Use of continuous glucose monitors in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review
- PMID: 36929661
- DOI: 10.1111/dme.15089
Use of continuous glucose monitors in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review
Abstract
Aims: The use of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) has been shown to have positive impact on diabetes management for people with type 1 diabetes (T1DM), type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and gestational diabetes (GDM) in high-income countries. However, as useful as CGMs are, the experience in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is limited and has not been summarized.
Methods: A scoping review of the scientific literature was conducted. Medline, Embase, Global Health and Scopus were used to seek original research conducted in LMICs. The search results were screened by two reviewers independently. We included studies assessing health outcomes following the use of CGMs at the individual level (e.g. glycaemic control or complications) and at the health system level (e.g. barriers, facilitators and cost-effectiveness) in English, Portuguese, Spanish and French. Results were summarized narratively.
Results: From 4772 records found in database search, 27 reports were included; most of them from China (n = 7), Colombia (n = 5) and India (n = 4). Thirteen reports studied T1DM, five T2DM, seven both T1DM and T2DM and two GDM. Seven reports presented results of experimental studies (five randomized trials and two quasi-experimental); two on cost-effective analysis and the remaining 18 were observational. Studies showed that CGMs improved surrogate glycaemic outcomes (HbA1c reduction), hard endpoints (lower hospitalization rates and diabetes complications) and patient-oriented outcomes (quality of life). However, several caveats were identified: mostly observational studies, few participants in trials, short follow-up and focused on surrogate outcomes.
Conclusions: The scoping review identified that studies about CGMs in LMICs have several limitations. Stronger study designs, appropriate sample sizes and the inclusion of patient-important outcomes should be considered to inform the evidence about CGMs for the management of people with diabetes in LMICs.
Keywords: diabetes; glycaemic control; health technologies; scoping review.
© 2023 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Diabetes UK.
References
REFERENCES
-
- NCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC). Worldwide trends in diabetes since 1980: a pooled analysis of 751 population-based studies with 4.4 million participants. Lancet. 2016;387(10027):1513-1530.
-
- Harding JL, Pavkov ME, Magliano DJ, Shaw JE, Gregg EW. Global trends in diabetes complications: a review of current evidence. Diabetologia. 2019;62(1):3-16.
-
- Zhang Y, Lazzarini PA, McPhail SM, van Netten JJ, Armstrong DG, Pacella RE. Global disability burdens of diabetes-related lower-extremity complications in 1990 and 2016. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(5):964-974.
-
- Deng Y, Li N, Wu Y, et al. Global, regional, and National Burden of diabetes-related chronic kidney disease from 1990 to 2019. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2021;12:672350.
-
- Birhanu MM, Zaman SB, Thrift AG, Evans RG, Zengin A. Risk factors for incident cardiovascular events among adults in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Prev Med. 2022;158:107036.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous