Author(s) :

Navami Muglurmath.

Volume/Issue :

Abstract :

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) management relies on accurate and consistent glucose monitoring. While self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) has long been the standard for type 1 diabetes (T1D) care, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technologies have gained prominence due to their ability to provide real-time glucose trends. This systematic review’s objective is to analyze seventeen studies (2015-2025) to evaluate clinical and psychosocial outcomes of CGM versus SMBG in T1D, with attention to device type, accuracy constraints (exercise, medication interference), and user factors. Previous research has demonstrated the effectiveness of CGM in lowering hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and improving glycemic control, but few have reviewed holistically comparing variations in study design, response variables, and type influence outcomes. This study addresses that gap by analyzing key response variables (HbA1c, time in range, hypoglycemia, and glycemic variability), CGM accuracy metrics, study design features, and patient-reported outcomes such as behavioral changes and quality of life. The findings show that CGM use typically increased time in range by 5-10 percentage points and reduced time below range by 2-7 percentage points. HbA1c levels ranged from no change to about -0.5% over 12-16 weeks. In children with elevated HbA1c using isCGM 2.0, time below range fell by 6.4 percentage points over 12 weeks without an HbA1c change; these time below range benefits and higher testing frequency were sustained to 24 weeks after crossover to isCGM in both arms. Psychosocially, early CGM after diagnosis was widely endorsed by parents for reduced worry, better sleep, and remote monitoring benefits. Primary limitations in this review include heterogeneity in device types, populations, durations, and co-interventions. These results highlight the clinical value of CGM in improving both physiological and psychosocial outcomes. Differences in CGM technology, calibration needs, and adherence also impacted outcomes. These results reinforce the clinical value of CGMs while highlighting the need for standardized protocols and broader inclusion across demographic groups to optimize diabetes care.