The Effects of Professional Continuous Glucose Monitoring as an Adjuvant Educational Tool in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Poor Glycemic Control

From May to October 2017, the investigators conducted a three-month pilot study with intervention and control groups and ex-ante and ex-post evaluations in one ISSSTE family medicine clinic in Mexico City. Patients with type 2 diabetes in the comprehensive diabetes care program (MIDE) who were older than 20 years of age and had HbA1c> 8 mg/dL were considered eligible participants for the study; those who agreed to participate, were required to sign an informed consent. In May and June, the investigators invited all consecutive type 2 diabetes patients who attended the MIDE program to join the intervention group; the investigators followed the same protocol in July and August to assemble the control group.

The control group followed the MIDE care plan, consisting of at least two consultations with a medical doctor and HbA1c measurements at baseline and three months later, as well as weekly self-care educational group activities. The baseline consultation included a review of HbA1c levels and treatment adjustments.

At the beginning of the study, the intervention group had a professional CGM device (iPro™2, Medtronic, USA) inserted subcutaneously for six days. Before the CGM insertion, the intervention group received a training session on how to use and calibrate the device through three daily glucometer readings of capillary glucose. Moreover, intervention group patients were trained to record daily information on their medications, including the times and dosages taken; their diet, including the foods and portions consumed; and their physical activity practices. After six days of device use, intervention group participants had a consultation with a family physician trained in diabetes to interpret the CGM report results and adjust their treatment. In addition, a dietitian provided an educational session and personalized diet plan guided by the CGM results. Participants in the intervention group were also advised to attend regular MIDE program activities. After three months, the intervention group wore the sensor again and their HbA1C levels were measured.

After the three-month study period, the intervention and control groups continued their participation in the MIDE program. The primary outcome variable was HbA1c level measured at baseline and three months after the CGM intervention. The investigators analyzed the effect of the intervention on HbA1c levels by estimating the differences-in-differences treatment effect. Additionally, baseline and three-month CGM and dietary information was recorded for the intervention group and analyzed using the Student's paired t-test and mixed-effects generalized linear models to control for patients' baseline characteristics.