Usability of Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review
Authors' conclusion
Although the clinical effectiveness of CGM among adults 60 years or older was demonstrated in the reviewed studies, our usability assessment is inconclusive.
Study context
- Population
- Adults 60 years or older with T2D; English-language studies published 2019–2024 (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL)7 studies
- Comparison
- Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) vs usual care; CGM across device types; CGM across care models
- Outcome
- Usability of CGM (efficiency, effectiveness and satisfaction)
Methodological detailsPRISMA checklist, quality assessed with Critical Appraisal Skills Program Checklist, 118 titles identified; 58 full-text reviews; 7 included
- PRISMA checklist
- Quality assessed with Critical Appraisal Skills Program Checklist
- 118 titles identified; 58 full-text reviews; 7 included
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Usability of CGM
- Clinical effectiveness (HbA1c and time-in-range) and satisfaction higher across CGM types vs usual care
- Satisfaction higher with real-time CGM than professional-mode CGM (descriptive measures)
- Efficiency findings not reported in the included studies
- No findings on effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction of ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) metrics
Original publication
Usability of Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review. Diabetes Technol Ther. Published 8 November 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →