Speciality Medical Dialogues
    • facebook
    • twitter
    Login Register
    • facebook
    • twitter
    Login Register
    • Medical Dialogues
    • Education Dialogues
    • Business Dialogues
    • Medical Jobs
    • Medical Matrimony
    • MD Brand Connect
    Speciality Medical Dialogues
    • Editorial
    • News
        • Anesthesiology
        • Cancer
        • Cardiac Sciences
        • Critical Care
        • Dentistry
        • Dermatology
        • Diabetes and Endo
        • Diagnostics
        • ENT
        • Featured Research
        • Gastroenterology
        • Geriatrics
        • Medicine
        • Nephrology
        • Neurosciences
        • Nursing
        • Obs and Gynae
        • Ophthalmology
        • Orthopaedics
        • Paediatrics
        • Parmedics
        • Pharmacy
        • Psychiatry
        • Pulmonology
        • Radiology
        • Surgery
        • Urology
    • Practice Guidelines
        • Anesthesiology Guidelines
        • Cancer Guidelines
        • Cardiac Sciences Guidelines
        • Critical Care Guidelines
        • Dentistry Guidelines
        • Dermatology Guidelines
        • Diabetes and Endo Guidelines
        • Diagnostics Guidelines
        • ENT Guidelines
        • Featured Practice Guidelines
        • Gastroenterology Guidelines
        • Geriatrics Guidelines
        • Medicine Guidelines
        • Nephrology Guidelines
        • Neurosciences Guidelines
        • Obs and Gynae Guidelines
        • Ophthalmology Guidelines
        • Orthopaedics Guidelines
        • Paediatrics Guidelines
        • Psychiatry Guidelines
        • Pulmonology Guidelines
        • Radiology Guidelines
        • Surgery Guidelines
        • Urology Guidelines
    LoginRegister
    Speciality Medical Dialogues
    LoginRegister
    • Home
    • Editorial
    • News
      • Anesthesiology
      • Cancer
      • Cardiac Sciences
      • Critical Care
      • Dentistry
      • Dermatology
      • Diabetes and Endo
      • Diagnostics
      • ENT
      • Featured Research
      • Gastroenterology
      • Geriatrics
      • Medicine
      • Nephrology
      • Neurosciences
      • Nursing
      • Obs and Gynae
      • Ophthalmology
      • Orthopaedics
      • Paediatrics
      • Parmedics
      • Pharmacy
      • Psychiatry
      • Pulmonology
      • Radiology
      • Surgery
      • Urology
    • Practice Guidelines
      • Anesthesiology Guidelines
      • Cancer Guidelines
      • Cardiac Sciences Guidelines
      • Critical Care Guidelines
      • Dentistry Guidelines
      • Dermatology Guidelines
      • Diabetes and Endo Guidelines
      • Diagnostics Guidelines
      • ENT Guidelines
      • Featured Practice Guidelines
      • Gastroenterology Guidelines
      • Geriatrics Guidelines
      • Medicine Guidelines
      • Nephrology Guidelines
      • Neurosciences Guidelines
      • Obs and Gynae Guidelines
      • Ophthalmology Guidelines
      • Orthopaedics Guidelines
      • Paediatrics Guidelines
      • Psychiatry Guidelines
      • Pulmonology Guidelines
      • Radiology Guidelines
      • Surgery Guidelines
      • Urology Guidelines
    • Home
    • News
    • Diabetes and Endo
    • Blood sugar testing by...

    Blood sugar testing by CGM cost effective compared to finger prick during T1 Diabetes Pregnancy

    Written by Medha Baranwal Baranwal Published On 2019-06-23T09:00:46+05:30  |  Updated On 23 Jun 2019 9:00 AM IST
    Blood sugar testing by CGM cost effective compared to finger prick during T1 Diabetes Pregnancy

    Blood sugar testing by continuous glucose monitoring ( CGM) is cost-effective compared to finger prick testing during Type 1 Diabetes Pregnancy finds a clinical trial. The results of the analysis were presented at this year’s American Diabetes Association (ADA) 2019 Scientific Sessions.


    It is an integral part of every diabetes control to monitor blood sugar, of course, the mode of blood sugar testing may differ. The blood sugar testing for patients of type 1 diabetes patients during pregnancy is essential but it may be finger prick or by continuous glucose monitoring, depending on individual choice.


    A cost-effectiveness analysis of the CONCEPTT randomised controlled trial (RCT) data, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes saves £2500 per pregnancy and birth compared with pregnancy using finger-prick testing.


    The analysis was based on findings from the CONCEPTT trial in which the neonatal cost-effectiveness calculations showed that the cost of providing standard care with CGM was less than that without. The findings will come handy for publicly-funded healthcare system like the NHS, where there will be saving of £2500 with use of CGM during pregnancy in mothers with type 1 diabetes because CGM is more effective than capillary blood sugar monitoring.


    The CONCEPTT trial was conducted to evaluate whether there was a benefit or not in terms of blood sugar control in pregnant mothers with type 1 diabetes who used CGM compared with capillary glucose monitoring. The trial found that CGM improved newborn health outcomes compared with capillary monitoring of blood sugar and large for gestational age babies were observed in 53% and 69% of births in CGM versus control groups respectively. The proportion of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admissions for longer than 24 hours was 27% in the CGM arm versus 43% in the control arm.


    The researchers wanted to look at the cost implications of integrating CGM into standard antenatal diabetes care, in this cost-effectiveness analysis.


    They found that in terms of healthcare resource utilisation, the cost of standard antenatal care for a woman with type 1 diabetes (with capillary monitoring of blood glucose) was estimated at around £6500. The direct cost of instituting CGM from approximately 10 weeks of gestation until delivery was £1700, assuming each sensor costs £52 (thirty-three sensors across pregnancy). In addition, the costs of diabetes nurse specialists and dieticians were included, so the total additional costs of implementing CGM throughout pregnancy was approximately £2050.







    Similar analyses made in the UK and Canada have also depicted budget impacts for example in Canada, the use of CGM equates to a 30% cost reduction, while in the UK it is approximately 40%.


    On the basis of this analysis, NHS will be to offer CGM to all pregnant women with type 1 diabetes next year.





    By making continuous glucose monitoring technology available to all women with type 1 diabetes during pregnancy could lead to significant cost savings for the NHS. Moreover, CGM could offer a better way to help pregnant women with type 1 diabetes keep their blood glucose levels in a safe range, to keep both mother and baby healthy.

    blood sugarblood sugar testCGMCONCEPTT trialcontinuous glucose monitoringdiabetesdiabetes insipidusDiabetes Mellitusdiabetes symptomsFasting blood sugarfinger prickFinger prick testgestational diabetesinsulininsulin dosageinsulin injection sitesnormal blood sugarnormal blood sugar levelPregnancytype 1 diabetes mellitustype 1 diabetes symptomsType 1 DMtype 2 diabetes symptomsType-1 diabetesType-2 diabetestypes of diabetes

    Disclaimer: This site is primarily intended for healthcare professionals. Any content/information on this website does not replace the advice of medical and/or health professionals and should not be construed as medical/diagnostic advice/endorsement or prescription. Use of this site is subject to our terms of use, privacy policy, advertisement policy. © 2020 Minerva Medical Treatment Pvt Ltd

    Medha Baranwal Baranwal
    Medha Baranwal Baranwal
      Show Full Article
      Next Story
      Similar Posts
      NO DATA FOUND

      • Email: info@medicaldialogues.in
      • Phone: 011 - 4372 0751

      Website Last Updated On : 12 Oct 2022 7:06 AM GMT
      Company
      • About Us
      • Contact Us
      • Our Team
      • Reach our Editor
      • Feedback
      • Submit Article
      Ads & Legal
      • Advertise
      • Advertise Policy
      • Terms and Conditions
      • Privacy Policy
      • Editorial Policy
      • Comments Policy
      • Disclamier
      Medical Dialogues is health news portal designed to update medical and healthcare professionals but does not limit/block other interested parties from accessing our general health content. The health content on Medical Dialogues and its subdomains is created and/or edited by our expert team, that includes doctors, healthcare researchers and scientific writers, who review all medical information to keep them in line with the latest evidence-based medical information and accepted health guidelines by established medical organisations of the world.

      Any content/information on this website does not replace the advice of medical and/or health professionals and should not be construed as medical/diagnostic advice/endorsement or prescription.Use of this site is subject to our terms of use, privacy policy, advertisement policy. You can check out disclaimers here. © 2025 Minerva Medical Treatment Pvt Ltd

      © 2025 - Medical Dialogues. All Rights Reserved.
      Powered By: Hocalwire
      X
      We use cookies for analytics, advertising and to improve our site. You agree to our use of cookies by continuing to use our site. To know more, see our Cookie Policy and Cookie Settings.Ok