Kwang Joon Kim, Yang Sun Park, Eunseo Sun, Euna Jo, Jiwon Shinn, Hyeon Woo Yim, Chang Oh Kim, Hun-Sung Kim
{"title":"A Pilot Study Examining If the Additional Use of a Continuous Glucose Monitoring Is Helpful for Glucose Control in Older Adults.","authors":"Kwang Joon Kim, Yang Sun Park, Eunseo Sun, Euna Jo, Jiwon Shinn, Hyeon Woo Yim, Chang Oh Kim, Hun-Sung Kim","doi":"10.3349/ymj.2024.0261","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To investigate whether using a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for the second time (2nd_CGM) would be effective after using it for the first time (1st_CGM), depending on age.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study included patients aged ≥40 years who were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and had used a CGM at least twice between 2017 and 2021. Participants were divided into two groups based on their age: those aged <60 years and those aged ≥60 years. We assessed the glycemic control status of the 1st_CGM and 2nd_CGM, along with the glycemic variability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 15 patients were included in the study. The mean glucose level in users aged <60 years significantly decreased (<i>p</i><0.001) owing to the CGM use, while it did not increase in those aged ≥60 years. In users aged ≥60 years, the 1st_CGM group showed a significant decrease in blood glucose levels over time (<i>p</i><0.05), whereas the 2nd_CGM group only showed a non-significant decreasing trend. The time in range tended to increase in those aged <60 years but decreased in those aged ≥60 years. In those aged <60 years, the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (<i>p</i><0.001), standard deviation (<i>p</i><0.05), and coefficient of variation (<i>p</i><0.001) significantly decreased. In those aged ≥60 years, these parameters exhibited a non-significant decreasing trend.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Glycemic effect and variability improved as expected with 1st_CGM use. However, 2nd_CGM did not significantly improve glycemic effect or variability in users aged ≥60 years, contrary to expectations. To address this issue, further investigation is needed to understand why, compared to 1st_CGM, 2nd_CGM fails to achieve better glycemic control in individuals aged ≥60 years.</p>","PeriodicalId":23765,"journal":{"name":"Yonsei Medical Journal","volume":"66 6","pages":"346-353"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12116873/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Yonsei Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2024.0261","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate whether using a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for the second time (2nd_CGM) would be effective after using it for the first time (1st_CGM), depending on age.
Materials and methods: This study included patients aged ≥40 years who were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and had used a CGM at least twice between 2017 and 2021. Participants were divided into two groups based on their age: those aged <60 years and those aged ≥60 years. We assessed the glycemic control status of the 1st_CGM and 2nd_CGM, along with the glycemic variability.
Results: Overall, 15 patients were included in the study. The mean glucose level in users aged <60 years significantly decreased (p<0.001) owing to the CGM use, while it did not increase in those aged ≥60 years. In users aged ≥60 years, the 1st_CGM group showed a significant decrease in blood glucose levels over time (p<0.05), whereas the 2nd_CGM group only showed a non-significant decreasing trend. The time in range tended to increase in those aged <60 years but decreased in those aged ≥60 years. In those aged <60 years, the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (p<0.001), standard deviation (p<0.05), and coefficient of variation (p<0.001) significantly decreased. In those aged ≥60 years, these parameters exhibited a non-significant decreasing trend.
Conclusion: Glycemic effect and variability improved as expected with 1st_CGM use. However, 2nd_CGM did not significantly improve glycemic effect or variability in users aged ≥60 years, contrary to expectations. To address this issue, further investigation is needed to understand why, compared to 1st_CGM, 2nd_CGM fails to achieve better glycemic control in individuals aged ≥60 years.
期刊介绍:
The goal of the Yonsei Medical Journal (YMJ) is to publish high quality manuscripts dedicated to clinical or basic research. Any authors affiliated with an accredited biomedical institution may submit manuscripts of original articles, review articles, case reports, brief communications, and letters to the Editor.