Multicenter Randomized Trial of Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes and Recent-Onset Acute Myocardial Infarction: Results of the LIBERATES Trial
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the impact of modern glucose-monitoring strategies on glycemic and patient-related outcomes in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and recent myocardial infarction (MI) and assess cost effectiveness. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: LIBERATES was a multicenter two-arm randomized trial comparing self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) with intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM), also known as flash CGM, in individuals with T2D and recent MI, treated with insulin and/or a sulphonylurea before hospital admission. The primary outcome measure was time in range (TIR) (glucose 3.9–10 mmol/L/day) on days 76–90 post-randomization. Secondary and exploratory outcomes included time in hypoglycemia, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), clinical outcome, quality of life (QOL), and cost effectiveness. RESULTS: Of 141 participants randomly assigned (median age 63 years; interquartile range 53, 70), 73% of whom were men, isCGM was associated with increased TIR by 17 min/day (95% credible interval −105 to +153 min/day), with 59% probability of benefit. Users of isCGM showed lower hypoglycemic exposure (<3.9 mmol/L) at days 76–90 (−80 min/day; 95% CI −118, −43), also evident at days 16–30 (−28 min/day; 95% CI −92, 2). Compared with baseline, HbA1c showed similar reductions of 7 mmol/mol at 3 months in both study arms. Combined glycemic emergencies and mortality occurred in four isCGM and seven SMBG study participants. QOL measures marginally favored isCGM, and the intervention proved to be cost effective. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with SMBG, isCGM in T2D individuals with MI marginally increases TIR and significantly reduces hypoglycemic exposure while equally improving HbA1c, explaining its cost effectiveness. Studies are required to understand whether these glycemic differences translate into longer-term clinical benefit.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
isCGM has been positively linked with the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities Questionnaire (SDSCA-K).
“Furthermore, rtCGM has been associated with improvements in the medication effect score (MES) and the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) 50 while isCGM has been positively linked with the Summary of Diabetes Self‐Care Activities Questionnaire (SDSCA‐K). 28 , 30”
From Continuous glucose monitoring in noninsulin‐treated type 2 diabetes: A critical review of reported trials with an updated systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials (2025) · cites this paper as [30]
The Research Design and Methods > Outcome Measures section lists the quality-of-life questionnaires used in the trial—DTSQ, EQ5D-5L, and ADDQoL—but not SDSCA-K. The Results > Secondary and Exploratory Outcome Measures section reports patient-related outcomes without an SDSCA-K finding. Searches for “Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities Questionnaire,” “SDSCA-K,” and self-care activities found no passage establishing the claimed link. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 36 · Cited by 44
- Authors
- Ajjan, R. A., Heller, S. R., Everett, C. C., Vargas-Palacios, A., Higham, R., Sharples, L., Gorog, D. A., Rogers, A., Reynolds, C., Fernandez, C., Rodrigues, P., Sathyapalan, T., Storey, R. F., & Stocken, D. D.
- Affiliations
- University of Leeds (GB)
- University of Sheffield (GB)
- 4Academic Unit of Health Economics, University of Leeds, Leeds, U.K.
- London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
- University of Hertfordshire (GB)
- 8Patient representative
- University of Hull (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Ajjan, Ramzi A.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Diabetes Care
- Publisher
- American Diabetes Association
- Published
- 2022-12-14
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 441-449
- ISSN
- 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-5548
- PMC
- PMC9887626
- OpenAlex
- W4311472352
- Cited by
- 44
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 5
- FWCI
- 6.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Repository@Hull (Worktribe) (University of Hull) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Abbott Laboratories
- National Institute for Health Research
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Hyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patients
- Keywords
- intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring, flash glucose monitoring, self-monitoring of blood glucose, type 2 diabetes, acute myocardial infarction, time in range, hypoglycemia, glycemic control, HbA1c, quality of life, cost-effectiveness, insulin therapy, sulfonylureas
- MeSH terms
- Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review