Background: Studies have shown benefits of CGM in management of type 1 diabetes (T1D), however, it is not yet clear if the benefits are maintained in a real-life clinical practice.

Methods: We evaluated 2 groups of adults (age 18-35 years) with T1D: One using CGM and the other using glucometer. Patients underwent either 2-week blinded CGM or assessment from personal CGM over 2 weeks. Patients also completed questionnaires for demographics, surveys for fear of hypoglycemia (HSF II), hypoglycemic unawareness, and problem areas in diabetes Questionnaire (PAID)). Glycemic control was measured by A1c.

Results: We evaluated 33 patients withT1D (15 using CGM and 18 using glucometer); average age 27 years, duration of diabetes 10 years, years of education 7 years. CGM users had better glycemic control as seen by A1C of 7.5% vs. 8.5 (p<0.05). 40% of patients using CGM had clinically significant hypoglycemia (glucose≤54 for > 15 mins/episode) compared to 66% in glucometer-users (mean duration 18 min/day vs. 27 min/day) (p=ns). CGM users spent longer time in range (70-180 mg/dl) compared to glucometer-users (14 hours/day vs. 12 hours/day). Hypoglycemia unawareness was reported by 44% of CGM users compared to 14% of glucometer-users. More CGM-users reported checking SMBG > 6 times per day, and worried more regarding nocturnal hypoglycemia (81% vs. 57%). Diabetes-related distress was lower in RT-CGM users (PAID score 27 vs. 34).

Conclusion: In a clinical setting, despite more hypoglycemic unawareness and more worry regarding hypoglycemia, T1D patients who used RT-CGM had better glycemic control, higher time spent in range, and lower risk of hypoglycemia compared to glucometer-users.


E. Toschi: None. C. Slyne: None. A. Atakov-Castillo: None. J. Greenberg: None. T. Greaves: None. S.P. Carl: None. M. Munshi: Consultant; Self; Sanofi.

Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. More information is available at