Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 1 de 1
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
BMC Endocr Disord ; 21(1): 79, 2021 Apr 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33888117

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The study objective was to evaluate the effects of professional continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) as an adjuvant educational tool for improving glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: We conducted a three-month quasi-experimental study with an intervention (IGr) and control group (CGr) and ex-ante and ex-post evaluations in one family medicine clinic in Mexico City. Participants were T2D patients with HbA1c > 8% attending a comprehensive diabetes care program. In addition to the program, the IGr wore a professional CGM sensor (iPro™2) during the first 7 days of the study. Following this period, IGr participants had a medical consultation for the CGM results and treatment adjustments. Additionally, they received an educational session and personalized diet plan from a dietitian. After 3 months, the IGr again wore the CGM sensor for 1 week. The primary outcome variable was HbA1c level measured at baseline and 3 months after the CGM intervention. We analyzed the effect of the intervention on HbA1c levels by estimating the differences-in-differences treatment effect (Diff-in-Diff). Additionally, baseline and three-month CGM and dietary information were recorded for the IGr and analyzed using the Student's paired t-test and mixed-effects generalized linear models to control for patients' baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Overall, 302 T2D patients participated in the study (IGr, n = 150; control, n = 152). At the end of the three-month follow-up, we observed 0.439 mean HbA1C difference between groups (p = 0.004), with an additional decrease in HbA1c levels in the IGr compared with the CGr (Diff-in-Diff HbA1c mean of - 0.481% points, p = 0.023). Moreover, compared with the baseline, the three-month CGM patterns showed a significant increase in the percentage of time in glucose range (+ 7.25; p = 0.011); a reduction in the percentage of time above 180 mg/dl (- 6.01; p = 0.045), a decrease in glycemic variability (- 3.94, p = 0.034); and improvements in dietary patterns, shown by a reduction in total caloric intake (- 197.66 Kcal/day; p = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Professional CGM contributes to reducing HbA1c levels and is an adjuvant educational tool that can improve glycemic control in patients with T2D. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04667728 . Registered 16/12/2020.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood , Glycemic Control/methods , Monitoring, Physiologic/methods , Patient Education as Topic , Self-Management/education , Adult , Aged , Blood Glucose/analysis , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/methods , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin/analysis , Glycated Hemoglobin/metabolism , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Education as Topic/methods , Patient Participation , Self Care
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL