This qualitative study used semistructured interviews with primary care clinicians to understand barriers to CGM and resources needed to prescribe. Participants were recruited through practice-based research networks. Rapid qualitative analysis was used to summarize themes from interview findings.

We conducted interviews with 55 primary care clinicians across 21 states. Participants described CGM benefits for patients with varying levels of diabetes self-management and engagement. Major barriers to prescribing included lack of insurance coverage for CGM costs to patients, and time constraints. Participants identified resources needed to foster CGM prescribing, for example, clinician education, support staff, and EHR compatibility.

Primary care clinicians face several challenges to prescribing CGM, but they are interested in learning more to help them offer it to their patients. This study reinforces the ongoing need for improved clinician education on CGM technology and continued expansion of insurance coverage for people with both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Standard summary metrics and functional data analysis (FDA) were applied to CGM data from the CONCEPTT trial (RT-CGM, n = 100; SMBG, n = 100) taken at baseline and at 24- and 34-weeks gestation. Multivariable regression analysis determined if temporal differences in 24-h glucose profiles occurred between comparators in each of the three groups.

FDA revealed that women using RT-CGM had significantly lower glucose (0.4–0.8 mmol/L [7–14 mg/dL]) for 7 h/day (0800 h–1200 h and 1600 h–1900 h) compared with those with SMBG. Women using pumps had significantly higher glucose (0.4–0.9 mmol/L [7–16 mg/dL]) for 12 h/day (0300 h to 0600 h, 1300 h to 1800 h, and 2030 h to 0030 h) at 24 weeks with no difference at 34 weeks compared with MDI. Women who had an LGA infant ran a significantly higher glucose by 0.4–0.7 mmol/L (7–13 mg/dL) for 4.5 h/day at baseline; by 0.4–0.9 mmol/L (7–16 mg/dL) for 16 h/day at 24 weeks; and by 0.4–0.7 mmol/L (7–13 mg/dL) for 14 h/day at 34 weeks.

FDA of temporal glucose profiles gives important information about differences in glucose control and its timing, which are undetectable by standard summary metrics. Women using RT-CGM were able to achieve better daytime glucose control, reducing fetal exposure to maternal glucose.

We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CGM with usual care for parameters of glycemic control in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Many electronic databases were searched for articles published from inception until 30 June 2019.

We selected RCTs that assessed both changes in HbA_1c and time in target range (TIR), together with time below range (TBR), time above range (TAR), and glucose variability expressed as coefficient of variation (CV).

Data were extracted from each trial by two investigators.

All results were analyzed by a random effects model to calculate the weighted mean difference (WMD) with the 95% CI. We identified 15 RCTs, lasting 12–36 weeks and involving 2,461 patients. Compared with the usual care (overall data), CGM was associated with modest reduction in HbA_1c (WMD –0.17%, 95% CI –0.29 to –0.06, I² = 96.2%), increase in TIR (WMD 70.74 min, 95% CI 46.73–94.76, I² = 66.3%), and lower TAR, TBR, and CV, with heterogeneity between studies. The increase in TIR was significant and robust independently of diabetes type, method of insulin delivery, and reason for CGM use. In preplanned subgroup analyses, real-time CGM led to the higher improvement in mean HbA_1c (WMD –0.23%, 95% CI –0.36 to –0.10, P < 0.001), TIR (WMD 83.49 min, 95% CI 52.68–114.30, P < 0.001), and TAR, whereas both intermittently scanned CGM and sensor-augmented pump were associated with the greater decline in TBR.

Heterogeneity was high for most of the study outcomes; all studies were sponsored by industry, had short duration, and used an open-label design.

CGM improves glycemic control by expanding TIR and decreasing TBR, TAR, and glucose variability in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.