- βCGM users gained nearly 6 extra months of healthy quality life versus finger-stick testing
- βCGM costs fell well below the official cost-effectiveness threshold, making it good value for money
- βFindings support broader insurance coverage and access to CGM for basal insulin users
| Journal | Journal of diabetes science and technology |
| Year | 2025 |
| Authors | Kim, Ilham, Alshannaq |
| PMID | 41121684 |
What Was Studied and Why It Matters
Millions of people with type 2 diabetes take a once-daily "basal" insulin injection to help control blood sugar. Traditionally, these patients check their glucose by pricking their finger several times a day. But continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) β small sensors worn on the skin that track blood sugar automatically β are becoming more widely available. The big question for patients, doctors, and health systems is: are CGMs worth the extra cost?
This 2025 study tackled that question for people in South Korea with type 2 diabetes on basal insulin, comparing real-time CGM against traditional finger-stick self-monitoring. The findings have relevance for patients and healthcare systems worldwide.
What the Researchers Did
Scientists used a well-established computer simulation called the IQVIA Core Diabetes Model to project health outcomes and costs over a lifetime β up to 50 years. They based their analysis on real patient data from South Korea's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. The key measurement they used was a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) β essentially a way of measuring both how long and how well someone lives.
What They Found
- People using real-time CGM gained an average of 0.49 additional quality-adjusted life years compared to those using finger sticks β roughly equivalent to gaining nearly six months of healthy life.
- CGM did cost more β approximately KRW 13.3 million more over a lifetime (roughly $10,000 USD).
- However, the cost per quality-adjusted life year gained was KRW 27.1 million β well below South Korea's official willingness-to-pay threshold of KRW 47 million, which is the benchmark used to decide if a treatment provides good value for money.
- This means CGM cleared the bar for being considered cost-effective in this healthcare system.
What This Means for Real Patients
If you or a loved one has type 2 diabetes and uses basal insulin, this research suggests that switching from finger-stick testing to a continuous glucose monitor isn't just more convenient β it may actually add meaningful healthy years to your life, and at a price that healthcare systems can reasonably justify.
CGMs remove much of the guesswork from diabetes management. Instead of a snapshot reading a few times a day, you get a continuous picture of how your blood sugar rises and falls β after meals, during exercise, or overnight. That richer information helps you and your doctor make smarter decisions.
For patients managing supplies and equipment, working with a trusted provider like MDS Diabetes can make accessing CGM devices and related diabetes supplies straightforward and stress-free.
Bottom Line
This study provides strong evidence that real-time continuous glucose monitoring is a cost-effective choice for type 2 diabetes patients on basal insulin. Beyond the economics, CGM offers a better quality of life β fewer painful finger sticks, better glucose awareness, and ultimately better health outcomes. Talk to your doctor about whether CGM is right for your diabetes management plan.