PSHP 2026 Residency Conference

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in patients enrolled in a type 2 diabetes management program led to a significant change in glycemic control.


Methods: This retrospective chart review included adult patients with type 2 diabetes enrolled in a Population Health clinical pharmacist-led diabetes management program operating under a collaborative practice agreement at Lehigh Valley Physician Group (LVPG) sites between July 1, 2024 to March 31, 2025. Eligible patients were adults (≥ 18 years of age) with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes managed by their primary care provider. Eligible patients had a baseline hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) drawn within 30 days of enrollment in the program, and at least 1 repeat HbA1c drawn during the study period. Patients were excluded if they had a diagnosis of type 1 diabetes, were pregnant, were managed by Endocrinology, or lacked a repeat HbA1c. The two study groups included patients using CGM and those who did not use CGM. 


Results: The research data report generated a total of 251 unique patient charts for review, of which 105 met at least one exclusion criteria. The remaining 146 patient charts were included in the final analysis. The study population was 58.22% male (n=85), 76.03% White or Caucasian (n=111), with a mean age of 60.68 years. The CGM group included 54 patients while the non-CGM group included 92 patients using a glucometer or no glucose-monitoring device. In both groups, HbA1c decreased significantly from baseline to repeat (p<0.0001). The reduction was greater in the CGM group (median -1.70) compared with the non-CGM group (median -1.50). This difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.2036).


Conclusion: This analysis supports that pharmacist-led interventions can result in HbA1c reduction. Both CGM and non-CGM users experienced significant improvements in glycemic control. Although the median reduction in HbA1c was greater among CGM users, this difference was not statistically significant. A larger study over a longer period of time could further evaluate whether CGM use impacts glycemic control in our patient population.