Pharmacists and Continuous Glucose Monitoring: An Attachment Worth Having

Over the past several years, continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) have become a mainstay in diabetes self-management. Once a restricted intervention for individuals with type 1 diabetes who were insulin-dependent, requiring multiple glucose checks per day, CGMs are now accessible to most individuals with diabetes.^1-3 Although CGMs can be hard to set up, the elimination of finger sticks and the ability to share data with family and friends have truly made diabetes a collaborative treatment effort.¹ Pharmacists, who are already heavily involved in the diabetes collaborative care model, are great additions for CGM management.

The Journal of the American Pharmacist Association recently published a scoping review on pharmacist-managed clinic impact in continuous glucose monitoring.¹ The researchers reviewed 20 research articles published between 2019 and October 2025. Studies included were written in English that used hemoglobin A_1C (HbA_1C) as the most reported surrogate and used a variety of available CGMs. These studies represented 1724 patients.

The findings emphasized that, overall, CGM usage has significantly improved clinical outcomes for patients and increased interventions for pharmacists. But despite generally favorable clinical outcomes, some adults with type 1 diabetes felt overwhelmed by the data, experiencing anxiety due to heightened awareness of glucose levels.¹

Most studies used HbA_1C as the most common biomarker for glucose control despite also using CGM as an intervention.¹ Studies generally reported greater reductions in HbA_1C among patients receiving pharmacist-managed CGM services than among comparison groups. Several studies assessed pharmacist-managed clinics using the CGM parameters time in range, time above range, glucose variability, and average glucose, but the reporting was inconsistent.

Pharmacists used CGM data to identify opportunities for medication optimization, including dose adjustments, treatment intensification, and deprescribing. In one large study, deprescribing by a pharmacist occurred in 11.4% of patients based on timely CGM report.¹

A few studies noted economic and humanistic outcomes with CGM use. CGM access led to fewer emergency department visits and hospitalizations, while some patients and caregivers said continuous access increased their anxiety.

Health care experts prefer using HbA_1C for monitoring diabetes control. Given all that CGM data can provide, the authors concluded that diabetic guidelines should consider standardized reporting of CGM metrics in studies employing CGM-based interventions.¹ This could further expand pharmacists’ roles in CGM management to include assessment of patient-reported measures and the impact of direct and indirect cost burdens.

About the Author

Janae Mack is a clinical pharmacist with the US Department of Veteran Affairs.

REFERENCES

1. Lee JY, Chan D, Samra M, Tan M, Nguyen J. The impact of continuous glucose monitoring in pharmacist-supported diabetes care: evidence mapping through a scoping review. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2026;66(3):103034. doi:10.1016/j.japh.2026.103034

2. Choosing a CGM. American Diabetes Association. Accessed July 7, 2026. https://diabetes.org/about-diabetes/devices-technology/choosing-cgm

3. Anderson JE, Gavin JR, Kruger DF. Current eligibility requirements for CGM coverage are harmful, costly, and unjustified. Diabet Technol Therap. 2019;22(3). doi:10.1089/dia.2019.0303