How use of continuous glucose monitoring can address therapeutic inertia in primary care

References

• American Diabetes Association. 6. Glycemic targets: standards of medical care in diabetes—2021. Diabetes Care. 2021 Jan;44(Supplement 1):S73–S84
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone MA, Charpentier G, Doggen K, et al. Quality of care of people with Type 2 diabetes in eight European Countries: findings from the guideline adherence to enhance care (GUIDANCE) study. Diabetes Care. 2013 Sep;36(9):2628–2638.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meneghini L, Mauricio D, Orsi E, et al. Achievement of HbA1c targets in the Diabetes Unmet Need with Basal Insulin Evaluation (DUNE) real-world study. ADA 77th Scientific Sessions, San Diego, CA, 990. Poster; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Mauricio D, Meneghini L, Seufert J, et al. Glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia burden in patients with type 2 diabetes initiating basal insulin in Europe and the USA. Diabet Obes Metab. 2017; 19: 1155–1164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khunti K, Wolden ML, Thorsted BL, et al. Clinical inertia in people with Type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study of more than 80,000 people. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:3411‐3417.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carls G, Huynh J, Tuttle E, et al. Achievement of glycated hemoglobin goals in the US remains unchanged through 2014. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8:863–873.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang M, Wang D, Coresh J, et al. Trends in diabetes treatment and control in U.S. adults, 1999–2018. N Eng J Med. 2021;384:2219–2228.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipska KJ, Warton EM, Huang ES, et al. HbA1c and risk of severe hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes: the Diabetes and Aging Study. Diabetes Care. 2013;36(11):3535–3542.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinstock RS, DuBose SN, Bergenstal RM, et al. Risk factors associated with severe hypoglycemia in older adults with Type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2016;39(4):603–610.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao MJY, Prentice JC, Mohr DC, et al. Association between hemoglobin a1c variability and hypoglycemia-related hospitalizations in veterans with diabetes mellitus. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2021;9:e001797.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nathan DM, Genuth S, Lachin J, et al.; Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:977–986.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonlylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet. 1998;352(9131):837–853.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nathan DM, Cleary PA, Backlund JY, et al. Diabetes control and complications trial/epidemiology of diabetes interventions and complications (DCCT/EDIC) Study Research Group: intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2643–2653.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holman RR, Paul SK, Bethel A, et al. 10-Year follow-up of intensive glucose control in Type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1577–1589.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lebeau JP, Cadwallader JS, Aubin-Auger I, et al. The concept and definition of therapeutic inertia in hypertension in primary care: a qualitative systematic review. BMC Fam Pract. 2014;15:130. Cited 2021 May 20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karam SL, Dendy J, Polu S, et al. Overview of therapeutic inertia in diabetes: prevalence, causes, and consequences. Diabetes Spectr. 2020 Feb;33(1):8–15.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Davies MJ, D’Alessio DA, Fradkin J, et al. Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2018. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care. 2018;61(12):2461–2498.
   Google Scholar
• Khunti K, Gomes MB, Pocock S, et al. Therapeutic inertia in the treatment of hyperglycaemia in patients with Type 2 diabetes: a systematic review. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2018;20(2):427–437.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Satoh J, Andersen M, Bekker Hansen B, et al. Clinical inertia in basal insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes—results from a retrospec- tive database study in Japan (JDDM 43). PLoS ONE. 2018;13:e0198160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zafar A, Davies M, Azhar A, et al. Clinical inertia in management of T2DM. Prim Care Diabetes. 2010;4:203–207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khunti K, Millar-Jones D. Clinical inertia to insulin initiation and intensification in the UK: a focused literature review. Prim Care Diabetes. 2017;11(1):3–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paul SK, Klein K, Thorsted BL, et al. Delay in treatment intensification increases the risks of cardiovascular events in patients with Type 2 diabetes. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2015;14:100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirsch IB. Blood glucose monitoring technology: translating data into practice. Endocr Pract. 2004;10:67–76.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Given JE, O’Kane MJ, Bunting BP, et al. Comparing patient-generated blood glucose diary records with meter memory in diabetes: a systematic review. Diabet Med. 2013;30:901–913.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kazlauskaite R, Soni S, Evans AT, et al. Accuracy of self-monitored blood glucose in Type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2009;11:385–392.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selvan C, Thukral A, Dutta D, et al. Impact of self-monitoring of blood glucose log reliability on long-term glycemic outcomes in children with Type 1 diabetes. Indian J Endocrinol Metab. 2017 May-Jun;21(3):38–382.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fogh-Andersen N, Altura BM, Altura BT, et al. Composition of interstitial fluid. Clin Chem. 1995;41:1522–1525.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmelzeisen-Redeker G, Schoemaker M, Kirchsteiger H, et al. Time delay of CGM sensors: relevance, causes, and countermeasures. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015;9(5):S73–S84.
   Google Scholar
• Basu A, Dube S, Veettil S, et al. Time lag of glucose from intravascular to interstitial compartment in type 1 diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015;9(1):63–68.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grunberger G, Sherr J, Allende M, et al. American Association of clinical endocrinology clinical practice guideline: the use of advanced technology in the management of persons with diabetes mellitus. Endocr Pract 2021 Jun;27(6):505–537.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward JEF, Stetson BA, Mokshagundam SPL. Patient perspectives on self-monitoring of blood glucose: perceived recommendations, behaviors and barriers in a clinic sample of adults with Type 2 diabetes. J Diabetes Metab Disord2015 May 19 14:43.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ajjan R, Slattery D, Wright E. Continuous glucose monitoring: a brief review for primary care practitioners. Adv Ther. 2019;36:579–596.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peyrot M, Rubin RR, Lauritzen T, et al. Psychosocial problems and barriers to improved diabetes management: results of the cross-national diabetes attitudes, wishes and needs (DAWN) study. Diabet Med. 2005;22(10):1379–1385.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris MI. National health and nutrition examination survey. Frequency of blood glucose monitoring in relation to glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2001;24(6):979–982.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vincze G, Barner JC, Lopez D. Factors associated with adherence to self-monitoring of blood glucose among persons with diabetes. Diabetes Educ. 2004;30(1):112–125.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westen SC, Warnick JL, Albanese-O’Neill A, et al. Objectively measured adherence in adolescents with Type 1 diabetes on multiple daily injections and insulin pump therapy. J Pediatr Psychol. 2019;44:21–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lind M, Polonsky W, Hirsch IB. Continuous glucose monitoring vs conventional therapy for glycemic control in adults with Type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections: the GOLD randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;317(4):379–387.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck RW, Riddlesworth T, Ruedy K, et al. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in adults with Type 1 diabetes using insulin injections: the DIAMOND randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;317:371–378.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruedy KJ, Parkin CG, Riddlesworth TD, et al., for the DIAMOND Study Group. Continuous glucose monitoring in older adults with type 1 and Type 2 diabetes using multiple daily injections of insulin: results from the DIAMOND trial. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017;11(6):1138–1146.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Šoupal J, Petruželková L, Flekač M, et al. Comparison of different treatment modalities for type 1 diabetes, including sensor-augmented insulin regimens, in 52 weeks of follow-up: a COMISAIR study. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2016;18(9):532–538.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Šoupal J, Petruželková L, Grunberger G, et al. Glycemic outcomes in adults with T1D are impacted more by continuous glucose monitoring than by insulin delivery method: 3 years of follow-up from The comisair Study. Diabetes Care. 2020 Jan;43(1):37–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kröger J, Fasching P, Hanaire H. Three European retrospective real-world chart review studies to determine the effectiveness of flash glucose monitoring on Hba1c in adults with Type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Ther. 2020;11(1):279–291.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charleer S, De Block C, Van Huffel L, et al. Quality of life and glucose control after 1 year of nationwide reimbursement of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in adults living with Type 1 diabetes (future): a prospective observational Real-World Cohort Study. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(2):389–397.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fokkert M, van Dijk P, Edens M, et al. Improved well-being and decreased disease burden after 1-year use of flash glucose monitoring (FLARE-NL4). BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2019;7(1):e000809.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyndall V, Stimson RH, Zammitt NN, et al. Marked improvement in HbA1c following commencement of flash glucose monitoring in people with type 1 diabetes. Diabetologia. 2019;62(8):1349–1356.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paris I, Henry C, Pirard F, et al. The new freestyle libre flash glucose monitoring system improves the glycaemic control in a cohort of people with type 1 diabetes followed in real-life conditions over a period of one year. Endocrinol Diab Metab 2018;1:e00023. 2021 Cited https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6354746/.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pintus D. Freestyle libre flash glucose monitoring improves patient quality of life measures in children with Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) with appropriate provision of education and support by healthcare professionals. Oct. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2019 Sep;13(5):2923–2926.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charleer S, Mathieu C, Nobels F, et al. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control, acute admissions, and quality of life: a real-world study. Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2018;103(3):1224–1232.
   Google Scholar
• Haak T, Hanaire H, Ajjan R, et al. Flash glucose-sensing technology as a replacement for blood glucose monitoring for the management of insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: a multicenter, open-label randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8(1):55–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolinder J, Antuna R, Geelhoed-Duijvestijn P, et al. Novel glucose-sensing technology and hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes: a multicentre, non-masked, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;388:2254–2263.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Beers Ca, DeVries JH, Kleijer SJ, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring for patients with Type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IN CONTROL): a randomised, open-label, crossover trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016;4(11):893–902.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haak T, Hanaire H, Ajjan R, et al. Use of flash glucose sensing technology for 12 months as a replacement for blood glucose monitoring in insulin-treated Type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8:573–586.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gomez-Peralta F, Dunn T, Katherine Landuy K, et al. Flash glucose monitoring reduces glycemic variability and hypoglycemia: real-world data from Spain. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2020 Mar;8(1):e001052.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ólafsdóttir AF, Polonsky W, Bolinder J, et al. The effect of continuous glucose monitoring on nocturnal hypoglycemia, daytime hypoglycemia, glycemic variability, and hypoglycemia confidence in persons with Type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections (GOLD-3). Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018;20(4):274–284.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monnier L, Colette C, Wojtusciszyn A, et al. Toward defining the threshold between low and high glucose variability in diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2017;40:832–838.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kovatchev B. Glycemic variability: risk factors, assessment, and control. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2019 Jul;13(4):627–635.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kovatchev BP, Cox DJ, Gonder-Frederick LA, et al. Assessment of risk for severe hypoglycemia among adults with IDDM: validation of the low blood glucose index. Diabetes Care. 1998;21(11):1870–1875.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirsch IB, Kerr MSD, Roberts GJ, et al. Utilization of continuous glucose monitors is associated with reduction in inpatient and outpatient emergency acute diabetes events regardless of prior blood test strip usage. Diabetes. 2020;69(Supplement 1):875.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergenstal RM, Kerr MSD, Roberts GJ, et al. Flash CGM is associated with reduced diabetes events and hospitalizations in insulin-treated Type 2 diabetes. J Endocr Soc. 2021;5(4):bvab013.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller E, Kerr MSD, Roberts GJ, et al. FreeStyle libre® system use associated with reduction in acute diabetes events and all-cause hospitalizations in patients with Type 2 diabetes without bolus insulin. Diabetes. 2020 Jun;69(Supplement 1):85–LB.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright EE, Kerr MSD, Reyes IJ, et al. Use of flash continuous glucose monitoring is associated with a1c reduction in people with Type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin or non-insulin therapy. Diabetes Spectr. Cited 2021 Mar 9;34:184–189. 2021 Feb;ds200069.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Martens T, Beck RW, Bailey R, et al. effect of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in patients with Type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2021;325(22):2262–2272.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinemann L, Guido Freckmann G, Gabriele Faber-Heinemann G, et al. Benefits of continuous glucose monitoring use in adults with type 1 diabetes and impaired hypoglycaemia awareness and/or severe hypoglycaemia treated with multiple daily insulin injections: results of the multicentre, randomised controlled HypoDE study. Lancet. 2018;391(10128):1367–1377.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Little SA, Leelarathna L, Walkinshaw E, et al. Recovery of hypoglycemia awareness in long-standing type 1 diabetes: a multicenter 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial comparing insulin pump with multiple daily injections and continuous with conventional glucose self-monitoring (HypoCOMPaSS). Diabetes Care. 2014;37:2114–2122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Beers Ca, DeVries JH, Kleijer SJ, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring for patients with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IN CONTROL): a randomised, open-label, crossover trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016;4:893–902.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuroda M, Shinke T, Sakaguchi K, et al. Association between daily glucose fluctuation and coronary plaque properties in patients receiving adequate lipid-lowering therapy assessed by continuous glucose monitoring and optical coherence tomography. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2015;14:78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gohbara M, Iwahashi N, Kataoka S, et al. Glycemic variability determined by continuous glucose monitoring system predicts left ventricular remodeling in patients with a first st-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Circ J. 2015;79(5):1092–1099.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gohbara M, Hibi K, Mitsuhashi T, et al. Glycemic variability on continuous glucose monitoring system correlates with non-culprit vessel coronary plaque vulnerability in patients with first-episode acute coronary syndrome - optical coherence tomography study. Circ J. 2016;80(1):202–210.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kataoka S, Gohbara M, Iwahashi N, et al. Glycemic variability on continuous glucose monitoring system predicts rapid progression of non-culprit lesions in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Circ J. 2015;79(10):2246–2254.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National kidney foundation. KDOQI clinical practice guideline for diabetes and ckd: 2012 update. Am J Kidney Dis. 2012 Nov;60(5):850–886.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galindo RJ, Beck RW, Scioscia MF, et al. Glycemic monitoring and management in advanced chronic kidney disease. Endocr Rev. 2020;41:756–774. bnaa017, Cited July 10,2020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chantrel G, Sissoko H, L.Képénékian L, et al. Influence of dialysis on the glucose profile in patients with diabetes: usefulness of continuous glucose monitoring. Horm Metab Res. 2014;46(11):810–813.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joubert M, Fourmy C, Henri P, et al. Effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in dialysis patients with diabetes: the dialydiab pilot study. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2015 Mar;107(3):348–354.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Battelino T, Danne T, Bergenstal RM, et al. Clinical targets for continuous glucose monitoring data interpretation: recommendations from the international consensus on time in range. Diabetes Care. 2019;42(8):1593–1603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodbard D. Continuous glucose monitoring: a review of successes, challenges, and opportunities. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2016;18(Suppl 2):S2-3-S2–13.
   Google Scholar
• Bergenstal RM, Ahmann AJ, Bailey T, et al. Recommendations for standardizing glucose reporting and analysis to optimize clinical decision making in diabetes: the Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP). Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013;15(3):198–211.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danne T, Nimri R, Battelino T, et al. International consensus on use of continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care. 2017;40(12):1631–1640.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazze RS, Lucido D, Langer O, et al. Ambulatory glucose profile: representation of verified self-monitored blood glucose data. Diabetes Care. 1987;10(1):111–117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergenstal RM, Beck RW, Close KL, et al. Glucose Management Indicator (GMI):a new term for estimating A1C from continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care. 2018;41:2275–2280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faruque LI, Wiebe N, Ehteshami A, et al. Effect of telemedicine on glycated hemoglobin in diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Cmaj. 2017;189:E341–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salehi S, Olyaeemanesh A, Mobinizadeh M, et al. Assessment of remote patient monitoring (RPM) systems for patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2020;19:115–127. Cited 2020 Jun 29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tchero H, Kangambega P, Briatte C, et al. Clinical effectiveness of telemedicine in diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of 42 randomized controlled trials. Telemed J E Health. 2019;25(7):569–583.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang X, Shu W, Du J, et al. Mobile health in the management of type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Endocr Disord. 2019;19:21. 21. Cited 2020 Jun 28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charpentier G, Benhamou PY, Dardari D, et al. The diabeo software enabling individualized insulin dose adjustments combined with telemedicine support improves HbA1c in poorly controlled type 1 diabetic patients: a 6-month, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, multicenter trial (teleDiab 1 study). Diabetes Care. 2011;34(3):533–539.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dixon RF, Zisser H, Layne JE, et al. A smartphone-based Type 2 diabetes clinic using video endocrinology consultations and CGM. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2016; 14, 908–911. Cited 2019 Dec 10 ePub
   Google Scholar
• Polonsky WH, Layne JE, Parkin CG, et al. Impact of participation in a virtual diabetes clinic on diabetes-related distress in individuals with Type 2 diabetes. Clini Diabetes. 2020 Oct;38(4):357–362.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lee WC, Balu S, Cobden D, et al. Medication adherence and the associated health-economic impact among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus converting to insulin pen therapy: an analysis of third-party managed care claims data. Clin Ther. 2006;28(10):1712–1725.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Su D, Zhou J, Kelley MS, et al. Does telemedicine improve treatment outcomes for diabetes? A meta-analysis of results from 55 randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2016;116:136–148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcolino MS, Maia JX, Alkmim MB, et al. Telemedicine application in the care of diabetes patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2013;8:e79246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee SWH, Chan CKY, Chua SS, et al. Comparative effectiveness of telemedicine strategies on type 2 diabetes management: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2017 Oct 4;7(1):12680.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heitkemper EM, Mamykina L, Travers J, et al. Do health information technology self-management interventions improve glycemic control in medically underserved adults with diabetes? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017;24:1024–1035.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keesara S, Jonas A, Schulman K. Covid-19 and health care’s digital revolution. N Engl J Med. 2020 Apr 2;382:e82. Epub ahead of print.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galindo RG, Aleppo G, Klonoff DC, et al. Implementation of continuous glucose monitoring in the hospital: emergent considerations for remote glucose monitoring during the COVID-19. Pandemic J Diabetes Sci Technol 2020; Jun 14;1932296820932903.14:822–832.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jones MS, Goley AL, Alexander BE, et al. Inpatient transition to virtual care during covid-19 pandemic. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2020 Jun;22(6):444–448.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters AL, Garg SK. The silver lining to covid-19: avoiding diabetic ketoacidosis admissions with telehealth. Diabetes Technol & Ther. 2020;22(60):449–453
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Welsh JB, Thomas R. Continuous glucose monitoring: an emerging standard of care. Am J Manag Care. 2019;25(23): SP116–SP119.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Type 1 diabetes in adults: diagnosis and management. Cited 2019 Jul 1 https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng17.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor PJ, Thompson CH, Brinkworth GD. Effectiveness and acceptability of continuous glucose monitoring for Type 2 diabetes management: a narrative review. J Diabetes Investig. 2018;9(4):713–725.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck RW, Riddlesworth TD, Ruedy K, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring versus usual care in patients with Type 2 diabetes receiving multiple daily insulin injections: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2017;167:365–374.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergenstal RM, Layne JE, Zisser H, et al. Remote application and use of real-time continuous glucose monitoring by adults with Type 2 diabetes in a virtual diabetes clinic. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021;23(2):128–132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ida S, Kaneko R, Murata K. Utility of real-time and retrospective continuous glucose monitoring in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Diabetes Res. 2019 Jan15;2019:4684815. 2019.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee PA, Greenfield G, Pappas Y. Patients’ perception of using telehealth for Type 2 diabetes management: a phenomenological study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jul 13;18(1):549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asche C, LaFleur J, Conner C. A review of diabetes treatment adherence and the association with clinical and economic outcomes. Clin Ther. 2011;33(1):74–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boye KS, Curtis SE, Lage MJ, et al. Associations between adherence and outcomes among older, type 2 diabetes patients: evidence from a medicare supplemental database. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016;10:1573–1581.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emechebe N, Agu N, Malm M, Zgibor JC. Examining the association between treatment satisfaction and medication adherence among patients with poorly controlled Type 2 diabetes diabetes. Diabetes. 2018 Jul;67(Supplement 1):724.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar