Continuous Glucose Monitoring Alarms in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: User Characteristics and the Impact of Hypoglycemia and Hyperglycemia Alarm Thresholds on Glycemic Control
Authors' conclusion
CGM alarms contribute to better glycemic control. However, hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia alarms have advantages and disadvantages.
Study context
- Population
- Adults with T1D using the FreeStyle Libre 2 system, single centre; 501 men, median age 48 years (range 18–90)
- Participants
- 873 adults
- Exposure
- Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) alarm users vs nonusers; hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia alarm thresholds
- Outcome
- Influence of hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia alarm thresholds on glycaemic control
Methodological detailsobservational, single-centre
- Observational
- Single-centre
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
- Hypoglycaemia alarms reduced hypoglycaemia features and glucose variability, at the expense of shorter TIR; higher threshold, greater effects
- Hyperglycaemia alarms reduced hyperglycaemia and lowered GMI, at the expense of greater tendency to hypoglycaemia; lower threshold, greater effects
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Age · alarm users older
P < 0.001
Hypoglycaemia alarms set, by sex
- Women
- 76.1%
- Men
- 69.1%
- P
- P = 0.022
Original publication
Continuous Glucose Monitoring Alarms in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: User Characteristics and the Impact of Hypoglycemia and Hyperglycemia Alarm Thresholds on Glycemic Control. Diabetes Technol Ther. Published 8 March 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →