Citations

Importance Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), initially recommended primarily for people with type 1 diabetes, has rapidly expanded to patients with type 2 diabetes and, more recently, even to individuals without diabetes. This broadening use underscores the importance of critically examining the evidence supporting CGM across populations, clarifying where benefits are established, where they are modest, and where they remain uncertain. Observations We reviewed systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials and clinical guidelines evaluating CGM use beyond type 1 diabetes, with particular attention to glycemic outcomes, hypoglycemia, patient-reported outcomes, and potential unintended consequences in nonpregnant adults. In adults with type 2 diabetes, evidence from randomized trials consistently demonstrated that CGM use was associated, on average, with a modest yet consistent reduction in hemoglobin A 1c of approximately 0.3% compared with finger-stick monitoring or usual care; some patients benefited considerably more. Only limited and indirect evidence supported the adoption of CGM in people with type 2 diabetes not receiving glucose-lowering therapy or in those with prediabetes or obesity. Conclusions and Relevance CGM should be deployed in response to a specific patient problem rather than as a default intervention. Deliberate, equitable deployment of CGM that is aligned with patient goals, clinical context, and system capacity will be necessary to ensure that those most likely to benefit are not left behind, while avoiding overuse in populations for whom benefit remains unproven.

Objectives To assess whether recommendations of individually oriented lifestyle interventions (IOLIs) in guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) were underpinned by evidence of benefit, and whether harms and opportunity costs were considered. Design Cross sectional survey. Setting UK. Data sources NICE guidelines and supporting evidence. Eligibility criteria All NICE pathways for IOLI recommendations (ie, non-drug interventions that healthcare professionals administer to adults to achieve a healthier lifestyle and improve health) were searched systematically on 26 August 2020. One author screened all retrieved pathways for candidate guidelines, while a second author verified these judgments. Two authors independently and in duplicate screened all retrieved guidelines and recommendations for eligibility, extracted data, and evaluated the evidence cited and the outcomes considered. Disagreements were noted and resolved by consensus. Results Within 57 guidelines, 379 NICE recommendations were found for IOLIs; almost all (n=374; 99%) recommended the lifestyle intervention and five (1%) recommended against the intervention. Of the 379 recommendations, 13 (3%) were supported by moderate or high certainty evidence of a beneficial effect on patient relevant outcomes (n=7; 2%) or surrogate outcomes (n=13; 3%). 19 (5%) interventions considered psychosocial harms, 32 (8%) considered physical harms, and one (<1%) considered the opportunity costs of implementation. No intervention considered the burden placed on individuals by these recommendations. Conclusion Few NICE recommendations of lifestyle interventions are supported by reliable evidence. While this finding does not contest the beneficial effects of healthy habits, guidelines recommending clinicians to try to change people’s lifestyle need to be reconsidered given the substantial uncertainty about the effectiveness, harms, and opportunity costs of such interventions.