Continuous glucose monitors are becoming a staple in diabetes care, and a new scoping review highlights how pharmacist‑run clinics are shaping their use.
Pharmacist‑led CGM services show better HbA1c outcomes
The review, published in the Journal of the American Pharmacist Association, examined 20 studies released between 2019 and October 2025. All of the papers were in English and focused on hemoglobin A1C as the primary measure of glucose control. Together, the research covered 1,724 patients who used a variety of commercially available CGM devices.
Across the board, the analysis found that patients who received pharmacist‑managed CGM support achieved larger drops in HbA1c than those who did not. While many studies also tracked CGM‑specific metrics such as time in range or glucose variability, the reporting of these figures was inconsistent, leaving a gap in the evidence base.
Related: Patients Lead Push for Better Antimicrobial Stewardship
Pharmacists used the continuous data streams to pinpoint medication adjustments, ranging from dose changes to treatment intensification and even deprescribing. One large study noted that they discontinued or altered therapy for 11.4 % of patients after reviewing timely CGM reports.
Patient experience and economic impact
Beyond the clinical numbers, the review touched on humanistic outcomes. Several investigations reported fewer emergency department visits and hospital admissions among CGM users, suggesting a cost‑saving angle for health systems. However, the same access to real‑time glucose information sometimes heightened anxiety, especially among adults with type 1 diabetes who felt overwhelmed by the constant flow of data.
Economic analyses were sparse, but where they appeared, they pointed to reduced acute care utilization. The authors argued that more standardized reporting of CGM metrics could help clarify both clinical and cost benefits, potentially expanding the pharmacist’s role to include assessment of patient‑reported outcomes and financial implications.
Related: 10 Benefits of Taking Fildena Daily
Guidelines currently favor HbA1c for monitoring, but the authors of the review recommend that professional societies adopt a more uniform approach to reporting CGM‑derived metrics. Such a shift could streamline research, improve comparability across studies, and reinforce the value pharmacists bring to diabetes teams.
One notable limitation of the literature is the uneven focus on CGM parameters other than HbA1c. While some studies measured time in range, time above range, and average glucose, the lack of consistent methodology makes it hard to draw firm conclusions about the broader impact of CGM data on therapeutic decisions.
Despite these gaps, the overall trend points toward a positive influence of pharmacist‑managed CGM programs on both clinical outcomes and health‑care utilization. As CGM devices become more widely available, the role of pharmacists in interpreting data, adjusting therapy, and supporting patients appears poised to grow.