Determinants of implementation of continuous glucose monitoring for patients with Insulin-Treated type 2 diabetes: a national survey of primary care providers

Table 2 Multivariable linear regression analysis: determinants of PCP intent to discuss and facility uptake of CGM

	PCP uptake *^{, †} (n = 1204)		Facility uptake ^‡,§ (n = 97)
Scale	B	P-value	B	P-value
Benefits of CGM	0.25	< 0.001	0.10	0.03
PCP Workload Capacity	0.27	< 0.001	-0.04	0.40
PCP Knowledge about CGM	0.54	< 0.001	-0.009	0.84
Access to Resources for CGM	0.001	0.98	-0.02	0.55
Support from Leadership & Other Services	0.17	< 0.001	0.18	< 0.001
Covariates
Female	0.03	0.63	0.06	0.39
Years in Clinical Practice > 10	-0.18	< 0.001	0.07	0.33
Less than 5 Clinical Sessions per Week	-0.02	0.74	-0.08	0.31
Care delivered in a VAMC	0.14	0.09	0.002	0.98
Intercept	-0.42	0.02	-0.47	0.03
F Value	128.34	< 0.001	3.70	< 0.001
R²	0.49		0.29

* PCP uptake measured by survey question “I am likely to initiate discussions about starting CGM in the next 3 months with eligible patients who have type 2 diabetes,” on a 5-point Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree scale
^† Model for PCP uptake was at respondent level and included all scales scores and clinician gender, years in service, part-time status, and facility type
^‡ Facility uptake measured by the proportion of patients aged 18 + with type 2 diabetes on insulin who had a PCP visit and received a prescription for a CGM sensor between August 1, 2023 and March 30, 2024
^§ Model for facility-level CGM uptake was at facility level and included all scale scores and clinician gender, years in service, part-time status, and facility type

ISSN: 2731-4553