PDF herunterladen
Am J Perinatol
DOI: 10.1055/a-2442-7090
Short Communication

Satisfaction with Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Pregnant Patients with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes

Kevin S. Shrestha
1   Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama
,
Ashley N. Battarbee 
1   Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama
2   Center for Women's Reproductive Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama
› Institutsangaben Funding A.N.B received support from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objective Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) improves pregnancy outcomes in type 1 diabetes. Given the rapid uptake of CGM in pregnancies complicated by both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, our objective was to determine if CGM satisfaction and use differed between type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Study Design Cross-sectional survey study of 100 patients with pregestational diabetes who used Dexcom G6 CGM during pregnancy and received prenatal care at a single tertiary care center. Participants completed the validated 15-question Glucose Monitoring Satisfaction Survey (GMSS) and other questions about CGM use. The primary outcome was high satisfaction with CGM, defined as a total GMSS score of 4 or greater. Secondary outcomes included GMSS subscales, frequency of CGM app use, and CGM features used. Outcomes were compared between type 1 and type 2 diabetes, and logistic and ordinal regression estimated the association between type 2 diabetes and outcomes.

Results Of 100 surveyed patients, 45 had type 1 and 55 had type 2 diabetes. Patients with type 1 diabetes were more likely to use CGM before pregnancy and use an insulin pump. CGM satisfaction did not differ between type 1 and type 2 diabetes (74.5 vs. 56.6%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.54, 95% [confidence interval] CI: 0.21–1.36). High openness, low behavioral burden, low emotional burden, and high worthwhileness also did not differ between groups after adjustment for CGM use before pregnancy. Reported CGM app use was high and did not differ between groups. Patients with type 2 diabetes were less likely to use arrows and/or graphs on the CGM app compared to type 1 diabetes.

Conclusion In this cohort, patients with type 2 diabetes appear to be similarly satisfied with CGM compared to those with type 1 diabetes. Future efforts focused on CGM education for new users may help increase the use of CGM app features, maximize satisfaction, and minimize technology burden.

Key Points

  • CGM satisfaction was similar between pregnant patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

  • Patients with both diabetes types thought that CGM was worthwhile and of low burden during pregnancy.

  • Patients with type 2 diabetes were less likely to report using CGM features during pregnancy.

Keywords

pregestational diabetes - type 1 diabetes - type 2 diabetes - continuous glucose monitoring - satisfaction - survey - Glucose Monitoring Satisfaction Survey

Note

This study was presented at the 2024 Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Annual Pregnancy Meeting (February 10-14, 2024, National Harbor, MD).




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 10. Juni 2024

Angenommen: 15. Oktober 2024

Accepted Manuscript online:
17. Oktober 2024

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
30. November 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Feig DS, Donovan LE, Corcoy R. et al; CONCEPTT Collaborative Group. Continuous glucose monitoring in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes (CONCEPTT): a multicentre international randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2017; 390 (10110): 2347-2359
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Martens T, Beck RW, Bailey R. et al; MOBILE Study Group. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2021; 325 (22) 2262-2272
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Polonsky WH, Fisher L, Hessler D, Edelman SV. Development of a new measure for assessing glucose monitoring device-related treatment satisfaction and quality of life. Diabetes Technol Ther 2015; 17 (09) 657-663
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Marigliano M, Pertile R, Mozzillo E. et al. Satisfaction with continuous glucose monitoring is positively correlated with time in range in children with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2023; 204: 110895
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Lind M, Polonsky W, Hirsch IB. et al. Continuous glucose monitoring vs conventional therapy for glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections: The GOLD Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2017; 317 (04) 379-387
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Beck RW, Riddlesworth TD, Ruedy K. et al; DIAMOND Study Group. Continuous glucose monitoring versus usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving multiple daily insulin injections: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2017; 167 (06) 365-374
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 McLachlan K, Jenkins A, O'Neal D. The role of continuous glucose monitoring in clinical decision-making in diabetes in pregnancy. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2007; 47 (03) 186-190
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Secher AL, Madsen AB, Ringholm L. et al. Patient satisfaction and barriers to initiating real-time continuous glucose monitoring in early pregnancy in women with diabetes. Diabet Med 2012; 29 (02) 272-277
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar