In a consensus statement published in Diabetes Care, the Advanced Technologies & Treatments for Diabetes (ATTD) Congress provided evidence-based suggestions for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) use as it relates to establishing long-term glucose control, aiding clinical trials, and improving risk assessment for diabetes-related complications.
Thanks for posting this.
I’m biased: for me the CGM was a complete game changer. So I thought the news summary of this research was a pretty tepid endorsement of the technology. The article itself provides a little more enthusiasm, but seems to be equally focused on the related but separate topic of hypoglycemia.
At the articles’ end, it talks about assessing the value of a CGM for clinical trials. Maybe that’s still an outstanding question, but to me it’s a no brainer – what trial wouldn’t benefit from having that data?
IMHO when it comes to CGM technology, that which is blatantly obvious to families which use CGM systems may actually be hard to understand/believe for those who have never tried it or had any sort of first hand exposure to this technology.
This recommendation comes from the ADA and frankly it stinks. It recommends CGM be considered for patients who are not able to achieve control, especially if they suffer hypos. Anyone else, tough nuggets. If this recommendation was adopted a huge number of us would be denied CGM’s. And rankly stating this recommendation in this way means that if you use a CGM and achieve control and eliminate hypos then they will be justified in taking away your CGM.
Come on. Are they serious? CGMs should be a standard of care for anyone using insulin.
And by using insulin and getting our bg’s under control, they should take away our insulin, also.
I am type 2 and have been insulin dependent for about 6 years. I now take 5 units of Novalog about three times a day (depending on lunch) and Levemir, 20 units twice a day.
i have been considering CGM, but don’t know which is best. Any advice would be appreciated.