Systematic intensive therapy in addition to continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 14, 2026

Improving IV Insulin Administration in a Community Hospital
Published on: June 11, 2012
Arndís F Ólafsdóttir1,2,3, Kari-Anne Sveen4, Magnus Wijkman5
1Department of Medicine, NU Hospital Group, Uddevalla, Sweden.
Background:
Although continuous glucose monitor/intermittent scanning continuous glucose monitor (CGM/isCGM) is widely used for glucose monitoring, many adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) still fail to achieve recommended glycaemic targets. We aimed to evaluate whether digital distance counselling based on CGM data could improve glycaemic control in adults with T1D and suboptimal control.
Methods:
In this multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial, adults with T1D and HbA1c ≥58 mmol/mol, already using CGM/isCGM with insulin therapy (multiple daily injections or pump), were enrolled across eight sites in Sweden and Norway. Participants were allocated (1:1) via a minimisation algorithm to receive either systematic intensive therapy (SIT) or conventional therapy (CT). The SIT group received weekly distance counselling, including CGM interpretation, if mean glucose was ≥8·4 mmol/L, during an 18-week intervention period. The control group attended two clinical visits during this period. The primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline to 18 weeks. Adverse events of special interest (AESI; severe hypoglycaemia or diabetic ketoacidosis) were assessed in the safety population. This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov number NCT03474393.
Findings:
117 participants were enrolled and randomised (59 SIT, 58 control). At 18 weeks, mean (SD) HbA1c decreased by -10·7 (9·4) mmol/mol (-0·98% [0·86]) in the SIT group compared with -2·4 (8·4) mmol/mol (-0·22% [0·77]) in CT, resulting in an adjusted mean difference of -8·3 mmol/mol (95% CI -11·2 to -5·5), equivalent to -0·76% (95% CI -1·02 to -0·50%; P < 0·0001). No AESI were observed in the SIT group, compared with one event in the control group (1·7%), giving a risk difference of -1·7% (95% CI -5·1 to 1·6%).
Interpretation:
SIT improves glycaemic control in adults with T1D using CGM/isCGM who are not achieving recommended glycaemic targets, without evidence of safety concerns. These findings highlight the critical role of structured, individualised interventions in addressing persistent glycaemic management deficits and advancing clinical outcomes in this population.
Funding:
The study was supported by the Swedish state, Region Västra Götaland, and the Swedish Diabetes Foundation.
Related Concept Videos
Diabetes: Management and Pharmacotherapy
Insulin remains the cornerstone of treatment for most patients with type 1 and many...
Diabetes Mellitus: Overview and Type I Subtype
Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease in which the immune system mistakenly attacks and destroys the insulin-producing beta cells in the pancreas. As a result, the body is unable to produce sufficient insulin, and individuals with...
Diabetes Mellitus: Type 2 and Gestational
Insulin: Dosing Regimen and Adverse Effects
The basal dose constitutes about 40%-50% of the total daily dose, with the rest as premeal insulin. The mealtime insulin dose should mirror...
Diabetes: Symptoms, Diagnosis, and Complications
Oral Hypoglycemic Agents: Biguanides and Glitazones

