4.6 Article

Continuous glucose monitor use with and without remote monitoring in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes: A pilot study

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 15, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230476

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Dexcom, Inc. through the Board of Regents at the University of Colorado Denver
  2. NIH/NCRR Colorado CTSI Grant [UL1 RR025780]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background To examine whether continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with remote monitoring by followers (family/friends) changes glucose management, follower interventions, and health outcomes compared to CGM alone in pregnant women with diabetes. Methods We prospectively stratified first trimester pregnant women with Type 1 Diabetes to CGM Share (remote monitoring) or CGM Alone. We enrolled a main follower per woman. We retrospectively acquired data for pregnant women who did not use CGM (no CGM). We compared hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) between groups. We compared sensor glucose, follower interventions, and gestational outcomes between CGM Alone and CGM Share. Longitudinal mixed effects models were used for analyses of changes in outcomes over time. Results HbA1c decreased in all groups throughout pregnancy and was significantly lower over time in women using CGM Share (n = 15) compared to CGM Alone (n = 13) or no CGM (n = 8) (p = 0.0042). CGM Share users had lower median sensor glucose levels (p = 0.0331) and percent time spent > 180 mg/dL (p = 0.0228) across pregnancy. There were no significant differences in maternal and fetal outcomes between groups. CGM Share followers had more alerts for hypoglycemia, but did fewer interventions. Conclusions In this small pilot study, use of CGM with remote monitoring improved some glycemic metrics in pregnant women with diabetes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available