Determinants of implementation of continuous glucose monitoring for patients with Insulin-Treated type 2 diabetes: a national survey of primary care providers.

Vimalananda VG, Kragen B, Leibowitz AJ, Qian S, Wormwood J, Linsky AM, Underwood P, Conlin PR, Kim B. Determinants of implementation of continuous glucose monitoring for patients with Insulin-Treated type 2 diabetes: a national survey of primary care providers. BMC primary care. 2025 Mar 8; 26(1):68, DOI: 10.1186/s12875-025-02764-7.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

OBJECTIVES: To identify determinants of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) implementation from primary care providers'' (PCPs'') perspectives and examine the associations of these determinants with both PCP intent to discuss CGM with eligible patients and facility-level uptake of CGM. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. METHODS: A survey about CGM implementation for patients with type 2 diabetes on insulin was distributed to all PCPs in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health system from October 2023-April 2024. Multi-item scales measured perceived clinical benefits of CGM, workload capacity, knowledge about CGM, access to CGM resources, and support from leadership and other services. Responses were on a 5-point Likert scale from "Strongly Disagree" to "Strongly Agree". An item asked about likelihood of initiating discussions about starting CGM. Facility-level uptake was measured using VA administrative data. Multivariable regression models assessed the relationship between determinants of CGM implementation and both PCP intent to discuss CGM and facility-level uptake. RESULTS: Of 1373 respondents, most perceived clinical benefits of CGM (79% "Agree" + "Strongly Agree"). Very few indicated sufficient access to resources (8%) and support from leadership and other services (5%). After adjustment for respondent characteristics, the scale most strongly associated with PCP intent to discuss CGM was PCP Knowledge About CGM (B  =  0.54, P  < .001). Facility uptake of CGM was associated with Clinical Benefits of CGM (B  =  0.10, P  = .026) and Support from Leadership and Other Services (B  =  0.18, P  < .001). CONCLUSIONS: PCPs perceive benefits to CGM but lack sufficient knowledge, resources, and workload capacity to manage it alone. PCP education about CGM use and interprofessional support for uptake may increase the likelihood that eligible patients use CGM.