Journal
DIABETES CARE
Volume 40, Issue 12, Pages 1631-1640Publisher
AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/dc17-1600
Keywords
-
Categories
Funding
- ATTD Congress
- Abbott Laboratories
- Dex-com
- Insulet Corporation
- Eli Lilly
- Medtronic
- Roche Diabetes Care
- Sanofi
- diaTribe Foundation
- National Institute for Health Research [CDF-2013-06-035, NF-SI-0515-10079] Funding Source: researchfish
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Measurement of glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) has been the traditional method for assessing glycemic control. However, it does not reflect intra- and interday glycemic excursions that may lead to acute events (such as hypoglycemia) or postprandial hyperglycemia, which have been linked to both microvascular and macrovascular complications. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), either from real-time use (rtCGM) or intermittently viewed (iCGM), addresses many of the limitations inherent in HbA(1c) testing and self-monitoring of blood glucose. Although both provide the means to move beyond the HbA(1c) measurement as the sole marker of glycemic control, standardized metrics for analyzing CGM data are lacking. Moreover, clear criteria for matching people with diabetes to the most appropriate glucose monitoring methodologies, as well as standardized advice about how best to use the new information they provide, have yet to be established. In February 2017, the Advanced Technologies & Treatments for Diabetes (ATTD) Congress convened an international panel of physicians, researchers, and individuals with diabetes who are expert in CGM technologies to address these issues. This article summarizes the ATTD consensus recommendations and represents the current understanding of how CGM results can affect outcomes.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available