Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial

ObjectiveThis study evaluated the effect of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitored blood glucose (SMGB) in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) <6%.MethodsFrom January 2019 to February 2021, 154 GDM patients with HbA1c<6% at 24–28 gestation...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Mengyu Lai [verfasserIn] Jianrong Weng [verfasserIn] Jiaying Yang [verfasserIn] Yujia Gong [verfasserIn] Fang Fang [verfasserIn] Na Li [verfasserIn] Mei Kang [verfasserIn] Xianming Xu [verfasserIn] Yufan Wang [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2023

Schlagwörter:	gestational diabetes mellitus continuous glucose monitoring self-monitoring of blood glucose gestational weight gain cost

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Frontiers in Endocrinology - Frontiers Media S.A., 2011, 14(2023)
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:14 ; year:2023

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ089587014

Internformat


LEADER	01000naa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ089587014
003	DE-627
005	20230505015524.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230505s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ089587014
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJc4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a RC648-665
100	0		\|a Mengyu Lai \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial
264		1	\|c 2023
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a ObjectiveThis study evaluated the effect of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitored blood glucose (SMGB) in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) <6%.MethodsFrom January 2019 to February 2021, 154 GDM patients with HbA1c<6% at 24–28 gestational weeks were recruited and assigned randomly to either SMBG only or CGM in addition to SMBG, with 77 participants in each group. CGM was used in combination with fingertip blood glucose monitoring every four weeks until antepartum in the CGM group, while in the SMBG group, fingertip blood glucose monitoring was applied. The CGM metrics were evaluated after 8 weeks, HbA1c levels before delivery, gestational weight gain (GWG), adverse pregnancy outcomes and CGM medical costs were compared between the two groups.ResultsCompared with patients in the SMBG group, the CGM group patients had similar times in range (TIRs) after 8 weeks (100.00% (93.75-100.00%) versus 99.14% (90.97-100.00%), p=0.183) and HbA1c levels before delivery (5.31 ± 0.06% versus 5.35 ± 0.06%, p=0.599). The proportion with GWG within recommendations was higher in the CGM group (59.7% versus 40.3%, p=0.046), and the newborn birth weight was lower (3123.79 ± 369.58 g versus 3291.56 ± 386.59 g, p=0.015). There were no significant differences in prenatal or obstetric outcomes, e.g., cesarean delivery rate, hypertensive disorders, preterm births, macrosomia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hypoglycemia, respiratory distress, and neonatal intensive care unit admission >24 h, between the two groups. Considering glucose monitoring, SMBG group patients showed a lower cost than CGM group patients.ConclusionsFor GDM patients with HbA1c<6%, regular SMBG is a more economical blood glucose monitoring method and can achieve a similar performance in glycemic control as CGM, while CGM is beneficial for ideal GWG.
650		4	\|a gestational diabetes mellitus
650		4	\|a continuous glucose monitoring
650		4	\|a self-monitoring of blood glucose
650		4	\|a gestational weight gain
650		4	\|a cost
653		0	\|a Diseases of the endocrine glands. Clinical endocrinology
700	0		\|a Jianrong Weng \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Jiaying Yang \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Yujia Gong \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Fang Fang \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Na Li \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Mei Kang \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Xianming Xu \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Yufan Wang \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Frontiers in Endocrinology \|d Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 \|g 14(2023) \|w (DE-627)645090948 \|w (DE-600)2592084-4 \|x 16642392 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:14 \|g year:2023
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/c4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239/full \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/1664-2392 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 14 \|j 2023

Indexfelder

author_variant	m l ml j w jw j y jy y g yg f f ff n l nl m k mk x x xx y w yw
matchkey_str	article:16642392:2023----::fetfotnoslcsmntrncmaewtslmntrnobodlcsigsainlibtsains
hierarchy_sort_str	2023
callnumber-subject-code	RC
publishDate	2023
allfields	10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239 doi (DE-627)DOAJ089587014 (DE-599)DOAJc4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC648-665 Mengyu Lai verfasserin aut Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier ObjectiveThis study evaluated the effect of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitored blood glucose (SMGB) in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) <6%.MethodsFrom January 2019 to February 2021, 154 GDM patients with HbA1c<6% at 24–28 gestational weeks were recruited and assigned randomly to either SMBG only or CGM in addition to SMBG, with 77 participants in each group. CGM was used in combination with fingertip blood glucose monitoring every four weeks until antepartum in the CGM group, while in the SMBG group, fingertip blood glucose monitoring was applied. The CGM metrics were evaluated after 8 weeks, HbA1c levels before delivery, gestational weight gain (GWG), adverse pregnancy outcomes and CGM medical costs were compared between the two groups.ResultsCompared with patients in the SMBG group, the CGM group patients had similar times in range (TIRs) after 8 weeks (100.00% (93.75-100.00%) versus 99.14% (90.97-100.00%), p=0.183) and HbA1c levels before delivery (5.31 ± 0.06% versus 5.35 ± 0.06%, p=0.599). The proportion with GWG within recommendations was higher in the CGM group (59.7% versus 40.3%, p=0.046), and the newborn birth weight was lower (3123.79 ± 369.58 g versus 3291.56 ± 386.59 g, p=0.015). There were no significant differences in prenatal or obstetric outcomes, e.g., cesarean delivery rate, hypertensive disorders, preterm births, macrosomia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hypoglycemia, respiratory distress, and neonatal intensive care unit admission >24 h, between the two groups. Considering glucose monitoring, SMBG group patients showed a lower cost than CGM group patients.ConclusionsFor GDM patients with HbA1c<6%, regular SMBG is a more economical blood glucose monitoring method and can achieve a similar performance in glycemic control as CGM, while CGM is beneficial for ideal GWG. gestational diabetes mellitus continuous glucose monitoring self-monitoring of blood glucose gestational weight gain cost Diseases of the endocrine glands. Clinical endocrinology Jianrong Weng verfasserin aut Jiaying Yang verfasserin aut Yujia Gong verfasserin aut Fang Fang verfasserin aut Na Li verfasserin aut Mei Kang verfasserin aut Xianming Xu verfasserin aut Yufan Wang verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Endocrinology Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 14(2023) (DE-627)645090948 (DE-600)2592084-4 16642392 nnns volume:14 year:2023 https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/c4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833 kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-2392 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 14 2023
spelling	10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239 doi (DE-627)DOAJ089587014 (DE-599)DOAJc4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC648-665 Mengyu Lai verfasserin aut Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier ObjectiveThis study evaluated the effect of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitored blood glucose (SMGB) in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) <6%.MethodsFrom January 2019 to February 2021, 154 GDM patients with HbA1c<6% at 24–28 gestational weeks were recruited and assigned randomly to either SMBG only or CGM in addition to SMBG, with 77 participants in each group. CGM was used in combination with fingertip blood glucose monitoring every four weeks until antepartum in the CGM group, while in the SMBG group, fingertip blood glucose monitoring was applied. The CGM metrics were evaluated after 8 weeks, HbA1c levels before delivery, gestational weight gain (GWG), adverse pregnancy outcomes and CGM medical costs were compared between the two groups.ResultsCompared with patients in the SMBG group, the CGM group patients had similar times in range (TIRs) after 8 weeks (100.00% (93.75-100.00%) versus 99.14% (90.97-100.00%), p=0.183) and HbA1c levels before delivery (5.31 ± 0.06% versus 5.35 ± 0.06%, p=0.599). The proportion with GWG within recommendations was higher in the CGM group (59.7% versus 40.3%, p=0.046), and the newborn birth weight was lower (3123.79 ± 369.58 g versus 3291.56 ± 386.59 g, p=0.015). There were no significant differences in prenatal or obstetric outcomes, e.g., cesarean delivery rate, hypertensive disorders, preterm births, macrosomia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hypoglycemia, respiratory distress, and neonatal intensive care unit admission >24 h, between the two groups. Considering glucose monitoring, SMBG group patients showed a lower cost than CGM group patients.ConclusionsFor GDM patients with HbA1c<6%, regular SMBG is a more economical blood glucose monitoring method and can achieve a similar performance in glycemic control as CGM, while CGM is beneficial for ideal GWG. gestational diabetes mellitus continuous glucose monitoring self-monitoring of blood glucose gestational weight gain cost Diseases of the endocrine glands. Clinical endocrinology Jianrong Weng verfasserin aut Jiaying Yang verfasserin aut Yujia Gong verfasserin aut Fang Fang verfasserin aut Na Li verfasserin aut Mei Kang verfasserin aut Xianming Xu verfasserin aut Yufan Wang verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Endocrinology Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 14(2023) (DE-627)645090948 (DE-600)2592084-4 16642392 nnns volume:14 year:2023 https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/c4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833 kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-2392 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 14 2023
allfields_unstemmed	10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239 doi (DE-627)DOAJ089587014 (DE-599)DOAJc4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC648-665 Mengyu Lai verfasserin aut Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier ObjectiveThis study evaluated the effect of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitored blood glucose (SMGB) in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) <6%.MethodsFrom January 2019 to February 2021, 154 GDM patients with HbA1c<6% at 24–28 gestational weeks were recruited and assigned randomly to either SMBG only or CGM in addition to SMBG, with 77 participants in each group. CGM was used in combination with fingertip blood glucose monitoring every four weeks until antepartum in the CGM group, while in the SMBG group, fingertip blood glucose monitoring was applied. The CGM metrics were evaluated after 8 weeks, HbA1c levels before delivery, gestational weight gain (GWG), adverse pregnancy outcomes and CGM medical costs were compared between the two groups.ResultsCompared with patients in the SMBG group, the CGM group patients had similar times in range (TIRs) after 8 weeks (100.00% (93.75-100.00%) versus 99.14% (90.97-100.00%), p=0.183) and HbA1c levels before delivery (5.31 ± 0.06% versus 5.35 ± 0.06%, p=0.599). The proportion with GWG within recommendations was higher in the CGM group (59.7% versus 40.3%, p=0.046), and the newborn birth weight was lower (3123.79 ± 369.58 g versus 3291.56 ± 386.59 g, p=0.015). There were no significant differences in prenatal or obstetric outcomes, e.g., cesarean delivery rate, hypertensive disorders, preterm births, macrosomia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hypoglycemia, respiratory distress, and neonatal intensive care unit admission >24 h, between the two groups. Considering glucose monitoring, SMBG group patients showed a lower cost than CGM group patients.ConclusionsFor GDM patients with HbA1c<6%, regular SMBG is a more economical blood glucose monitoring method and can achieve a similar performance in glycemic control as CGM, while CGM is beneficial for ideal GWG. gestational diabetes mellitus continuous glucose monitoring self-monitoring of blood glucose gestational weight gain cost Diseases of the endocrine glands. Clinical endocrinology Jianrong Weng verfasserin aut Jiaying Yang verfasserin aut Yujia Gong verfasserin aut Fang Fang verfasserin aut Na Li verfasserin aut Mei Kang verfasserin aut Xianming Xu verfasserin aut Yufan Wang verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Endocrinology Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 14(2023) (DE-627)645090948 (DE-600)2592084-4 16642392 nnns volume:14 year:2023 https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/c4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833 kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-2392 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 14 2023
allfieldsGer	10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239 doi (DE-627)DOAJ089587014 (DE-599)DOAJc4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC648-665 Mengyu Lai verfasserin aut Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier ObjectiveThis study evaluated the effect of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitored blood glucose (SMGB) in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) <6%.MethodsFrom January 2019 to February 2021, 154 GDM patients with HbA1c<6% at 24–28 gestational weeks were recruited and assigned randomly to either SMBG only or CGM in addition to SMBG, with 77 participants in each group. CGM was used in combination with fingertip blood glucose monitoring every four weeks until antepartum in the CGM group, while in the SMBG group, fingertip blood glucose monitoring was applied. The CGM metrics were evaluated after 8 weeks, HbA1c levels before delivery, gestational weight gain (GWG), adverse pregnancy outcomes and CGM medical costs were compared between the two groups.ResultsCompared with patients in the SMBG group, the CGM group patients had similar times in range (TIRs) after 8 weeks (100.00% (93.75-100.00%) versus 99.14% (90.97-100.00%), p=0.183) and HbA1c levels before delivery (5.31 ± 0.06% versus 5.35 ± 0.06%, p=0.599). The proportion with GWG within recommendations was higher in the CGM group (59.7% versus 40.3%, p=0.046), and the newborn birth weight was lower (3123.79 ± 369.58 g versus 3291.56 ± 386.59 g, p=0.015). There were no significant differences in prenatal or obstetric outcomes, e.g., cesarean delivery rate, hypertensive disorders, preterm births, macrosomia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hypoglycemia, respiratory distress, and neonatal intensive care unit admission >24 h, between the two groups. Considering glucose monitoring, SMBG group patients showed a lower cost than CGM group patients.ConclusionsFor GDM patients with HbA1c<6%, regular SMBG is a more economical blood glucose monitoring method and can achieve a similar performance in glycemic control as CGM, while CGM is beneficial for ideal GWG. gestational diabetes mellitus continuous glucose monitoring self-monitoring of blood glucose gestational weight gain cost Diseases of the endocrine glands. Clinical endocrinology Jianrong Weng verfasserin aut Jiaying Yang verfasserin aut Yujia Gong verfasserin aut Fang Fang verfasserin aut Na Li verfasserin aut Mei Kang verfasserin aut Xianming Xu verfasserin aut Yufan Wang verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Endocrinology Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 14(2023) (DE-627)645090948 (DE-600)2592084-4 16642392 nnns volume:14 year:2023 https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/c4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833 kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-2392 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 14 2023
allfieldsSound	10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239 doi (DE-627)DOAJ089587014 (DE-599)DOAJc4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RC648-665 Mengyu Lai verfasserin aut Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier ObjectiveThis study evaluated the effect of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitored blood glucose (SMGB) in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) <6%.MethodsFrom January 2019 to February 2021, 154 GDM patients with HbA1c<6% at 24–28 gestational weeks were recruited and assigned randomly to either SMBG only or CGM in addition to SMBG, with 77 participants in each group. CGM was used in combination with fingertip blood glucose monitoring every four weeks until antepartum in the CGM group, while in the SMBG group, fingertip blood glucose monitoring was applied. The CGM metrics were evaluated after 8 weeks, HbA1c levels before delivery, gestational weight gain (GWG), adverse pregnancy outcomes and CGM medical costs were compared between the two groups.ResultsCompared with patients in the SMBG group, the CGM group patients had similar times in range (TIRs) after 8 weeks (100.00% (93.75-100.00%) versus 99.14% (90.97-100.00%), p=0.183) and HbA1c levels before delivery (5.31 ± 0.06% versus 5.35 ± 0.06%, p=0.599). The proportion with GWG within recommendations was higher in the CGM group (59.7% versus 40.3%, p=0.046), and the newborn birth weight was lower (3123.79 ± 369.58 g versus 3291.56 ± 386.59 g, p=0.015). There were no significant differences in prenatal or obstetric outcomes, e.g., cesarean delivery rate, hypertensive disorders, preterm births, macrosomia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hypoglycemia, respiratory distress, and neonatal intensive care unit admission >24 h, between the two groups. Considering glucose monitoring, SMBG group patients showed a lower cost than CGM group patients.ConclusionsFor GDM patients with HbA1c<6%, regular SMBG is a more economical blood glucose monitoring method and can achieve a similar performance in glycemic control as CGM, while CGM is beneficial for ideal GWG. gestational diabetes mellitus continuous glucose monitoring self-monitoring of blood glucose gestational weight gain cost Diseases of the endocrine glands. Clinical endocrinology Jianrong Weng verfasserin aut Jiaying Yang verfasserin aut Yujia Gong verfasserin aut Fang Fang verfasserin aut Na Li verfasserin aut Mei Kang verfasserin aut Xianming Xu verfasserin aut Yufan Wang verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Endocrinology Frontiers Media S.A., 2011 14(2023) (DE-627)645090948 (DE-600)2592084-4 16642392 nnns volume:14 year:2023 https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/c4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833 kostenfrei https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-2392 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 14 2023
language	English
source	In Frontiers in Endocrinology 14(2023) volume:14 year:2023
sourceStr	In Frontiers in Endocrinology 14(2023) volume:14 year:2023
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	gestational diabetes mellitus continuous glucose monitoring self-monitoring of blood glucose gestational weight gain cost Diseases of the endocrine glands. Clinical endocrinology
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Frontiers in Endocrinology
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Mengyu Lai @@aut@@ Jianrong Weng @@aut@@ Jiaying Yang @@aut@@ Yujia Gong @@aut@@ Fang Fang @@aut@@ Na Li @@aut@@ Mei Kang @@aut@@ Xianming Xu @@aut@@ Yufan Wang @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2023-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	645090948
id	DOAJ089587014
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ089587014</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230505015524.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230505s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ089587014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJc4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RC648-665</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mengyu Lai</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ObjectiveThis study evaluated the effect of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitored blood glucose (SMGB) in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) &lt;6%.MethodsFrom January 2019 to February 2021, 154 GDM patients with HbA1c&lt;6% at 24–28 gestational weeks were recruited and assigned randomly to either SMBG only or CGM in addition to SMBG, with 77 participants in each group. CGM was used in combination with fingertip blood glucose monitoring every four weeks until antepartum in the CGM group, while in the SMBG group, fingertip blood glucose monitoring was applied. The CGM metrics were evaluated after 8 weeks, HbA1c levels before delivery, gestational weight gain (GWG), adverse pregnancy outcomes and CGM medical costs were compared between the two groups.ResultsCompared with patients in the SMBG group, the CGM group patients had similar times in range (TIRs) after 8 weeks (100.00% (93.75-100.00%) versus 99.14% (90.97-100.00%), p=0.183) and HbA1c levels before delivery (5.31 ± 0.06% versus 5.35 ± 0.06%, p=0.599). The proportion with GWG within recommendations was higher in the CGM group (59.7% versus 40.3%, p=0.046), and the newborn birth weight was lower (3123.79 ± 369.58 g versus 3291.56 ± 386.59 g, p=0.015). There were no significant differences in prenatal or obstetric outcomes, e.g., cesarean delivery rate, hypertensive disorders, preterm births, macrosomia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hypoglycemia, respiratory distress, and neonatal intensive care unit admission &gt;24 h, between the two groups. Considering glucose monitoring, SMBG group patients showed a lower cost than CGM group patients.ConclusionsFor GDM patients with HbA1c&lt;6%, regular SMBG is a more economical blood glucose monitoring method and can achieve a similar performance in glycemic control as CGM, while CGM is beneficial for ideal GWG.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">gestational diabetes mellitus</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">continuous glucose monitoring</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">self-monitoring of blood glucose</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">gestational weight gain</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">cost</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Diseases of the endocrine glands. Clinical endocrinology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jianrong Weng</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jiaying Yang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yujia Gong</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fang Fang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Na Li</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mei Kang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xianming Xu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yufan Wang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Frontiers in Endocrinology</subfield><subfield code="d">Frontiers Media S.A., 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">14(2023)</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)645090948</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2592084-4</subfield><subfield code="x">16642392</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:14</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/c4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239/full</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1664-2392</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">14</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	R - Medicine
author	Mengyu Lai
spellingShingle	Mengyu Lai misc RC648-665 misc gestational diabetes mellitus misc continuous glucose monitoring misc self-monitoring of blood glucose misc gestational weight gain misc cost misc Diseases of the endocrine glands. Clinical endocrinology Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial
authorStr	Mengyu Lai
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)645090948
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	RC648-665
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	16642392
topic_title	RC648-665 Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial gestational diabetes mellitus continuous glucose monitoring self-monitoring of blood glucose gestational weight gain cost
topic	misc RC648-665 misc gestational diabetes mellitus misc continuous glucose monitoring misc self-monitoring of blood glucose misc gestational weight gain misc cost misc Diseases of the endocrine glands. Clinical endocrinology
topic_unstemmed	misc RC648-665 misc gestational diabetes mellitus misc continuous glucose monitoring misc self-monitoring of blood glucose misc gestational weight gain misc cost misc Diseases of the endocrine glands. Clinical endocrinology
topic_browse	misc RC648-665 misc gestational diabetes mellitus misc continuous glucose monitoring misc self-monitoring of blood glucose misc gestational weight gain misc cost misc Diseases of the endocrine glands. Clinical endocrinology
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Frontiers in Endocrinology
hierarchy_parent_id	645090948
hierarchy_top_title	Frontiers in Endocrinology
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)645090948 (DE-600)2592084-4
title	Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ089587014 (DE-599)DOAJc4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833
title_full	Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial
author_sort	Mengyu Lai
journal	Frontiers in Endocrinology
journalStr	Frontiers in Endocrinology
callnumber-first-code	R
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2023
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Mengyu Lai Jianrong Weng Jiaying Yang Yujia Gong Fang Fang Na Li Mei Kang Xianming Xu Yufan Wang
container_volume	14
class	RC648-665
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Mengyu Lai
doi_str_mv	10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with hba1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial
callnumber	RC648-665
title_auth	Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial
abstract	ObjectiveThis study evaluated the effect of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitored blood glucose (SMGB) in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) <6%.MethodsFrom January 2019 to February 2021, 154 GDM patients with HbA1c<6% at 24–28 gestational weeks were recruited and assigned randomly to either SMBG only or CGM in addition to SMBG, with 77 participants in each group. CGM was used in combination with fingertip blood glucose monitoring every four weeks until antepartum in the CGM group, while in the SMBG group, fingertip blood glucose monitoring was applied. The CGM metrics were evaluated after 8 weeks, HbA1c levels before delivery, gestational weight gain (GWG), adverse pregnancy outcomes and CGM medical costs were compared between the two groups.ResultsCompared with patients in the SMBG group, the CGM group patients had similar times in range (TIRs) after 8 weeks (100.00% (93.75-100.00%) versus 99.14% (90.97-100.00%), p=0.183) and HbA1c levels before delivery (5.31 ± 0.06% versus 5.35 ± 0.06%, p=0.599). The proportion with GWG within recommendations was higher in the CGM group (59.7% versus 40.3%, p=0.046), and the newborn birth weight was lower (3123.79 ± 369.58 g versus 3291.56 ± 386.59 g, p=0.015). There were no significant differences in prenatal or obstetric outcomes, e.g., cesarean delivery rate, hypertensive disorders, preterm births, macrosomia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hypoglycemia, respiratory distress, and neonatal intensive care unit admission >24 h, between the two groups. Considering glucose monitoring, SMBG group patients showed a lower cost than CGM group patients.ConclusionsFor GDM patients with HbA1c<6%, regular SMBG is a more economical blood glucose monitoring method and can achieve a similar performance in glycemic control as CGM, while CGM is beneficial for ideal GWG.
abstractGer	ObjectiveThis study evaluated the effect of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitored blood glucose (SMGB) in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) <6%.MethodsFrom January 2019 to February 2021, 154 GDM patients with HbA1c<6% at 24–28 gestational weeks were recruited and assigned randomly to either SMBG only or CGM in addition to SMBG, with 77 participants in each group. CGM was used in combination with fingertip blood glucose monitoring every four weeks until antepartum in the CGM group, while in the SMBG group, fingertip blood glucose monitoring was applied. The CGM metrics were evaluated after 8 weeks, HbA1c levels before delivery, gestational weight gain (GWG), adverse pregnancy outcomes and CGM medical costs were compared between the two groups.ResultsCompared with patients in the SMBG group, the CGM group patients had similar times in range (TIRs) after 8 weeks (100.00% (93.75-100.00%) versus 99.14% (90.97-100.00%), p=0.183) and HbA1c levels before delivery (5.31 ± 0.06% versus 5.35 ± 0.06%, p=0.599). The proportion with GWG within recommendations was higher in the CGM group (59.7% versus 40.3%, p=0.046), and the newborn birth weight was lower (3123.79 ± 369.58 g versus 3291.56 ± 386.59 g, p=0.015). There were no significant differences in prenatal or obstetric outcomes, e.g., cesarean delivery rate, hypertensive disorders, preterm births, macrosomia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hypoglycemia, respiratory distress, and neonatal intensive care unit admission >24 h, between the two groups. Considering glucose monitoring, SMBG group patients showed a lower cost than CGM group patients.ConclusionsFor GDM patients with HbA1c<6%, regular SMBG is a more economical blood glucose monitoring method and can achieve a similar performance in glycemic control as CGM, while CGM is beneficial for ideal GWG.
abstract_unstemmed	ObjectiveThis study evaluated the effect of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitored blood glucose (SMGB) in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) <6%.MethodsFrom January 2019 to February 2021, 154 GDM patients with HbA1c<6% at 24–28 gestational weeks were recruited and assigned randomly to either SMBG only or CGM in addition to SMBG, with 77 participants in each group. CGM was used in combination with fingertip blood glucose monitoring every four weeks until antepartum in the CGM group, while in the SMBG group, fingertip blood glucose monitoring was applied. The CGM metrics were evaluated after 8 weeks, HbA1c levels before delivery, gestational weight gain (GWG), adverse pregnancy outcomes and CGM medical costs were compared between the two groups.ResultsCompared with patients in the SMBG group, the CGM group patients had similar times in range (TIRs) after 8 weeks (100.00% (93.75-100.00%) versus 99.14% (90.97-100.00%), p=0.183) and HbA1c levels before delivery (5.31 ± 0.06% versus 5.35 ± 0.06%, p=0.599). The proportion with GWG within recommendations was higher in the CGM group (59.7% versus 40.3%, p=0.046), and the newborn birth weight was lower (3123.79 ± 369.58 g versus 3291.56 ± 386.59 g, p=0.015). There were no significant differences in prenatal or obstetric outcomes, e.g., cesarean delivery rate, hypertensive disorders, preterm births, macrosomia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hypoglycemia, respiratory distress, and neonatal intensive care unit admission >24 h, between the two groups. Considering glucose monitoring, SMBG group patients showed a lower cost than CGM group patients.ConclusionsFor GDM patients with HbA1c<6%, regular SMBG is a more economical blood glucose monitoring method and can achieve a similar performance in glycemic control as CGM, while CGM is beneficial for ideal GWG.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
title_short	Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial
url	https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239 https://doaj.org/article/c4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239/full https://doaj.org/toc/1664-2392
remote_bool	true
author2	Jianrong Weng Jiaying Yang Yujia Gong Fang Fang Na Li Mei Kang Xianming Xu Yufan Wang
author2Str	Jianrong Weng Jiaying Yang Yujia Gong Fang Fang Na Li Mei Kang Xianming Xu Yufan Wang
ppnlink	645090948
callnumber-subject	RC - Internal Medicine
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239
callnumber-a	RC648-665
up_date	2024-07-03T23:48:18.671Z
_version_	1803603671694442496
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ089587014</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230505015524.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230505s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ089587014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJc4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RC648-665</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mengyu Lai</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ObjectiveThis study evaluated the effect of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitored blood glucose (SMGB) in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) &lt;6%.MethodsFrom January 2019 to February 2021, 154 GDM patients with HbA1c&lt;6% at 24–28 gestational weeks were recruited and assigned randomly to either SMBG only or CGM in addition to SMBG, with 77 participants in each group. CGM was used in combination with fingertip blood glucose monitoring every four weeks until antepartum in the CGM group, while in the SMBG group, fingertip blood glucose monitoring was applied. The CGM metrics were evaluated after 8 weeks, HbA1c levels before delivery, gestational weight gain (GWG), adverse pregnancy outcomes and CGM medical costs were compared between the two groups.ResultsCompared with patients in the SMBG group, the CGM group patients had similar times in range (TIRs) after 8 weeks (100.00% (93.75-100.00%) versus 99.14% (90.97-100.00%), p=0.183) and HbA1c levels before delivery (5.31 ± 0.06% versus 5.35 ± 0.06%, p=0.599). The proportion with GWG within recommendations was higher in the CGM group (59.7% versus 40.3%, p=0.046), and the newborn birth weight was lower (3123.79 ± 369.58 g versus 3291.56 ± 386.59 g, p=0.015). There were no significant differences in prenatal or obstetric outcomes, e.g., cesarean delivery rate, hypertensive disorders, preterm births, macrosomia, hyperbilirubinemia, neonatal hypoglycemia, respiratory distress, and neonatal intensive care unit admission &gt;24 h, between the two groups. Considering glucose monitoring, SMBG group patients showed a lower cost than CGM group patients.ConclusionsFor GDM patients with HbA1c&lt;6%, regular SMBG is a more economical blood glucose monitoring method and can achieve a similar performance in glycemic control as CGM, while CGM is beneficial for ideal GWG.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">gestational diabetes mellitus</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">continuous glucose monitoring</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">self-monitoring of blood glucose</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">gestational weight gain</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">cost</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Diseases of the endocrine glands. Clinical endocrinology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jianrong Weng</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jiaying Yang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yujia Gong</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fang Fang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Na Li</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Mei Kang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xianming Xu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yufan Wang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Frontiers in Endocrinology</subfield><subfield code="d">Frontiers Media S.A., 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">14(2023)</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)645090948</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2592084-4</subfield><subfield code="x">16642392</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:14</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/c4d7f6d97d3c45f0b97420ffb491f833</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2023.1174239/full</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1664-2392</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">14</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.40158

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Effect of continuous glucose monitoring compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in gestational diabetes patients with HbA1c<6%: a randomized controlled trial

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?