Abstract
Objective
To evaluate the impact of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) assistance on glycemic control in children with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in earthquake-affected regions, comparing those who benefited from CGM with those who did not. Additionally, the study assessed changes in CGM metrics over nine months of CGM use.
Methods
A multicenter, cross-sectional study was conducted across 11 centers in Türkiye. Children with T1D were divided into two groups: those who received CGM support (CGM+) and those who continued with finger-stick glucose monitoring (CGM-). Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels were measured at four intervals: pre-earthquake, 3-6 months, 6-9 months, and 9-12 months post-earthquake. In the second phase, CGM metrics were analyzed over 90-day intervals in the CGM+ group with at least 85% sensor usage.
Results
A total of 532 children were included. Median HbA1c levels decreased from 9.1% pre-earthquake to 8.8% 3-6 months post-earthquake (p=0.027). In the CGM+ group, HbA1c levels significantly decreased from 8.8% to 8.3% (p<0.001), while no significant change was observed in the CGM- group. Of the 412 subjects with access to CGM reports, 105 (25.4%) had less than 85% sensor usage and were excluded. In the remaining 307 patients, there was a significant increase in active sensor time and daily glucose measurements, along with a reduction in hypoglycemia frequency over the 90-day intervals (p<0.001 for all three).
Conclusion
CGM assistance improved glycemic control in children with T1D, even under the challenging conditions following a devastating earthquake. These findings highlight the need for broader access to CGM devices to enhance diabetes management.
Keywords: Continuous glucose monitoring, diabetes, earthquake, glucose sensor
Read the full text
5 sections · 3 figures · 2 tables · PDF
Create your free account to read the full text.
- Full text with figures and tables
- PDF and supplementary files
- Access on every Galenos journal
One Galenos account works on every Galenos journal site.
References
Türkiye earthquake: external situation report no. 9: 1 May-4 June 2023. Last Accessed Date: 08.05.2025. Available from: https://www.who.int/europe/publications/i/item/WHO-EURO-2023-7145-46911-70035
T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Resmî Gazete. Last Accessed Date: 08.05.2025. Available from: https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/08.02.2023
T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Strateji ve Bütçe Başkanlığı. 2023 Kahramanmaraş and Hatay Earthquakes Report. Last Accessed Date: 08.05.2025. Available from: https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/2023-Kahramanmaras-and-Hatay-Earthquakes-Report.pdf
Allweiss P. Diabetes and disasters: recent studies and resources for preparedness. Curr Diab Rep. 2019;19:131.
T.C. Aile ve Sosyal Hizmetler Bakanlığı Sosyal Yardımlar Genel Müdürlüğü. Bakanımız Derya Yanık: “Glikoz Ölçüm Cihazı Yardımımızı 0-22 yaş aralığındaki vatandaşlarımızı kapsayacak şekilde genişletiyoruz” Last Accessed Date: 08.05.2025. Available from: https://www.aile.gov.tr/sygm/haberler/bakanimiz-derya-yanik-glikoz-olcum-cihazi-yardimimizi-0-22-yas-araligindaki-vatandaslarimizi-kapsayacak-sekilde-genisletiyoruz/
Tarçın G, Özdemir Dilek S, Kılıç S, Ata A. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring device assistance on glycemic control of 2023 Kahramanmaraş doublet earthquake survivors with type 1 diabetes in Adana, Turkey. Turk Arch Pediatr. 2023;58:653-657.
Kamoi K, Tanaka M, Ikarashi T, Miyakoshi M. Effect of the 2004 Mid Niigata Prefecture earthquake on glycemic control in type 1 diabetic patients. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2006;74:141-147. Epub 2006 May 24.
Kirizuka K, Nishizaki H, Kohriyama K, Nukata O, Arioka Y, Motobuchi M, Yoshiki K, Tatezumi K, Kondo T, Tsuboi S. Influences of The Great Hanshin-Awaji earthquake on glycemic control in diabetic patients. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 1997;36:193-196.
Kondo T, Miyakawa N, Motoshima H, Hanatani S, Ishii N, Igata M, Yoshinaga K, Kukidome D, Senokuchi T, Kawashima J, Furukawa N, Matsumura T, Araki E. Impacts of the 2016 Kumamoto earthquake on glycemic control in patients with diabetes. J Diabetes Investig. 2019;10:521-530. Epub 2019 Apr 14.
Sengül A, Ozer E, Salman S, Salman F, Sağlam Z, Sargin M, Hatun S, Satman I, Yilmaz T. Lessons learnt from influences of the Marmara earthquake on glycemic control and quality of life in people with type 1 diabetes. Endocr J. 2004;51:407-414.
Laffel LM, Kanapka LG, Beck RW, Bergamo K, Clements MA, Criego A, DeSalvo DJ, Goland R, Hood K, Liljenquist D, Messer LH, Monzavi R, Mouse TJ, Prahalad P, Sherr J, Simmons JH, Wadwa RP, Weinstock RS, Willi SM, Miller KM; CGM Intervention in teens and young adults with T1D (CITY) study group; CDE10. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;323:2388-2396.
Dorando E, Haak T, Pieper D. Continuous glucose monitoring for glycemic control in children and adolescents diagnosed with diabetes type 1: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2022;130:61-72.
Streisand R, Monaghan M. Young children with type 1 diabetes: challenges, research, and future directions. Curr Diab Rep. 2014;14:520.
Lim STJ, Huang F, Lek N, Pereira K. Flash continuous home glucose monitoring to improve adherence to self-monitoring of blood glucose and self-efficacy in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Clin Diabetes. 2020;38:152-158.
Cho SH, Kim S, Lee YB, Jin SM, Hur KY, Kim G, Kim JH. Impact of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control and its derived metrics in type 1 diabetes: a longitudinal study. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023;14:1165471.
Lind M, Ólafsdóttir AF, Hirsch IB, Bolinder J, Dahlqvist S, Pivodic A, Hellman J, Wijkman M, Schwarcz E, Albrektsson H, Heise T, Polonsky W. Sustained intensive treatment and long-term effects on HbA(1c) reduction (SILVER Study) by CGM in people with type 1 diabetes treated with MDI. Diabetes Care. 2021;44:141-149. Epub 2020 Nov 15.
