Continuous Glucose Monitoring: Planning for Innovation

Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics
June 1, 2005

INTRODUCTION:

The New England Healthcare Institute (NEHI), a non-profit health research and policy organization, recently analyzed the potential impact of an evolving class of technology -- continuous glucose monitoring (CGM).  (The abbreviation "CGM" is used only as an acronym for "continuous glucose monitoring." The designation signifies a class of technology; it does not refer to any specific manufacturer's product.)  As part of NEHI's Innovation Series, this study seeks to identify opportunities to accelerate the adoption of a medical innovation that can have widespread impact in a major disease area -- diabetes.  The study begins with an in-depth review of CGM and an assessment of the costs, benefits, and value of adoption.  The study also examines the drivers moving the innovation forward and thebarriers that could prevent optimal adoption.  Based on those findings, NEHI makes policy recommendations that critical stakeholders can take to improve the environment for CGM adoption.

NEHI's focus on an innovation for diabetes was selected because of the extreme burden  that diabetes places on society.  Diabetes is associated with debilitating, long-term complications and contributes to over 200,000 deaths a year.  The financial toll of diabetes is enormous; approximately 11% of national health care expenditures in 2002 were for diabetes care.  Fortunately, studies have shown that the burden of diabetes can be mitigated with proper management, including tight control of blood glucose levels, blood pressure, and lipid levels.  The landmark Diabetes Control and Complications Trial and UK Prospective Diabetes Study studies demonstrate that many long-term complications can be reduced through tight blood glucose control, as measured by a patient''s A1c score.  However, the increased risk of hypoglycemia that is associated with tight control and the limitations of episodic blood glucose monitors make it difficult to achieve this standard.  Because of these and other challenges, only 37% of diabetes patients have met the recommended A1c score of less than 7.0%.  Clearly, there is a need for a tool that could help patients achieve and sustain tight blood glucose control.

Link to Full Article: http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/dia.2005.7.563?cookieSet=1&jou…