J Korean Diabetes.  2021 Dec;22(4):225-237. 10.4093/jkd.2021.22.4.225.

A Position Statement of the Utilization and Support Status of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Korea

• Kim WJ
• Kim JH
• Yoo HJ
• Son JW
• Khang AR
• Kwon SK
• Kim JH
• Kim TH
• Ryu OH
• Park KH
• Song SO
• Lee KW
• Lee WJ
• Jung JH
• Cho HC
• Gu MJ
• Lee J
• Ju DL
• Lee YH
• Kim EK
• Eom YS
• Yu SH
• Kim CH
• Committee of the Health Insurance and Government Relation, Korean Diabetes Association

• KMID: 2526205
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4093/jkd.2021.22.4.225

Abstract

The accuracy and convenience of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), which efficiently evaluates glycemic variability and hypoglycemia, are improving. There are two types of CGM: professional CGM and personal CGM. Personal CGM is subdivided into real-time CGM (rt-CGM) and intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM). CGM is being emphasized in both domestic and foreign diabetes management guidelines. Regardless of age or type of diabetes, CGM is useful for diabetic patients undergoing multiple insulin injection therapy or using an insulin pump. rt-CGM is recommended for all adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D), and can also be used in type 2 diabetes (T2D) treatments using multiple insulin injections. In some cases, short-term or intermittent use of CGM may be helpful for patients with T2D who use insulin therapy other than multiple insulin injections and/or oral hypoglycemic agents. CGM can help to achieve A1C targets in diabetes patients during pregnancy. CGM is a safe and cost-effective alternative to self-monitoring blood glucose in T1D and some T2D patients. CGM used in diabetes management works optimally with proper education, training, and follow up. To achieve the activation of CGM and its associated benefits, it is necessary to secure sufficient repetitive training and time for data analysis, management, and education. Various supports such as compensation, insurance coverage expansion, and reimbursement are required to increase the effectiveness of CGM while considering the scale of benefit recipients, policy priorities, and financial requirements.

Keyword

Continuous glucose monitoring; Costs and cost analysis; Diabetes mellitus; Education; Insurance

Reference

1.Korean Diabetes Association. Diabetes fact sheet in Korea 2020. Available from:. https://www.diabetes.or.kr/pro/news/admin.php?category=A&code=admin&num-ber=1992&mode=view. (updated 2020 Nov 5).

2.Chae HW., Seo GH., Song K., Choi HS., Suh J., Kwon A, et al. Incidence and prevalence of type 1 diabetes mellitus among Korean children and adolescents between 2007 and 2017: an epidemiologic study based on a national da-tabase. Diabetes Metab J. 2020. 44:866–74.

3.Writing Team for the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Research Group. Effect of intensive therapy on the microvascular complications of type 1 diabetes mellitus. JAMA. 2002. 287:2563–9.

4.Stratton IM., Adler AI., Neil HA., Matthews DR., Manley SE., Cull CA, et al. Association of glycaemia with macro-vascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study. BMJ. 2000. 321:405–12.

5.Gorst C., Kwok CS., Aslam S., Buchan I., Kontopantelis E., Myint PK, et al. Long-term glycemic variability and risk of adverse outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Care. 2015. 38:2354–69.

6.Lipska KJ., Ross JS., Wang Y., Inzucchi SE., Minges K., Karter AJ, et al. National trends in US hospital admissions for hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia among Medicare benefi-ciaries, 1999 to 2011. JAMA Intern Med. 2014. 174:1116–24.

7.Levy JC., Davies MJ., Holman RR. 4-T Study Group. Continuous glucose monitoring detected hypoglycaemia in the Treating to Target in Type 2 Diabetes Trial (4-T). Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2017. 131:161–8.

8.Beck RW., Connor CG., Mullen DM., Wesley DM., Ber-genstal RM. The fallacy of average: how using HbA1c alone to assess glycemic control can be misleading. diabetes Care. 2017. 40:994–9.

9.Korean Diabetes Association. 2021 Clinical practice guidelines for diabetes. Seoul: Korean Diabetes Association;2021.

10.American Diabetes Association. 7. Diabetes technology: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2021. Diabetes Care. 2021. 44(Suppl 1):S85–99.

11.Kim JH. Current status of continuous glucose monitoring among Korean children and adolescents with type 1 Diabetes mellitus. Ann Pediatr Endocrinol Metab. 2020. 25:145–51.

12.Aleppo G., Ruedy KJ., Riddlesworth TD., Kruger DF., Peters AL., Hirsch I, et al. REPLACE-BG Study Group. REPLACE-BG: a randomized trial comparing continuous glucose monitoring with and without routine blood glucose monitoring in adults with well-controlled type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2017. 40:538–45.

13.Palylyk-Colwell E., Ford C. Flash glucose monitoring system for diabetes. CADTH issues in emerging health technologies. Ottawa: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health;2016.

14.Jin SM. The present and future of continuous glucose monitoring. J Korean Diabetes. 2020. 21:179–83.

15.Foster NC., Beck RW., Miller KM., Clements MA., Rickels MR., DiMeglio LA, et al. State of type 1 diabetes management and outcomes from the T1D exchange in 2016-2018. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019. 21:66–72.

16.Beck RW., Riddlesworth T., Ruedy K., Ahmann A., Ber-genstal R., Haller S, et al. DIAMOND Study Group. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes using insulin injections: the DIAMOND randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017. 317:371–8.

17.Riddlesworth T., Price D., Cohen N., Beck RW. Hypoglyce-mic event frequency and the effect of continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes using multiple daily insulin injections. Diabetes Ther. 2017. 8:947–51.

18.Hermanns N., Ehrmann D., Schipfer M., Kröger J., Haak T., Kulzer B. The impact of a structured education and treatment programme (FLASH) for people with diabetes using a flash sensor-based glucose monitoring system: results of a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2019. 150:111–21.

19.Pintus D., Ng SM. Freestyle libre flash glucose monitoring improves patient quality of life measures in children with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) with appropriate provision of education and support by healthcare professionals. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2019. 13:2923–6.

20.Hilliard ME., Levy W., Anderson BJ., Whitehouse AL., Com-missariat PV., Harrington KR, et al. Benefits and barriers of continuous glucose monitoring in young children with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019. 21:493–8.

21.Sequeira PA., Montoya L., Ruelas V., Xing D., Chen V., Beck R, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring pilot in low-in-come type 1 diabetes patients. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013. 15:855–8.

22.Haak T., Hanaire H., Ajjan R., Hermanns N., Riveline JP., Rayman G. Flash glucose-sensing technology as a replace-ment for blood glucose monitoring for the management of insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: a multicenter, open-label randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Ther. 2017. 8:55–73.

23.Yaron M., Roitman E., Aharon-Hananel G., Landau Z., Ganz T., Yanuv I, et al. Effect of flash glucose monitoring technology on glycemic control and treatment satisfaction in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2019. 42:1178–84.

24.Poolsup N., Suksomboon N., Kyaw AM. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) on glucose control in diabetes. Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2013. 5:39.

25.Lind M., Polonsky W., Hirsch IB., Heise T., Bolinder J., Dahlqvist S, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring vs conventional therapy for glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections: the GOLD randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017. 317:379–87.

26.Bolinder J., Antuna R., Geelhoed-Duijvestijn P., Kröger J., Weitgasser R. Novel glucose-sensing technology and hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes: a multicentre, non-masked, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016. 388:2254–63.

27.Wong JC., Foster NC., Maahs DM., Raghinaru D., Ber-genstal RM., Ahmann AJ, et al. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring among participants in the T1D Exchange clinic registry. Diabetes Care. 2014. 37:2702–9.

28.Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous glucose Monitoring Study Group. Beck RW., Buckingham B., Miller K., Wolpert H., Xing D, et al. Factors predictive of use and of benefit from continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2009. 32:1947–53.

29.Mauras N., Beck R., Xing D., Ruedy K., Buckingham B., Tansey M, et al. A randomized clinical trial to assess the efficacy and safety of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in the management of type 1 diabetes in young children aged 4 to <10 years. Diabetes Care. 2012. 35:204–10.

30.Tsalikian E., Fox L., Weinzimer S., Buckingham B., White NH., Beck R, et al. Feasibility of prolonged continuous glucose monitoring in toddlers with type 1 diabetes. Pediatr Diabetes. 2012. 13:301–7.

31.Hermanns N., Schumann B., Kulzer B., Haak T. The impact of continuous glucose monitoring on low interstitial glucose values and low blood glucose values assessed by point-of-care blood glucose meters: results of a crossover trial. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2014. 8:516–22.

32.van Beers CA., DeVries JH., Kleijer SJ., Smits MM., Geel-hoed-Duijvestijn PH., Kramer MH, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring for patients with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IN CONTROL): a randomised, open-label, crossover trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016. 4:893–902.

33.Strander B., Andersson-Ellström A., Milsom I., Sparén P. Long term risk of invasive cancer after treatment for cer-vical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2007. 335:1077.

34.Karter AJ., Parker MM., Moffet HH., Gilliam LK., Dlott R. Association of real-time continuous glucose monitoring with glycemic control and acute metabolic events among patients with insulin-treated diabetes. JAMA. 2021. 325:2273–84.

35.Evans M., Welsh Z., Ells S., Seibold A. The impact of flash glucose monitoring on glycaemic control as measured by HbA1c: a meta-analysis of clinical trials and real-world observational studies. Diabetes Ther. 2020. 11:83–95.

36.Kröger J., Fasching P., Hanaire H. Three European retro-spective real-world chart review studies to determine the effectiveness of flash glucose monitoring on HbA1c in adults with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Ther. 2020. 11:279–91.

37.Beck RW., Riddlesworth TD., Ruedy K., Ahmann A., Haller S., Kruger D, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring versus usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving multiple daily insulin injections: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2017. 167:365–74.

38.Ajjan RA., Jackson N., Thomson SA. Reduction in HbA1c using professional flash glucose monitoring in insu-lin-treated type 2 diabetes patients managed in primary and secondary care settings: a pilot, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Diab Vasc Dis Res. 2019. 16:385–95.

39.Vigersky RA., Fonda SJ., Chellappa M., Walker MS., Ehrhardt NM. Short- and long-term effects of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2012. 35:32–8.

40.Ehrhardt NM., Chellappa M., Walker MS., Fonda SJ., Vigersky RA. The effect of real-time continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011. 5:668–75.

41.Yoo HJ., An HG., Park SY., Ryu OH., Kim HY., Seo JA, et al. Use of a real time continuous glucose monitoring system as a motivational device for poorly controlled type 2 Diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2008. 82:73–9.

42.Wada E., Onoue T., Kobayashi T., Handa T., Hayase A., Ito M, et al. Flash glucose monitoring helps achieve better glycemic control than conventional self-monitoring of blood glucose in non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2020. 8:e001115.

43.Feig DS., Donovan LE., Corcoy R., Murphy KE., Amiel SA., Hunt KF, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes (CONCEPTT): a multicentre international randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2017. 390:2347–59.

44.Secher AL., Ringholm L., Andersen HU., Damm P., Mathiesen ER. The effect of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in pregnant women with diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2013. 36:1877–83.

45.Wei Q., Sun Z., Yang Y., Yu H., Ding H., Wang S. Effect of a CGMS and SMBG on maternal and neonatal outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled trial. Sci Rep. 2016. 6:19920.

46.Ruedy KJ., Parkin CG., Riddlesworth TD., Graham C. DIAMOND Study Group. Continuous glucose monitoring in older adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes using multiple daily injections of insulin: results from the DIAMOND trial. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017. 11:1138–46.

47.Moser O., Riddell MC., Eckstein ML., Adolfsson P., Raba-sa-Lhoret R., van den Boom L, et al. Glucose management for exercise using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM) systems in type 1 diabetes: position statement of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) and of the International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes (ISPAD) endorsed by JDRF and supported by the American Diabetes Association (ADA). Diabetologia. 2020. 63:2501–20.

48.Jin SM., Kim TH., Bae JC., Hur KY., Lee MS., Lee MK, et al. Clinical factors associated with absolute and relative measures of glycemic variability determined by continuous glucose monitoring: an analysis of 480 subjects. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2014. 104:266–72.

49.Jun JE., Lee SE., Lee YB., Ahn JY., Kim G., Hur KY, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring defined glucose variability is associated with cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2019. 35:e3092.

50.Yoo JH., Choi MS., Ahn J., Park SW., Kim Y., Hur KY, et al. Association between continuous glucose monitoring-de-rived time in range, other core metrics, and albuminuria in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2020. 22:768–76.

51.American Diabetes Association. 7. Diabetes technology: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2019. Diabetes Care. 2019. 42(Suppl 1):S71–80.

52.Sherr JL., Tauschmann M., Battelino T., de Bock M., Forlenza G., Roman R, et al. ISPAD Clinical practice consensus guidelines 2018: diabetes technologies. Pediatr Diabetes. 2018. 19(Suppl 27):302–25.

53.Araki E., Goto A., Kondo T., Noda M., Noto H., Origasa H, et al. Japanese clinical practice guideline for diabetes 2019. Diabetol Int. 2020. 11:165–223.

54.Choi IS., Kim HS., Hwang SH., Kim HW., Noh YM. National Evidence-based healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA). Systematic reviews of the safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of the continuous glucose monitoring system and insulin pump for type 1 diabetes. Seoul: NECA;2020.

55.Roze S., Isitt J., Smith-Palmer J., Javanbakht M., Lynch P. Long-term cost-effectiveness of Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring versus self-monitoring of blood glucose in patients with type 1 diabetes in the U.K. Diabetes Care. 2020. 43:2411–7.

56.Roze S., Isitt JJ., Smith-Palmer J., Lynch P., Klinkenbijl B., Zammit G, et al. Long-term cost-effectiveness the Dexcom G6 real-time continuous glucose monitoring system compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in people with type 1 diabetes in France. Diabetes Ther. 2021. 12:235–46.

57.Hellmund R., Weitgasser R., Blissett D. Cost calculation for a flash glucose monitoring system for UK adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus receiving intensive insulin treatment. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2018. 138:193–200.

58.Fonda SJ., Graham C., Munakata J., Powers JM., Price D., Vigersky RA. The cost-effectiveness of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) in type 2 diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2016. 10:898–904.

59.Kim JH., Ryu OH., Huh JH., Kim GR., Sim GH., Kwak SI. Evaluation of the effect in the national health insurance support system for diabets self-management and proposal for its improvement. Wonju: National Health Insurance Service;2018.

60.AACE (American Association of Clinical Endocrinology). Billing codes for personal and professional continuous glucose monitoring visits and services. Available from:. https://pro.aace.com/cgm/toolkit/billing-codes.

61.Reimbursement coverage for CGM. Available from:. https://www.medtronic.com/content/dam/medtron-ic-com/jp-ja/hcp/diabetes/documents/gc/guardiancon-nect-reimbursesment.pdf?bypassIM=true.

62.FreeStyle. FAQ. Available from:. https://www.myfreestyle.jp/hcp/support/faq.html.