Continuous glucose monitoring versus blood glucose self-monitoring in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus managed via diet control: a prospective pilot study
Keywords:
Blood glucose self-monitoring, Continuous glucose monitoring, Diabetes, gestational, Patient satisfactionAbstract
Objectives: To compare agreement between continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and self-monitoring of blood glucose and to assess the acceptance and satisfaction of CGM among Chinese women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in Hong Kong.
Methods: Chinese women diagnosed with GDM after 28 weeks of gestation and managed via diet control were recruited at Kwong Wah Hospital, Hong Kong, between January 2025 and June 2025. Participants were instructed to wear a CGM sensor for 15 days. Additionally, they were instructed to perform self-monitoring of blood glucose via finger prick four times per day on 4 separate days. Fasting glucose levels in the morning and postprandial glucose levels 2 hours after each meal were recorded. Participants’ knowledge, application, usage, and acceptance and satisfaction of CGM were assessed using an 18-item questionnaire. Satisfaction with CGM was also assessed using the validated Chinese version of the Glucose Monitoring Satisfaction Survey.
Results: In total, 50 Chinese women diagnosed with GDM after 28 weeks of gestation and managed via diet control were included in the analysis. A total of 711 paired measurements were collected. Agreement between CGM and self-monitoring measurements was good, with a concordance correlation coefficient of 0.836. The linear-mixed-effects-based Bland-Altman plot showed a mean bias between the two methods of 0.069 mmol/L. Deming regression yielded an intercept of -0.046 and a slope of 1.017, indicating minimal fixed and proportional bias. The mixed-effects model showed a precision ratio of 0.626. The mean absolute relative difference was 8.04%. Parkes error grid analysis indicated that 100% of paired measurements were in zone A or B. Overall, 83.7% were satisfied with CGM and accepted its use for glucose monitoring during pregnancy when the sensor was provided free of charge.
Conclusion: Agreement between CGM and self-monitoring measurements was good in Chinese women with GDM. CGM can be used as an adjunct to self-monitoring with finger pricks, which should be performed at least weekly to cross-check agreement. Most women with GDM accepted and were satisfied with CGM.
References
1. World Health Organization. diagnostic criteria and classification of hyperglycaemia first detected in pregnancy. Accessed 13 February 2026. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-NMH-MND-13.2
2. Ye W, Luo C, Huang J, Li C, Liu Z, Liu F. Gestational diabetes mellitus and adverse pregnancy outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2022;377:e067946.
3. Zhou T, Du S, Sun D, et al. Prevalence and trends in gestational diabetes mellitus among women in the United States, 2006–2017: a population-based study. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2022;13:868094.
4. Chu SY, Callaghan WM, Kim SY, et al. Maternal obesity and risk of gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 2007;30:2070-6.
5. Li Y, Ren X, He L, Li J, Zhang S, Chen W. Maternal age and the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis of over 120 million participants. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2020;162:108044.
6. Cheuk QKY, Lo TK, Wong SF, Lee CP. Association between pregnancy-associated plasma protein-a levels in the first trimester and gestational diabetes mellitus in Chinese women. Hong Kong Med J 2016;22:30-8.
7. HKCOG Guidelines. Guidelines for the Management of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Accessed 13 February 2026. Available from: https://www.hkcog.org.hk/hkcog/Download/Guidelines_on_GDM_updated.pdf
8. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Diabetes in pregnancy: management from preconception to the postnatal period. Accessed 13 February 2026. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng3
9. Ong WM, Chua SS, Ng CJ. Barriers and facilitators to self-monitoring of blood glucose in people with type 2 diabetes using insulin: a qualitative study. Patient Prefer Adherence 2014;8:237-46.
10. Miller EM. Using continuous glucose monitoring in clinical practice. Clin Diabetes 2020;38:429-38.
11. Nathanson D, Svensson AM, Miftaraj M, Franzén S, Bolinder J, Eeg-Olofsson K. Effect of flash glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes: a nationwide, longitudinal observational study of 14,372 flash users compared with 7691 glucose sensor naive controls. Diabetologia 2021;64:1595-603.
12. Wada E, Onoue T, Kobayashi T, et al. Flash glucose monitoring helps achieve better glycemic control than conventional self-monitoring of blood glucose in non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care 2020;8:e001115.
13. Beck RW, Riddlesworth T, Ruedy K, et al. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes using insulin injections: the DIAMOND randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2017;317:371-8.
14. Scott EM, Bilous RW, Kautzky-Willer A. Accuracy, user acceptability, and safety evaluation for the FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring System when used by pregnant women with diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther 2018;20:180-8.
15. Beriwal S, Re F, Gibson S, et al. Acceptability of and satisfaction with continuous glucose monitoring in pregnant women with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a service improvement project. Obstet Med 2025;18:12-7.
16. Sinha M, McKeon KM, Parker S, et al. A comparison of time delay in three continuous glucose monitors for adolescents and adults. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2017;11:1132-7.
17. International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Consensus Panel; Metzger BE, Gabbe SG, et al. International association of diabetes and pregnancy study groups recommendations on the diagnosis and classification of hyperglycemia in pregnancy. Diabetes Care 2010;33:676-82.
18. Polonsky WH, Fisher L, Hessler D, Edelman SV. Development of a new measure for assessing glucose monitoring device-related treatment satisfaction and quality of life. Diabetes Technol Ther 2015;17:657-63.
19. Lu H, Lu X, Gao H, Gao Y. Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Glucose Monitoring Satisfaction Survey [in Chinese]. Chin Gen Pract 2020;23:1812-8.
20. Akintola AA, Noordam R, Jansen SW, et al. Accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring measurements in normo-glycemic individuals. PLoS One 2015;10:e0139973.
21. Fellinger E, Brandt T, Creutzburg J, Rommerskirchen T, Schmidt A. Analytical performance of the FreeStyle Libre 2 glucose sensor in healthy male adults. Sensors (Basel) 2024;24:5769.
22. Jin Z, Thackray AE, King JA, Deighton K, Davies MJ, Stensel DJ. Analytical performance of the factory-calibrated flash glucose monitoring System FreeStyle Libre2TM in healthy women. Sensors (Basel) 2023;23:7417.
23. Pfützner A, Klonoff DC, Pardo S, Parkes JL. Technical aspects of the Parkes error grid. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2013;7:1275-81.
24. ISO. ISO 15197:2013. In vitro diagnostic test systems: requirements for blood-glucose monitoring systems for self-testing in managing diabetes mellitus. Accessed 13 February 2026. Available from: https://www.iso.org/standard/54976.html
25. Hussain FN, Raymond S, Feldman KM, et al. Comparison of an intermittently scanned (flash) continuous glucose monitoring system to standard self-monitoring of capillary blood glucose in gestational diabetes mellitus. Am J Perinatol 2023;40:1149-57.
26. Freckmann G, Pleus S, Grady M, Setford S, Levy B. Measures of accuracy for continuous glucose monitoring and blood glucose monitoring devices. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2018;13:575-83.
27. Ólafsdóttir AF, Attvall S, Sandgren U, et al. A clinical trial of the accuracy and treatment experience of the flash glucose monitor FreeStyle Libre in adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther 2017;19:164-72.
28. Bailey T, Bode BW, Christiansen MP, Klaff LJ, Alva S. The performance and usability of a factory-calibrated flash glucose monitoring system. Diabetes Technol Ther 2015;17:787-94.
29. Lukács A, Szerencsi LB, Barkai L. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) satisfaction and its effect on mental health and glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes. Physiol Int 2022;109:501-10.
30. Amylidi-Mohr S, Zennaro G, Schneider S, Raio L, Mosimann B, Surbek D. Continuous glucose monitoring in the management of gestational diabetes in Switzerland (DipGluMo): an open-label, single-centre, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2025;13:591-9.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Hong Kong Journal of Gynaecology, Obstetrics and Midwifery
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The Journal has a fully Open Access policy and publishes all articles under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence. For any use other than that permitted by this license, written permission must be obtained from the Journal.
