Endocrine Abstracts

Introduction: Flash glucose monitoring (FGM) enables people with diabetes to regularly track their glucose levels without performing capillary finger-stick measurements (SMBG). Clinical studies have shown improvement in glycemic control, reduction of hypoglycemia, improvement in comfort and quality of life in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using this technology. In contrast to continuous glucose monitoring, FGM requires the performance of a scan to obtain the current glucose level. The analysis aimed to investigate whether patients’ scanning behaviour alters closer to an outpatient clinic visit.

Methods: We analysed registry data collected by at tertiary diabetes centre in Austria. People with T1D routinely using FGM to manage their diabetes were included in the analysis. FGM data of the last 90 days before a routine outpatient clinic visit were analysed. We assessed the effect of scan frequency on parameters of glycemic control such as eA1c (estimated A1c) and time in range (TIR) two weeks and three months prior to consultation. We tested for normal distribution using Shapiro-Wilk test and compared scan frequency, changes in eA1c and TIR using paired two-sample t-test.

Results: Data from 89 individuals (49% female, age 42.3 ± 13.9 years, BMI 25.1 ± 4.0 kg/m², diabetes duration 20.1 ± 12.5 years, CSII vs MDI 18 vs 71) were analysed. Data are two weeks vs three months before a regular outpatient clinic visit, respectively. The mean scan frequency was 13.2 ± 8.3 scans/day vs 10.5 ± 4.4 scans/day (P < 0.01). EA1c 58.9 ± 11.8 mmol/mol vs 59.2 ± 10.7 mmol/mol (P = 0.664) and TIR (70–180 mg/dl) 53.9 ± 16.3% vs 53.11 ± 14.8% (P = 0.346) were not significantly different between the two time periods.

Discussion: We observed a significant increase in daily scan frequency two weeks prior to a scheduled outpatient clinic visit as compared to the three months before the visit This is analogous to earlier findings in SMBG, showing an increase in performance and documentation of glucose values before an outpatient clinic visit. Despite this increase in glucose checks, there was no significant improvement in glycemic control assessed by FGM such as eA1c and TIR. The recommended treatment goal of > 70% TIR 70–180 mg/dl was not achieved in our population. Thus, we can assume that only an increase in scan frequency might not necessarily result in relevant improvement in glycemic control. Therefore, effort must be made to motivate and educate FGM users better to make use of the full potential of FGM.