Barriers to Continuous Glucose Monitoring in People With Type 1 Diabetes: Clinician Perspectives

Overview

Journal Diabetes Spectr

Specialty Endocrinology

Date 2020 Nov 23

PMID 33223770

Citations 10

Authors

Monica S Lanning

Molly L Tanenbaum

Jessie J Wong

Korey K Hood

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine clinician attitudes about the distinct barriers to uptake of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) among people with diabetes. Survey data were collected measuring individual barriers, prerequisites to CGM, confidence in addressing barriers, and clinic staff resources. Results show that clinicians commonly report barriers to using CGM among people with diabetes in their clinic. Furthermore, clinicians who report a high number of barriers do not feel confident in overcoming the barriers to CGM. Interventions that attempt to empower clinicians to address concerns about CGM among people with diabetes may be warranted because low uptake does not appear to be directly related to available resources or prerequisites to starting CGM.

Citing Articles

Unleashing the Potential of Blood Glucose Monitoring Data With the Ambulatory Glucose Profile Report.

Simonson G, Holt E, Grady M, Hurrell G, Gaudiani L, Bergenstal R Clin Diabetes. 2024; 42(4):550-560.

PMID: 39429460 PMC: 11486858. DOI: 10.2337/cd23-0092.

Patient Perspectives on the Benefits and Challenges of Diabetes and Digital Technology.

Edelman S, Cheatham W, Norton A, Close K Clin Diabetes. 2024; 42(2):243-256.

PMID: 38666210 PMC: 11040029. DOI: 10.2337/cd23-0003.

The impact of socioeconomic factors, social determinants, and ethnicity on the utilization of glucose sensor technology among persons with diabetes mellitus: a narrative review.

Been R, Lameijer A, Gans R, van Beek A, Kingsnorth A, Choudhary P Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab. 2024; 15:20420188241236289.

PMID: 38476216 PMC: 10929059. DOI: 10.1177/20420188241236289.

Time in Range Estimation in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes is Improved by Incorporating Fasting and Postprandial Glucose Levels.

Sun R, Duan Y, Zhang Y, Feng L, Ding B, Yan R Diabetes Ther. 2023; 14(8):1373-1386.

PMID: 37328714 PMC: 10299970. DOI: 10.1007/s13300-023-01432-2.

Predicting glycemic control status and high blood glucose levels through voice characteristic analysis in patients with cystic fibrosis-related diabetes (CFRD).

Suppakitjanusant P, Kasemkosin N, Sivapiromrat A, Weinstein S, Ongphiphadhanakul B, Hunt W Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):8617.

PMID: 37244957 PMC: 10220341. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-35416-w.

References

Mamkin I, Ten S, Bhandari S, Ramchandani N . Real-time continuous glucose monitoring in the clinical setting: the good, the bad, and the practical. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2009; 2(5):882-9. PMC: 2769797. DOI: 10.1177/193229680800200520. View

Iturralde E, Tanenbaum M, Hanes S, Suttiratana S, Ambrosino J, Ly T . Expectations and Attitudes of Individuals With Type 1 Diabetes After Using a Hybrid Closed Loop System. Diabetes Educ. 2017; 43(2):223-232. PMC: 7162535. DOI: 10.1177/0145721717697244. View

Sharifi A, de Bock M, Jayawardene D, Loh M, Horsburgh J, Berthold C . Glycemia, Treatment Satisfaction, Cognition, and Sleep Quality in Adults and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes When Using a Closed-Loop System Overnight Versus Sensor-Augmented Pump with Low-Glucose Suspend Function: A Randomized Crossover Study. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2016; 18(12):772-783. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2016.0288. View

Songer T, Laporte R, Lave J, Dorman J, Becker D . Health insurance and the financial impact of IDDM in families with a child with IDDM. Diabetes Care. 1997; 20(4):577-84. DOI: 10.2337/diacare.20.4.577. View

Tanenbaum M, Adams R, Lanning M, Hanes S, Agustin B, Naranjo D . Using Cluster Analysis to Understand Clinician Readiness to Promote Continuous Glucose Monitoring Adoption. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2018; 12(6):1108-1115. PMC: 6232742. DOI: 10.1177/1932296818786486. View

Giani E, Snelgrove R, Volkening L, Laffel L . Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) Adherence in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes: Associations With Biomedical and Psychosocial Variables. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2016; 11(3):476-483. PMC: 5505422. DOI: 10.1177/1932296816676280. View

Miller K, Foster N, Beck R, Bergenstal R, DuBose S, DiMeglio L . Current state of type 1 diabetes treatment in the U.S.: updated data from the T1D Exchange clinic registry. Diabetes Care. 2015; 38(6):971-8. DOI: 10.2337/dc15-0078. View

Ives B, Sikes K, Urban A, Stephenson K, Tamborlane W . Practical aspects of real-time continuous glucose monitors: the experience of the Yale Children's Diabetes Program. Diabetes Educ. 2009; 36(1):53-62. PMC: 2863334. DOI: 10.1177/0145721709352010. View

Powell P, Hilliard M, Anderson B . Motivational interviewing to promote adherence behaviors in pediatric type 1 diabetes. Curr Diab Rep. 2014; 14(10):531. PMC: 4447119. DOI: 10.1007/s11892-014-0531-z. View

10.

Rubin R, Peyrot M . Treatment satisfaction and quality of life for an integrated continuous glucose monitoring/insulin pump system compared to self-monitoring plus an insulin pump. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2010; 3(6):1402-10. PMC: 2787041. DOI: 10.1177/193229680900300621. View

11.

Liberman A, Buckingham B . Diabetes Technology and the Human Factor. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2016; 18 Suppl 1:S101-11. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2016.2510. View

12.

Hovorka R, Kumareswaran K, Harris J, Allen J, Elleri D, Xing D . Overnight closed loop insulin delivery (artificial pancreas) in adults with type 1 diabetes: crossover randomised controlled studies. BMJ. 2011; 342:d1855. PMC: 3077739. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.d1855. View

13.

Kim H . Statistical notes for clinical researchers: Chi-squared test and Fisher's exact test. Restor Dent Endod. 2017; 42(2):152-155. PMC: 5426219. DOI: 10.5395/rde.2017.42.2.152. View

14.

Anderson J, Gavin J, Kruger D . Current Eligibility Requirements for CGM Coverage Are Harmful, Costly, and Unjustified. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019; 22(3):169-173. PMC: 7047118. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2019.0303. View

15.

Hettema J, Steele J, Miller W . Motivational interviewing. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2007; 1:91-111. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.1.102803.143833. View

16.

Miele A, Weiland K, Dungan K . Clinical outcomes associated with referral-based continuous glucose monitoring using a central standardized interpretation strategy. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2012; 14(9):765-71. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2012.0081. View

17.

Horswell R, Wascom C, Cerise F, Besse J, Johnson J . Diabetes mellitus medication assistance program: relationship of effectiveness to adherence. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2008; 19(3):677-86. DOI: 10.1353/hpu.0.0062. View

18.

Lawton J, Kimbell B, Rankin D, Ashcroft N, Varghese L, Allen J . Health professionals' views about who would benefit from using a closed-loop system: a qualitative study. Diabet Med. 2020; 37(6):1030-1037. DOI: 10.1111/dme.14252. View

19.

Tanenbaum M, Hanes S, Miller K, Naranjo D, Bensen R, Hood K . Diabetes Device Use in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: Barriers to Uptake and Potential Intervention Targets. Diabetes Care. 2016; 40(2):181-187. PMC: 5864141. DOI: 10.2337/dc16-1536. View

20.

Tanenbaum M, Adams R, Hanes S, Barley R, Miller K, Mulvaney S . Optimal Use of Diabetes Devices: Clinician Perspectives on Barriers and Adherence to Device Use. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017; 11(3):484-492. PMC: 5505431. DOI: 10.1177/1932296816688010. View