Table 1.
Quality of Life Effects of CGM.
| Sample size | Study design | Results | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Barnard et al20 | n = 15 youths with type 1 diabetes n = 13 parents of the patients |
Qualitative study | - 66.7% of respondents reported reduced fear of hyperglycemic and hypoglycemic events - Patients felt higher control over the illness and an increased sense of security - Negative aspects: technical handling of the device |
| Hommel et al21 | n = 153 patients with type 1 diabetes (81 adults, 72 children) | RCT | - CGM use leads to a higher health-related quality of life in adults; this is however not the case for children - Increased burden on families with children who have type 1 diabetes |
| Walker and Yucha22 | n = 10 adult patients with type 1 diabetes | Quasi-experimental design Follow-up |
- With CGM use: less fear of hypoglycemic events, therefore an improved quality of life - Exact numeric specification of the values is not absolutely necessary to profit from CGM |
| Polonsky and Hessler16 | n = 877 patients predominantly with type 1 diabetes (93%) | Qualitative study/observational study | - 86% of respondents: felt more in control over their diabetes using CGM - 85% of respondents: felt better protected against hypoglycemic events |
| Markowitz et al14 | Youths: n = 28 Parents: n = 28 Educators: n = 21 |
Qualitative analysis | - For CGM: more anxiety in youths - Higher depression values - Less negative affect - Quality of life for CGM corresponds to the quality of life for BGM |
| Riveline et al23 | n = 178 patients (8-60 years old) with type 1 diabetes | RCT | - CGM results in higher patient satisfaction (measured after 1 year) - Physical components of quality of life (measured using SF-36) are significantly improved using CGM - No improvement in the subscale mental health (SF-36) |
| Riveline13 | n = 197 patients with type 1 diabetes | RCT Follow-up |
- Improvement of physical quality of life using CGM - Important: training sessions for patients |
| Husted et al15 | n = 68 youths with type 1 diabetes | RCT | - Intrafamilial conflicts between youths with type 1 diabetes and their parents as a problem area - Positive effects of CGM use |
| Lee et al12 | Adults: n = 213 Children: n = 238 |
Qualitative study | - High quality of life for patients with type 1 diabetes - No difference between statements made by children and the evaluation provided by their parents |
| Kordonouri et al24 | n = 160 children with type 1 diabetes | RCT Follow-up |
- Children have a lower health-related quality of life baseline measurement than the European normal standard sample - After 6 months, they approached the normal range and after 12 months, they remained at a normal level - No difference between the CGM and insulin pump groups |