Non-adjunctive flash glucose monitoring system use during summer-camp in children with type 1 diabetes: The free-summer study

• DOI: 10.1111/pedi.12729
• Publication Date: 2018-07-19T08:59:34Z
• Authors: Claudia Piona; Klemen Dovc; Gül Y. Mutlu; Klara Grad; Petra Gregorc; Tadej Battelino; Nataša Bratina
• Keywords: Blood Glucose; Male; Adolescent; Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring; intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring; type 1 diabetes in childhood; Data Accuracy; 3. Good health; Wearable Electronic Devices; 03 medical and health sciences; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; 0302 clinical medicine; Humans; replacement of self-monitoring blood glucose; Female; management of type 1 diabetes; Child

A factory-calibrated sensor for intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) is accurate and safe in children with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Data on isCGM effectiveness as a replacement for self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in this population is scarce.The aim of this study was to evaluate the non-adjunctive use of isCGM in children with T1D during 2 weeks in a challenging summer-camp setting.In this two-arm, parallel, randomized, outpatient clinical trial we enrolled 46 children (25 females, mean ± SD: age 11.1 ± 2.6 years, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 7.4% ± 0.7%): 26 in the isCGM group were blinded for the SMBG and insulin dosing was isCGM-based, whereas 20 in the control group were blinded for isCGM and performed SMBG-based insulin dosing. The primary outcome of intention-to-treat analysis was between-group difference in the proportion of time within range 3.9 to 10 mmol/L (TIR).There was no significant difference in TIR (3.9-10 mmol/L) between the two groups. In participants with suboptimal metabolic control (HbA1c > 7%) we observed a significant reduction in time spent above 10 mmol/L (P < 0.05) and an improvement in TIR (P = 0.05) in the isCGM group. No severe hypoglycemic events or serious adverse events occurred. Overall mean absolute relative difference (MARD) between isCGM and SMBG was 18.3%, with median absolute relative difference (ARD) of 8%. Consensus error grid analysis demonstrated 82.2% and 95.2% of results in zone A, and zone A + B, respectively.The non-adjunctive use of isCGM was as safe and effective as SMBG, and reduced time spent in hyperglycemia in a sub-population of children with T1D with suboptimal glycemic control.NCT03182842.