± 0.9% vs 7.5 ± 0.8%, P = 0.734) between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes on rtCGM also showed more beneficial effects for increase of time in range, with a notable reduction of time below range compared with those on isCGM. Real‐time CGM might provide better glycemic control than isCGM in children with type 1 diabetes.