What question did this study set out to answer?

This study aims to compare the long-term glycemic outcomes of continuous glucose monitoring with self-monitoring of blood glucose in adults with Type 1 diabetes.

June 7, 2026Diabetes

23-PUB: Pre-visit Continuous Glucose Monitoring vs. Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose for Long-Term Glycemic Control in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: A Retrospective Comparative Study

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

CCCHUPING CHEN JLJIANDE LIU PZPING ZHU

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Retrospective comparative study shows CGM improves glycemic outcomes in adults with Type 1 diabetes, suggesting its importance.

Key Points

This study aims to compare the long-term glycemic outcomes of continuous glucose monitoring with self-monitoring of blood glucose in adults with Type 1 diabetes.
Retrospective analysis of 25 adult outpatients with T1DM (CGMS: n=11; SMBG: n=14).
Participants used CGMS for 10-14 days before visits along with routine SMBG; treatment adjusted based on results.
Outcomes measured after 6 months included HbA1c, hypoglycemia frequency, and new-onset complications.
After 6 months, HbA1c was lower in the CGMS group (6.8%) compared to the SMBG group (7.2%), P<0.01.
New-onset diabetic nephropathy occurred in 1 CGMS case versus 4 SMBG cases, P<0.05; retinopathy rates were similar.
CGMS group reported fewer episodes of symptomatic hypoglycemia (3.1/month) compared to SMBG (6.4/month), P<0.01.

Cite This Study

CHEN et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a250be87def13d035e1bdb5 https://doi.org/10.2337/db26-23-pub

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

23-PUB: Pre-visit Continuous Glucose Monitoring vs. Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose for Long-Term Glycemic Control in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: A Retrospective Comparative Study

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Cite This Study

23-PUB: Pre-visit Continuous Glucose Monitoring vs. Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose for Long-Term Glycemic Control in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: A Retrospective Comparative Study

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Key Points

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider