Acceptability and satisfaction from CGM use
A significantly higher proportion of participants in the unblinded group
agreed that it was relevant (93.3% vs 76.9%, p =0.005) and were
motivated to track their daily behaviours (92.0% vs 75.6%,p =0.006), compared to participants in the blinded group (Table
S3). Overall, the participants in the unblinded group had a higher user
satisfaction score (4.4 + 0.7 vs 4.1 + 0.5,p =0.002) than the blinded group. However, the proportion of CGM
users having at least 70% of the CGM data captured from the total
wear-time was lower in the unblinded group, compared to the blinded
group (32.1% vs 70.1%, p =0.002) (Table S3). Adverse events
occurred in 29.3% from those in the unblinded group, and in 36.7% from
the blinded group, with the most common adverse event being skin
reactions at the site of sensor application (Table S4). Amongst the
users in the unblinded group, >90% reported that they
would scan their sensors at 4- or 8-hour intervals, and 36% reported
that they never missed a scan. Approximately 56% were not motivated to
change their lifestyle behaviours and 81.3% never correlated their meal
intake with use of the sensor (Table S5).