Amany R Keruakous, Inemesit Akpan, Michael Chahin, Aghapy Kirolos, Mai Keruakous
Equity in oncology care: addressing disparities in cancer treatment in Georgia
Frontiers in public health
background objective intermittent scanning continuous glucose monitoring isccgm increasingly used glycemic monitoring diabetes care crosssectional realworld analysis isccgm data compared traditional parameters glycemic control young people type 1 diabetes methods using dpv registry recent data children adolescents aged 18 years uploaded isccgm sensor profiles least 14 days data 50 completeness evaluated using recommended parameters sensor metrics analysis performed stratified age group glycemic control type therapy data taken dpv data pool february 2020 results glucose sensor profiles clinical data 1809 individuals mean age 134 years 53 male mean diabetes duration 502 years evaluated study 50 population n 965 reached current german treatment target hemoglobin a1c hba1c 75 target mean scanning frequency higher groups hba1c 75 80 120 vs 102 vs 76 times per day group preschool children highest frequency scanning 166 vs 133 times per day school kids 79 adolescents lowest hba1c level lowest risk hypoglycemia low blood glucose index 08 vs 10 vs 12 conclusion realworld data help determine value isccgm improve clinical patientrelated outcomes pediatric diabetology use device also intensity use seems high direct impact glycemic control