Impact of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Blood Glucose Monitoring to Support a Carbohydrate-Restricted Nutrition Intervention in People with Type 2 Diabetes
Authors' conclusion
Both the CGM and BGM arms saw similar and significant improvements in glycemia and other diabetes-related outcomes during this MSKDP.
Study context
- Population
- Adults with T2D; mean (SD) T2D duration 9.7 (7.7) years, HbA1c 8.1% (1.2%)
- Participants
- 163 adults
- Comparison
- Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) vs blood glucose monitoring (BGM) to guide a medically supervised ketogenic diet program
- CGMn = 81
- BGMn = 82reference
- Primary endpoint
- Difference in change in TIR between CGM and BGM during a MSKDP
Methodological detailsremote care
- Remote care
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
TIR · Base to M3
CGM
61-89%
BGM
63%-85%
P = 0.26
- Time in range (TIR) improved from baseline (Base) to M3
- P < 0.001
Further findings
Additional CGM metrics · M1 through M3
- Improved by M1, sustained through M3
HbA1c · Base to M3
- HbA1c decreased by ≥1.5% in both CGM and BGM arms
- P < 0.001
Diabetes medications · Base to M3
- De-intensified based on change in medication effect scores
- P < 0.001
Total energy and carbohydrate intake
- Decreased
- P < 0.001
Weight
- Clinically significant weight loss in both arms
- P < 0.001
Original publication
Impact of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Blood Glucose Monitoring to Support a Carbohydrate-Restricted Nutrition Intervention in People with Type 2 Diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. Published 11 November 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →