Real-time CGM significantly improves HbA1c and time in range in poorly controlled type 2 diabetes
Last updated May 7, 2026
Key finding
A 6-month RCT in 172 adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes found that the Glunovo real-time CGM system significantly reduced HbA1c by 1.4% compared to 0.6% with standard glucometer monitoring, and increased time in range from 70% to 89%.
This study tested a new real-time continuous glucose monitor (Glunovo) in 172 adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. After 6 months, those using the CGM saw their HbA1c drop by 1.4% (from 8.1% to 6.7%), compared to a 0.6% drop with standard fingerstick monitoring. Time in the target glucose range jumped from 70% to 89%, and patients reported much higher satisfaction with the device.
Quick read
Study at a glance
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs)
Follow-up
Medium-Term (3–12 mo)
Risk of bias
Some Concerns
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Plain-language summary
What this paper says
A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.
Study focus
A 6-month RCT in 172 adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes found that the Glunovo real-time CGM system significantly reduced HbA1c by 1.4% compared to 0.6% with standard glucometer monitoring, and increased time in range from 70% to 89%.
Published in
Journal Reference
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Lazzaroni E, Cimino V, Gandolfi A, et al. A Randomized Study of the Glunovo Real-time CGM Effectiveness in Individuals With Poorly Controlled Type 2 Diabetes. J Endocr Soc. 2026;10(2):bvaf165. doi:10.1210/jendso/bvaf165
Main Effects
↓ HbA1c reduced by 1.4% with rtCGM vs 0.6% with SMBG (p<0.001)
↑ Time in range improved from 70% to 89% with rtCGM (Δ=+18.4%, p<0.001)
↓ Time above range decreased from 25% to 9.3% with rtCGM (p<0.001)
Evidence Suggest
- Glunovo rtCGM significantly improves glycemic control in poorly controlled T2D compared to standard SMBG
- Patient satisfaction with rtCGM was high and improved substantially over the study period
- Overall well-being (WHO-5) showed no significant improvement despite better glycemic control
Who this applies to
Adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (HbA1c 7.5-11%) on various treatment regimens including basal-bolus insulin, basal-oral therapy, or noninsulin agents. Results are most relevant to patients who are not using CGM technology and have suboptimal glycemic control.
Keep in Mind
The study was open-label, so patients knew they were using CGM, which may have influenced behavioral changes and satisfaction scores. The SMBG group did not have CGM data available for TIR/TAR/TBR comparison. Some patients discontinued due to technical issues with the new device. The WHO-5 well-being index may not be sensitive enough to capture diabetes-specific quality of life changes.
Between the Lines
- Open-label design may introduce bias, particularly for patient-reported satisfaction outcomes
- SMBG group lacked CGM-derived metrics (TIR, TAR, TBR) for direct between-group comparison
- 7 participants (8.1%) in the rtCGM group discontinued due to device-related issues
- Single-center study in Italy may limit generalizability to other populations and healthcare settings
Evidence Library
Build your evidence library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
No ads. No tracking.
Focused on evidence, not advertising.
Secure & private
Your data is always protected.
Always up to date
New studies added every day.