The new FreeStyle libre flash glucose monitoring system improves the glycaemic control in a cohort of people with type 1 diabetes followed in real-life conditions over a period of one year

All Children Deserve to Be Safe, Mothers Too: Evidence and Rationale Supporting Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use in Gestational Diabetes Within the Medicaid Population

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a common metabolic disease of pregnancy that threatens the health of several million women and their offspring. The highest prevalence of GDM is seen in women of low socioeconomic status. Women with GDM are at increased risk of adverse maternal outcomes, including increased rates of Cesarean section delivery, preeclampsia, perineal tears, and postpartum hemorrhage. However, of even greater concern is the increased risk to the fetus and long-term health of the child due to elevated glycemia during pregnancy. Although the use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to reduce the incidence of maternal and fetal complications in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes, most state Medicaid programs do not cover CGM for women with GDM. This article reviews current statistics relevant to the incidence and costs of GDM among Medicaid beneficiaries, summarizes key findings from pregnancy studies using CGM, and presents a rationale for expanding and standardizing CGM coverage for GDM within state Medicaid populations.

Effectiveness of the flash glucose monitoring system in preventing severe hypoglycemic episodes and in improving glucose metrics and quality of life in subjects with type 1 diabetes at high risk of acute diabetes complications

AIMS

To assess the effectiveness of the intermittent-scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) system in preventing severe hypoglycemic episodes and in improving glucose parameters and quality of life.

METHODS

Four hundred T1D individuals were enrolled in a prospective real-word study with an intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring device during the 12-months follow-up. The primary endpoint was the incidence of severe hypoglycemic events.

RESULTS

82% of subjects were naïve to the use of the device (group A) and 18% were already wearing the system (group B). The cumulative incidence of severe hypoglycemia (SH) at 12 months was 12.06 per 100 person-year (95% CI: 8.35-16.85) in group A and 10.14 (95% CI: 4.08-20.90) in group B without inter-group differences. In group A there was a significant decrease in SH at 12 months compared to 3 months period (p = 0.005). Time in glucose range significantly increased in both groups accompanied with a significant decrease in glucose variability. HbA1c showed a progressive significant time-dependent decrease in group A. The use of the device significantly improved the perceived quality of life.

CONCLUSION

This study confirmed the effectiveness of the isCGM in reducing hypoglycemic risk without glucose deterioration, with potential benefits on adverse outcomes in T1D individuals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov registration no. NCT04060732.

Glycemic metrics in Japanese isCGM users - Analysis by diabetes type and therapy

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

The FreeStyle Libre (FSL) intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) system continually measures interstitial glucose levels and provides the data to users in numerical and graphical formats that guide users in their daily diabetes self-management. Although numerous studies have demonstrated the glycemic benefits of FSL in pediatric and adult populations, few studies have characterized FSL use specifically by Japanese adults with type 1 or 2 diabetes. We utilized established CGM metrics to assess glycemic control in a large cohort of Japanese adults with type 1 and 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 3,463 anonymized FSL users provided categorization into one of four therapy groups of interest: type 1 diabetes (n = 1,768), type 2 diabetes-multiple daily injections (MDI) (n = 612), type 2 diabetes-basal (BOI) (n = 343), and type 2 diabetes-non-insulin (NIT) (n = 740). Established CGM metrics were used to assess glycemic control.

RESULTS

All study groups showed relatively good glycemic control. Type 1 diabetes users showed the highest glucose variability (SD, 61 mg/dL; and %CV, 40%), above the established target level (%CV ≤ 36%). type 2 diabetes-MDI and type 2 diabetes-BOI users had similar levels of glucose variability (both within target). Type 2 diabetes-NIT users had the highest mean % time in range (TIR) (84.3%) and largest percentage of users that met the target of %TIR > 70% (87.4%). In contrast, type 1 diabetes users had the lowest mean %TIR (62.6%) and the lowest percentage meeting the established %TIR target (30.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

By utilizing CGM devices in daily diabetes care, both healthcare professionals and patients can monitor glycemic excursions and gain insights into their historical glucose control patterns.

Increase Access, Reduce Disparities: Recommendations for Modifying Medicaid CGM Coverage Eligibility Criteria

Numerous studies have demonstrated the clinical value of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) populations. However, the eligibility criteria for CGM coverage required by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) ignore the conclusive evidence that supports CGM use in various diabetes populations that are currently deemed ineligible. In an earlier article, we discussed the limitations and inconsistencies of the agency's CGM eligibility criteria relative to current scientific evidence and proposed practice solutions to address this issue and improve the safety and care of Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes. Although Medicaid is administered through CMS, there is no consistent Medicaid policy for CGM coverage in the United States. This article presents a rationale for modifying and standardizing Medicaid CGM coverage eligibility across the United States.

Effect of switch from flash glucose monitoring to flash glucose monitoring with real-time alarms on hypoglycaemia in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus

We aimed to evaluate the utility of the FreeStyle Libre 2 device for reducing time below range level 1 and level 2 compared with the Freestyle Libre device (without alarms) in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus. We conducted longitudinal observational follow-up study of a cohort of 100 people with type 1 diabetes mellitus who had switched from FreeStyle Libre to FreeStyle Libre 2 as part of routine clinical practice. Three months after switching to FreeStyle Libre 2, compared with results with FreeStyle Libre, there were a significant improvements in time below range level 1 (p = 0.02) and level 2 (p <0.001), time in range (p <0.001), time above range level 1 (p = 0.002), glucose management indicator (p= 0.04) and mean glucose (p= 0.04) during follow-up. Furthermore there was a significant direct association between age and change in TIR with a coefficient of 0.23, and a significant inverse association between age and change in TAR-1 with a coefficient of 0.11. Switching to a flash glucose monitoring system with alarms improves time below range, time in range and coefficient of variation in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially.

APPROACH

An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in screening, diagnosis, or monitoring of diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association for Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association.

CONTENT

Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the people with diabetes measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and also by laboratory analysis of HbA1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed.

SUMMARY

The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.

Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially.

APPROACH

An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in screening, diagnosis, or monitoring of diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association.

CONTENT

Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the people with diabetes measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and also by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed.

SUMMARY

The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.

The use of isCGM leads to marked reduction in severe hypoglycemia requiring emergency medical service or hospital admission and diabetic ketoacidosis in adult type 1 diabetes patients

AIMS

To determine the effect of the use of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) on acute diabetes-related complications in adult type 1 diabetes patients.

METHODS

Six hundred and forty-two adult type 1 diabetes patients with isCGM were identified from electronic health records in Siun sote region in Eastern Finland. A retrospective real-world analysis was conducted combining hospital admission and prehospital emergency service data to compare incidences of hypoglycemia requiring emergency medical support (EMS) involvement or hospital admission and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) before and after the start of isCGM. Data were collected from January 2015 to April 2020. Primary outcome was the rate of hypoglycemia requiring EMS involvement or hospital admission and DKA events. HbA1c was recorded at the start of isCGM and was compared with the last known HbA1c during the use of isCGM. The isCGM used in the study did not contain alarm functions.

RESULTS

Altogether 220 hypoglycemic events were identified during the study period. Incidence rate of hypoglycemic events decreased after the start of isCGM (72 events, incidence rate 50 events/1000 person-years) compared with the time before the start (148 events, incidence rate 76 events/1000 person-years) (p = 0.043). The incidence rate of DKA decreased after the start of isCGM compared with time before isCGM use (4 and 15 events/1000 person-years, respectively; p = 0.002). The change in mean HbA1c was - 0.28% (- 3.1 mmol/mol) between baseline and the last HbA1c measurement (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to lowering HbA1c in type 1 diabetes patients, isCGM is also effective in preventing acute diabetes-related complications such as hypoglycemia requiring EMS involvement or hospital admission and DKA.

Intermittent-scanned continuous glucose monitoring with low glucose alarms decreases hypoglycemia incidence in middle-aged adults with type 1 diabetes in real-life setting

OBJECTIVE

There is limited real-life data demonstrating that hypo-/hyperglycemic alarms added to continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) improve metabolic control in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). We evaluated the usefulness of switching from a flash or intermittent-scanned continuous glucose monitoring (is-CGM) device without low or higher glucose alarms to a is-CGM device with alarms to prevent hypoglycemia in adults with T1D.

METHODS

Individuals with T1D and fearful of hypoglycemia, prone to hypoglycemia unawareness, and/or experiencing severe hypoglycemia while using is-CGM Free Style Libre 1 (FSL1) were switched to FSL2 with individually-programmable low glucose alarms. The primary endpoint was the changes in % time below range (TBR%) <70 mg/dl [3.9 mmol/l] and <54 mg/dl [3.0 mmol/l] after 12 weeks on FSL2 compared with FSL1. Secondary endpoints were changes in % time in range (TIR% 70-180 mg/dl [3.9-10.0 mmol/l]), % time above range (TAR%) >180 [10.0 mmol/l], mean interstitial glucose, glycemic management indicator (GMI), interstitial glucose coefficient of variation (CV%), hemoglobin A1c, and sensor's scans/day.

RESULTS

We included 108 individuals (57.4 % men), aged 58.2 ± 17.3 [95 % CI: 55.0 to 61.5] years, with mean diabetes duration 25 ± 14.6 [95 % CI: 22.1 to 27.7] years. Among individuals, 40 (37.0 %) had hypoglycemia awareness with Clarke's score ≥4 and 19 (17.5 %) had a history of severe hypoglycemia. The median low glucose alarm threshold was 70 [IQR: 65-70] mg/dl (3.9 [IQR: 3.6-3.9] mmol/L). By comparison of first 12 weeks on FSL2 vs. last 12 weeks on FSL1, TBR% <70 mg/dl decreased from 4.5 ± 4.4 to 2.3 ± 2.8 % (p < 0.001), TBR% <54 mg/dl decreased from 1.4 ± 2.2 to 0.3 ± 0.9 % (p < 0.001). TIR% was not significantly different (51.5 ± 14.9 vs. 52.9 ± 16 % (p = 0.13)), nor was TAR% (43.8 ± 16.2 vs. 44.7 ± 16.5 % (p = 0.5)). CV% decreased from 39.4 ± 6.9 to 37.9 ± 6.1 % (p < 0.001). Those at risk for hypoglycemia (TBR >4 % and >1 %, respectively, at baseline) showed a significant decrease in the incidence of hypoglycemia <70 and <54 mg/dl (p < 0.0001). Patients' satisfaction with hypoglycemia alarms was high, since all individuals opted to pursue using individual alarm beyond the study period.

CONCLUSION

Switching from FSL1 to FSL2 with low glucose alarms reduced the frequency of hypoglycemia in middle-age adults with T1D, particularly in those who were prone to hypoglycemia awareness or severe hypoglycemia.

Important Decrease in Hospitalizations for Acute Diabetes Events Following FreeStyle Libre System Initiation in People with Type 2 Diabetes on Basal Insulin Therapy in France

Aims/Hypothesis: Initiation of insulin therapy in people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) may be necessary to achieve glycemic targets but is associated with acute diabetes events (ADEs), including severe hypoglycemia (SH) or diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). We assessed the impact of initiating FreeStyle Libre^® system (FSL) on hospitalizations for ADEs in people with T2DM on basal insulin only regimen±noninsulin antidiabetic drugs. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study of the French national Système National des Données de Santé reimbursement claims database (≈66 million French people) identified people with T2DM on basal insulin therapy receiving a first reimbursement of FSL between August 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018. Claims data for the 12 months before, and up to 24 months after FSL initiation, were analyzed. Hospitalizations for ADEs were identified, using ICD-10 codes as main or related diagnosis, for: SH events; DKA events; comas; and hyperglycemia-related admissions. Results: A total of 5933 people with T2DM on basal insulin therapy initiated FSL during the selection period. Of the patients, 78.9% were on basal insulin and other hypoglycemic agents. Among the 5933 patients identified, 2.01% had at least one hospitalization for any ADE in the year before FSL initiation, compared to 0.75% (1 year) and 0.60% (2 years). Reductions in ADEs were driven by 75% fewer DKA admissions, with a 44% reduction in SH admissions. These patterns of reduced ADEs persisted after 2 years, with a further 43% reduction in DKA rates. Conclusions/Interpretation: This study emphasizes the value of the FSL system in reducing ADEs in people with T2DM in France not on intensive insulin therapy and initially treated with basal-only insulin therapy.

Effects of a Diabetes Self-Management Education Program on Glucose Levels and Self-Care in Type 1 Diabetes: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

(1) Background: Several factors have been associated with the success of health education programs, such contact time, with better results being obtained from more intensive programs and early outcome measurement. Nurses play an essential role in educating patients with diabetes both in disease-management, therapeutic education, and healthy lifestyles promotion as well as emotion management. The objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of a nurse-led educational program based on patients with type 1 diabetes; (2) Methods: An experimental, two-group comparison design, 69 patients participated in the intervention group and 62 in control group. The control group received routine health education and follow-up. The intervention group received intensive educational program led by nurses. The effects were evaluated after 1 and 3 months of intervention; (3) Results: The differences between groups in sensor usage, knowledge, and diabetes self-care three months after the educational program were significant; (4) Conclusions: The program could help type 1 diabetes patients to improve the control rates for blood glucose. The continuous glucose monitoring sensor allowed knowing which parameters improved one and three months after the intervention. The hypothesis of the influence of the emotional state on glucose levels was confirmed.

The Frequency of Intermittently Scanned Glucose and Diurnal Variation of Glycemic Metrics

BACKGROUND

The relation between the frequency of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) and diurnal variation of time in range (TIR) and time below range (TBR) is unknown.

METHOD

A total of 163 persons with type 1 diabetes who used isCGM had glucose data for 60 days downloaded. Mean TIR and median TBR were calculated for 15-minute periods and presented for daytime and nighttime. The values for tertiles of scanning frequency were compared.

RESULTS

The 1st tertile (n = 53) of the population scanned <10 times; the 2nd tertile (n = 56) 10-13 times, and the 3rd tertile (n = 54) >13 per 24 hours. TIR (%, mean ± (SD)) increased significantly from the 1st to the 3rd scan tertile both during the day (43.8 ± 14.8, 52.0 ± 12.3, 62.1 ± 12.8) and the night (44.5 ± 17.3, 52.3 ± 18.5, 64.0 ± 13.9; P < .0001). In contrast, TBR (median, (IQR)) was not significantly associated with scan tertiles during daytime (3.5% (1.1-7.8), 4.4% (1.8-6.1), 3.5% (2.1-6.1); P = .85) or nighttime (3.8% (1.4-13.7), 5.0% (1.6-9.6), 5.7% (3.6-10.9); P = .24). In a multiple regression model, a 50% increase in 24-hour scanning frequency was associated with a 7.8 percentage point increase in TIR (95% CI, 5.6-10.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Increased scanning frequency was associated with a higher TIR both during daytime and nighttime with no change in TBR.

American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide updated and new evidence-based recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes mellitus to clinicians, diabetes-care teams, other health care professionals and stakeholders, and individuals with diabetes and their caregivers.

METHODS

The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology selected a task force of medical experts and staff who updated and assessed clinical questions and recommendations from the prior 2015 version of this guideline and conducted literature searches for relevant scientific papers published from January 1, 2015, through May 15, 2022. Selected studies from results of literature searches composed the evidence base to update 2015 recommendations as well as to develop new recommendations based on review of clinical evidence, current practice, expertise, and consensus, according to established American Association of Clinical Endocrinology protocol for guideline development.

RESULTS

This guideline includes 170 updated and new evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes. Recommendations are divided into four sections: (1) screening, diagnosis, glycemic targets, and glycemic monitoring; (2) comorbidities and complications, including obesity and management with lifestyle, nutrition, and bariatric surgery, hypertension, dyslipidemia, retinopathy, neuropathy, diabetic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease; (3) management of prediabetes, type 2 diabetes with antihyperglycemic pharmacotherapy and glycemic targets, type 1 diabetes with insulin therapy, hypoglycemia, hospitalized persons, and women with diabetes in pregnancy; (4) education and new topics regarding diabetes and infertility, nutritional supplements, secondary diabetes, social determinants of health, and virtual care, as well as updated recommendations on cancer risk, nonpharmacologic components of pediatric care plans, depression, education and team approach, occupational risk, role of sleep medicine, and vaccinations in persons with diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

This updated clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to assist with person-centered, team-based clinical decision-making to improve the care of persons with diabetes mellitus.

The Association of Personality Traits and Parameters of Glycemic Regulation in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Patients Using isCGM

This study aimed to examine the impact of personality on glycemic regulation in adult patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). The study group consisted of subjects with T1DM, who were ≥ 18 years of age. The study was conducted in two phases: At baseline, subjects completed the Croatian version of the International Personality Item Pool scale (IPIP50s) and a questionnaire designed to gather socioeconomic data, duration of diabetes, presence of chronic complications, presence of cardiovascular risk factors, frequency, and type of pre-existing hypoglycemic episodes per week. Blood and urine samples were collected and body mass index (BMI) was calculated. Each participant was provided with the intermittently scanned glucose monitoring system (isCGM) Freestyle Libre. During the second visit (3 months from the start of the trial), glycemic parameters were collected from the reports generated from the Freestyle Libre system. Estimated glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) values were significantly lower after three months compared to baseline HbA1c (Wilcoxon test, p < 0.001). An inverse correlation between the number of daily scans and degree of extraversion among subjects was observed, e.g., higher degrees of extraversion resulted in lower numbers of daily scans, while lower degrees of extraversion, i.e., introvertedness, resulted in higher numbers of daily scans (Rho = −0.238 p = 0.009). There was a positive correlation between emotional stability and time spent in hypoglycemia (Rho = 0.214; p = 0.02). In addition, a shorter duration of diabetes was associated with higher percentages of TIR and vice versa (p = 0.02). Investigating personality traits can be a useful tool for identifying patients predisposed to hypoglycemia and lower scanning frequency. Patients with a longer history of T1DM require closer follow-up and should be re-educated when necessary.

Validity of Danish public criteria for providing flash glucose monitoring to participants with type 1 diabetes-An explorative cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Flash glucose monitor (FGM) use is increasing. A set of Danish criteria for regulating the use has been released. We assessed their validity.

METHODS

Patients with type 1 diabetes attending our clinic were offered Freestyle Libre Sensor for 12 months and stratified into fulfilling the Danish regional criteria (RC+) or not (RC-). Primary endpoint was achieving individualized target HbA1c. Secondary endpoints were HbA1c reduction ≥5%, time in range (TIR), time below range (TBR), daily scans, change in median HbA1c, and noted experiences.

RESULTS

Two hundred seventy-eight participants were included. Forty-four participants met target HbA1c after 1 year. No difference between RC+ and RC- was observed (p = .136). Higher age was associated with probability to meet target HbA1c (RR = 3.15, [95% CI: 1.15, 8.62]) as was frequent scans (RR = 1.88, [95% CI: 0.99, 3.57]). One hundred twenty-three participants met an HbA1c reduction ≥5%, the majority represented in RC+ (p = .023). Higher baseline HbA1c was associated with a reduction of HbA1c ≥5% after 1 year (RR = 1.97, [95% CI: 1.40, 2.78]). There was no difference between RC+ and RC- in TIR, TBR, and daily scans. Positive experiences dominated from both participants and healthcare professionals. More positive experiences were noted from healthcare professionals in RC- (p = .003) but no difference in reported experiences among participants in RC+ and RC- (p = .880).

CONCLUSION

The Danish Regional Criteria seems not a valid tool for regulation of FGM. Participants of older age and participants with more frequent daily scans might benefit more from FGM.

Impact of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring on quality of life and glycaemic control in persons with type 1 diabetes: A 12-month follow-up study in real life

BACKGROUND AND AIM

We sought to prospectively assess the impact of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) initiation in the glycaemic control and quality of life (QoL) in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) patients followed in real-live conditions.

METHODS

Prospective, observational, cohort, single-centre and single-arm study conducted between September 2018 and March 2020, enrolling adults with T1DM with at least one year of diagnosis, interested in using isCGM. After training at isCGM initiation, CGM metrics and QoL were assessed at baseline and 12 months.

RESULTS

Thirty-six individuals (55.6% male) were included; median age at inclusion was 49.0 (43.5-62.5)years and the mean(±SD) duration of T1DM was 25.5 ± 12.0 years. Median (interquartile range) HbA1c decreased from 7.6(7.0-8.7)% to 7.4(6.8-7.7)% at 12 months (p = 0.02), driven by the subgroup of individuals with baseline HbA1c ≥ 7.5%. The number of scans per day increased from 7.0(5.5-10.0) to 10.0(7.0-14.0) but no correlation was found between the number of daily scans and CGM metrics. Total daily insulin dose remained unchanged, however the proportion of basal insulin decreased, and the proportion of bolus insulin increased over time. Multiple QoL subscales scores improved significantly, including disease-burden subscale for which TIR proved to be a significant predictive factor.

CONCLUSION

isCGM improved both glycaemic control, namely time in range, time below range and glycaemic variability, as well as QoL scores in the long term. The increase of the bolus insulin proportion suggests a behavioural change. However, the appraisal of our results must consider our substantial rate of drop-out limiting the external validity of our findings.

Reductions in HbA1c with Flash Glucose Monitoring Are Sustained for up to 24 Months: A Meta-Analysis of 75 Real-World Observational Studies

INTRODUCTION

Real-world evidence (RWE) confirms that reductions in HbA1c for children and adults with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) and adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are associated with use of the FreeStyle Libre system. This current meta-analysis aims to investigate whether HbA1c benefits are sustained over 24 months and to identify patterns of change in HbA1c for users of the FreeStyle Libre system for people living with T1DM or T2DM.

METHODS

A bibliographic search up to December 2020 identified 75 studies reporting data on change in lab HbA1c in 30,478 participants with type 1 (n = 28,063; 62 trials) or type 2 diabetes (n = 2415; 13 trials) using the FreeStyle Libre system, including observations on children, adolescents and adults. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model.

RESULTS

Reductions in HbA1c at 3-4 months were similar for adults with T1DM (- 0.53%, 95% CI - 0.69 to - 0.38) or with T2DM (- 0.45%, 95% CI - 0.57 to - 0.33), continuing through 4.5-7.5 months in T1DM (- 0.42%, 95% CI - 0.58 to - 0.27) and in T2DM (- 0.59%, 95% CI - 0.80 to - 0.39). Meta-regression analysis shows that higher starting HbA1c is correlated with greater reductions in HbA1c in T1DM and in T2DM. These patterns of change in HbA1c were sustained for 24 months in T1DM and for at least 12 months in T2DM.

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis of RWE confirms that using the FreeStyle Libre system is associated with significant reductions in HbA1c for adults with T1DM or with T2DM. Reductions are greater for people with higher baseline HbA1c and are sustained for 24 and 12 months in T1DM and TD2M respectively.

How use of continuous glucose monitoring can address therapeutic inertia in primary care

A significant proportion of individuals with diabetes have suboptimal glycemic management. Studies have shown that persistent hyperglycemia significantly increases the risks for both acute and long-term microvascular and macrovascular complications of diabetes. A key contributor to suboptimal glycemic management is therapeutic inertia in which clinicians delay intensifying therapy when patients are not meeting their glycemic goals. During the past five years, an increasing number of individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D) have adopted use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for daily measurement of glucose levels. As demonstrated in numerous clinical trials and real-world observational studies, use of CGM improves glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and reduces the occurrence and severity of hypoglycemia. However, for primary care clinicians who are unfamiliar with using CGM, integrating this technology into clinical practice can be daunting. In this article, we discuss the benefits and rationale for using CGM compared with traditional blood glucose monitoring (BGM), review the evidence supporting the clinical value of CGM in patients with T1D and T2D, and describe how use of CGM in primary care can facilitate appropriate and more timely therapy adjustments.

Impact of flash glucose monitoring on quality of life and glycaemic control parameters in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus⋆

INTRODUCTION

Flash glucose monitoring (FGM) improves some glycaemic control variables and quality of life parameters.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to evaluate the quality of life and glycaemic control parameters after initiating FGM in patients with type 1 diabetes (DM1) in clinical practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective observational study in DM1 patients that started using FGM between June 2019 and April 2020. We analysed their scores on the Diabetes Quality of Life (DQOL) questionnaire, Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS), Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) and glycaemic control parameters at baseline and 3 months after the FGM onset.

RESULTS

We recruited 114 patients, 56% male, mean age 37.2 (standard deviation, SD 12.4), with 18.7 (SD 11.5) years of DM1, 24.6% of which used continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. Differences were observed (baseline vs. 3 months) in the DTSQ score (22 [15.5-27] vs. 25 [22-28], P < 0.001) and in the DQOL score (88 [74-104] vs. 84 [70-101], P = 0.017) but not in the DDS score. HbA1c was 7.8% (SD 1.3) vs. 7.4% (SD 1.1) (P < 0.001), without improvement in other glycaemic control variables, except for the mean number of hypoglycaemic events/14 days: 14 (SD 9) at baseline vs. 11.5 (SD 7) at 3 months (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The initiation of FGM, combined with a structured educational programme, was associated with improvement in quality of life and patient satisfaction in DM1 patients. An improvement in HbA1c and a reduction in the number of hypoglycaemia events was observed, but not in the rest of glycaemic control parameters.

A guide for the use of LibreView digital diabetes platform in clinical practice: Expert paper of the Italian Working Group on Diabetes and Technology

Wider access to continuous glucose monitoring systems, including flash glucose monitoring, has enabled people with diabetes to achieve lower HbA1c levels and reduce the amount of time they spend in hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia, and has improved their quality of life. An International Consensus Panel proposed different target glucose ranges and recommendations according to different ages and situations (adults, young people and children with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, as well as elderly people who are at higher risk of hypoglycaemia, and women with diabetes during pregnancy). In this expert opinion, we interpret the international recommendations in the context of established clinical practice for diabetes care, and propose three different step-by-step algorithms to help the healthcare professionals use the most innovative glucose metrics, including time in glucose ranges, glucose management indicator, coefficient of variation, and ambulatory glucose profile. In detail, we focus on glucose metrics as measured by the FreeStyle Libre system and as visualized on the LibreView digital diabetes platform to support appropriate interpretation of flash glucose monitoring data. This is specifically structured for healthcare professionals and general practitioners who may have a low level of confidence with diabetes technology, with the aim of optimizing diabetes management, ensuring effective use of healthcare resources and to maximise outcomes for people with diabetes.

Effects of Nursing Diabetes Self-Management Education on Glycemic Control and Self-Care in Type 1 Diabetes: Study Protocol

(1) Background: Type 1 diabetes is a chronic disease that creates a high demand and responsibility for patient self-care. Patient education, self-care training and the management of derived complications are great challenges for nurses. The objective of this project is to evaluate the efficacy of a therapeutic education program for type 1 diabetes. (2) Methods: Participants recruited to the study will be adult patients with diagnosed type 1 diabetes attending the clinic at the study site. A nurse diabetes educator will deliver a four-session education program. A two-group randomized controlled trial will be used in this study, with an intervention group and a control group. The subjects included in the experimental group will attend some health education sessions, while control group participants will receive the existing standard care provided by the endocrinology and nutrition unit of the hospital. Measurements and evaluations will be conducted at the baseline prior to the intervention and at 1 and 3 months from the intervention. (3) Conclusions: The primary outcome is improving patients' knowledge about diet and treatment management. Secondary outcomes are improving patients' glycemic control and mood. The findings from this study will help to determine the effect of diabetes education about self-care and treatment in patients with diabetes, as well as helping to decrease short-term and long-term complications and reduce health care costs.

Flash monitor initiation is associated with improvements in HbA1c levels and DKA rates among people with type 1 diabetes in Scotland: a retrospective nationwide observational study

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

We assessed the real-world effect of flash monitor (FM) usage on HbA_1c levels and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and severe hospitalised hypoglycaemia (SHH) rates among people with type 1 diabetes in Scotland and across sociodemographic strata within this population.

METHODS

This study was retrospective, observational and registry based. Using the national diabetes registry, 14,682 individuals using an FM at any point between 2014 and mid-2020 were identified. Within-person change from baseline in HbA_1c following FM initiation was modelled using linear mixed models accounting for within-person pre-exposure trajectory. DKA and SHH events were captured through linkage to hospital admission and mortality data. The difference in DKA and SHH rates between FM-exposed and -unexposed person-time was assessed among users, using generalised linear mixed models with a Poisson likelihood. In a sensitivity analysis, we tested whether changes in these outcomes were seen in an age-, sex- and baseline HbA_1c-matched sample of non-users over the same time period.

RESULTS

Prevalence of ever-FM use was 45.9% by mid-2020, with large variations by age and socioeconomic status: 64.3% among children aged <13 years vs 32.7% among those aged ≥65 years; and 54.4% vs 36.2% in the least-deprived vs most-deprived quintile. Overall, the median (IQR) within-person change in HbA_1c in the year following FM initiation was -2.5 (-9.0, 2.5) mmol/mol (-0.2 [-0.8, 0.2]%). The change varied widely by pre-usage HbA_1c: -15.5 (-31.0, -4.0) mmol/mol (-1.4 [-2.8, -0.4]%) in those with HbA_1c > 84 mmol/mol [9.8%] and 1.0 (-2.0, 5.5) mmol/mol (0.1 [-0.2, 0.5]%) in those with HbA_1c < 54 mmol/mol (7.1%); the corresponding estimated fold change (95% CI) was 0.77 (0.76, 0.78) and 1.08 (1.07, 1.09). Significant reductions in HbA_1c were found in all age bands, sexes and socioeconomic strata, and regardless of prior/current pump use, completion of a diabetes education programme or early FM adoption. Variation between the strata of these factors beyond that driven by differing HbA_1c at baseline was slight. No change in HbA_1c in matched non-users was observed in the same time period (median [IQR] within-person change = 0.5 [-5.0, 5.5] mmol/mol [0.0 (-0.5, 0.5)%]). DKA rates decreased after FM initiation overall and in all strata apart from the adolescents. Estimated overall reduction in DKA event rates (rate ratio) was 0.59 [95% credible interval (CrI) 0.53, 0.64]) after FM vs before FM initiation, accounting for pre-exposure trend. Finally, among those at higher risk for SHH, estimated reduction in event rates was rate ratio 0.25 (95%CrI 0.20, 0.32) after FM vs before FM initiation.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

FM initiation is associated with clinically important reductions in HbA_1c and striking reduction in DKA rate. Increasing uptake among the socioeconomically disadvantaged offers considerable potential for tightening the current socioeconomic disparities in glycaemia-related outcomes.

Marked Improvement in A1C Levels After Initiation of Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring Is Maintained Over 4 Years in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to demonstrate the effectiveness of long-term use of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) in adult patients with type 1 diabetes.

DESIGN AND METHODS

In this retrospective real-world study, 689 patients with type 1 diabetes who were >18 years of age and using isCGM were identified from the electronic patient records in North Karelia, Finland. A1C data were collected before and after the initiation of isCGM. The primary outcome was a change in the mean A1C over time after isCGM started.

RESULTS

The greatest reductions in the mean A1C levels were observed 6 months (-0.54% [-5.9 mmol/mol], P <0.001) and 12 months (-0.42% [-4.6 mmol/mol], P <0.001) after the initiation of isCGM. Reduction in A1C remained significant for 4 years, although the mean reduction in A1C was -0.18% (-2.05 mmol/mol) (P = 0.009) at 48 months compared with baseline. In a subgroup analysis, patients with a baseline A1C >9% (75 mmol/mol) benefited the most from initiation of isCGM (reduction -0.97% [-10.6 mmol/mol], P <0.001, at 12 months and -0.92% [-10.1 mmol/mol], P <0.001, at 48 months). Neither sex nor age at the start of isCGM were correlated with A1C reduction.

CONCLUSION

Use of isCGM improves A1C levels significantly in adult patients with type 1 diabetes. Significant reduction in A1C persisted over 4 years of use, although the effect diminished over time.

Flash glucose monitoring and automated bolus calculation in type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections: a 26 week randomised, controlled, multicentre trial

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

We aimed to compare the effects of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) and carbohydrate counting with automated bolus calculation (ABC) with usual care.

METHODS

In a randomised, controlled, open-label trial carried out at five diabetes clinics in the Capital Region of Denmark, 170 adults with type 1 diabetes for ≥1 year, multiple daily insulin injections and HbA_1c > 53 mmol/mol (7.0%) were randomly assigned 1:1:1:1 with centrally prepared envelopes to usual care (n = 42), ABC (n = 41), isCGM (n = 48) or ABC+isCGM (n = 39). Blinded continuous glucose monitoring data, HbA_1c and patient-reported outcomes were recorded at baseline and after 26 weeks. The primary outcome was change in time in range using isCGM vs usual care.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were comparable across arms: mean age 47 (SD 13.7) years, median (IQR) diabetes duration 18 (10-28) years and HbA_1c 65 (61-72) mmol/mol (8.1% [7.7-8.7%]). Change in time in range using isCGM was comparable to usual care (% difference of 3.9 [-12-23], p = 0.660). The same was true for the ABC and ABC+isCGM arms and for hypo- and hyperglycaemia. Also compared with usual care, using ABC+isCGM reduced HbA_1c (4 [95% CI 1, 8] mmol/mol) (0.4 [0.1, 0.7] %-point) and glucose CV (11% [4%, 17%]) and improved treatment satisfaction, psychosocial self-efficacy and present life quality. Treatment satisfaction also improved by using isCGM alone vs usual care. Statistical significance was maintained after multiple testing adjustment concerning glucose CV and treatment satisfaction with ABC+isCGM, and treatment satisfaction with isCGM. Discontinuation was most common among ABC only users, and among completers the ABC was used 4 (2-5) times/day and the number of daily isCGM scans was 5 (1-7) at study end.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

isCGM alone did not improve time in range, but treatment satisfaction increased in technology-naive people with type 1 diabetes and suboptimal HbA_1c. The combination of ABC+isCGM appears advantageous regarding glycaemic variables and patient-reported outcomes, but many showed resistance towards ABC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03682237.

FUNDING

The study is investigator initiated and financed by the Capital Region of Denmark.

Leveraging advances in diabetes technologies in primary care: a narrative review

Primary care providers (PCPs) play an important role in providing medical care for patients with type 2 diabetes. Advancements in diabetes technologies can assist PCPs in providing personalised care that addresses each patient's individual needs. Diabetes technologies fall into two major categories: devices for glycaemic self-monitoring and insulin delivery systems. Monitoring technologies encompass self-measured blood glucose (SMBG), where blood glucose is intermittently measured by a finger prick blood sample, and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices, which use an interstitial sensor and are capable of giving real-time information. Studies show people using real-time CGM have better glucose control compared to SMBG. CGM allows for new parameters including time in range (the time spent within the desired target glucose range), which is an increasingly relevant real-time metric of glycaemic control. Insulin pens have increased the ease of administration of insulin and connected pens that can calculate and capture data on dosing are becoming available. There are a number of websites, software programs, and applications that can help PCPs and patients to integrate diabetes technology into their diabetes management schedules. In this article, we summarise these technologies and provide practical information to inform PCPs about utility in their clinical practice. The guiding principle is that use of technology should be individualised based on a patient's needs, desires, and availability of devices. Diabetes technology can help patients improve their clinical outcomes and achieve the quality of life they desire by decreasing disease burden.KEY MESSAGESIt is important to understand the role that diabetes technologies can play in primary care to help deliver high-quality care, taking into account patient and community resources. Diabetes technologies fall into two major categories: devices for glycaemic self-monitoring and insulin delivery systems. Modern self-measured blood glucose devices are simple to use and can help guide decision making for self-management plans to improve clinical outcomes, but cannot provide "live" data and may under- or overestimate blood glucose; patients' monitoring technique and compliance should be reviewed regularly. Importantly, before a patient is provided with monitoring technology, they must receive suitably structured education in its use and interpretation.Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is now standard of care for people with type 1 diabetes and people with type 2 diabetes on meal-time (prandial) insulin. Real-time CGM can tell both the patient and the healthcare provider when glucose is in the normal range, and when they are experiencing hyper- or hypoglycaemia. Using CGM data, changes in lifestyle, eating habits, and medications, including insulin, can help the patient to stay in a normal glycaemic range (70-180 mg/dL). Real-time CGM allows for creation of an ambulatory glucose profile and monitoring of time in range (the time spent within target blood glucose of 70-180 mg/dL), which ideally should be at least 70%; avoiding time above range (>180 mg/dL) is associated with reduced diabetes complications and avoiding time below range (<70 mg/dL) will prevent hypoglycaemia. Insulin pens are simpler to use than syringes, and connected pens capture information on insulin dose and injection timing.There are a number of websites, software programs and applications that can help primary care providers and patients to integrate diabetes technology into their diabetes management schedules. The guiding principle is that use of technology should be individualised based on a patient's needs, desires, skill level, and availability of devices.

Factors influencing the effectiveness of using flash glucose monitoring on glycemic control for type 1 diabetes in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

In 2017, 35000 Saudi children and adolescents were living with a type 1 diabetes (T1D) diagnosis. Diabetic complications are minimized upon strengthened glycemic regulation. The annual cost of treating diabetic patients with complications was four-fold higher than for patients without complications. The use of flash glucose monitoring (FGM) enables better diabetes treatment and thereby improves glycemic control. Understanding the factors that affect effectiveness of FGM will help enhance the device’s use and management of hospital resources, resulting in improved outcomes.

AIM

To investigate factors that affect effectiveness of the FGM system for glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels/glycemic control among T1D patients.

METHODS

A retrospective empirical analysis of T1D patient records from King Abdul-Aziz University Hospital and Prince Sultan Military Medical City was performed. T1D patients who began FGM between 2017 and 2019 were included.

RESULTS

The data included 195 T1D patients (70 males and 125 females) with a mean age of 23.6 ± 8.1 years. Among them, 152 patients used multiple daily injection and 43 used an insulin pump. The difference in HbA1c level from baseline and after using FGM was -0.60 ± 2.10, with a maximum of 4.70 and a minimum of -6.30. There was a statistically significant negative correlation between the independent variables (age, duration of diabetes, level of engagement) and HbA1c. The group with the highest HbA1c mean (9.85) was 18-years-old, while the group with the lowest HbA1c mean (7.87) was 45-years-old. Patients with a low level of engagement (less than six scans per day) had the highest HbA1c mean (9.84), whereas those with a high level of engagement (more than eight scans per day) had the lowest HbA1c mean (8.33).

CONCLUSION

With proper education, FGM can help people with uncontrolled T1D over the age of 18 years to control their glucose level.

Flash glucose monitoring system: impact on glycemic control and body mass index in type 1 diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVE

Flash glucose monitoring (FGM) is increasingly used in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) management. This study aimed to assess glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body mass index (BMI) in the first year of FGM use in patients with T1D and to identify predictive factors of benefit associated with its use.

METHODS

Retrospective study of T1D patients, using FGM for ≥ 6 months and under intensive insulin therapy with multiple daily injections.

RESULTS

In 179 patients with a median (Md) age of 43.0 years (P25 31.0; P75 52.0) and disease duration of 18.0 years (P25 10.0; P75 28.0), initial HbA1c was 7.9% (P25 7.2; P75 8.8) and initial BMI was 24.0 kg/m2 (P25 21.9; P75 26.2). With FGM, HbA1c improved significantly to 7.6% (P25 7.0; P75 8.3) at 6 months and 7.7% (P25 6.95; P75 8.5) at 12 months (p < 0.05), with more patients with HbA1c < 7% (16.1% vs 22.5%) and fewer patients with HbA1c ≥ 8% (49.1% vs 35.8%) (p < 0.05). Initial HbA1c 8.0-8.9% (HR 1.886; 95% CI 1.321-2.450) and ≥ 9.0% (HR 3.108, 95% CI 2.454-3.761) predicted greater HbA1c reduction. BMI increased significantly, especially between 6 and 12 months (BMI Md 23.8 [P25 21.9; P75 26.2] kg/m2 and 24.0 [P25 22.0; P75 26.2] kg/m2, respectively) (p < 0.05). Overweight (HR 4.319, 95% CI 3.185-5.453) and obesity (HR 8.112, 95% CI 3.919-12.306) predicted greater weight gain.

CONCLUSION

FGM use was associated with significant improvement in HbA1c, mainly in patients with worse previous glycemic control. It was also associated with increased BMI, especially if baseline BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2, so weight control strategies should be emphasized.

Real-World Studies Support Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Independently of Treatment Regimen

Numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated the glycemic benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes. Although RCTs remain the gold standard clinical study design, findings from these trials do not necessarily reflect the effectiveness of CGM or reveal the feasibility and wider applications for use in broader real-life settings. This review evaluates recent real-world evidence (RWE) demonstrating the value of CGM to improve clinical outcomes, such as avoidance of severe hypoglycemic and hyperglycemic crises, and improved measures of psychological health and quality of life. Additionally, this review considers recent RWE for the role of CGM to enhance health care resource utilization, including prediction of T1D and applications in gestational diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and monitoring during surgery.

Insurance Coverage for Emerging Diabetes Technologies: Payers' Perspective

Advances in glucose monitoring and insulin delivery technologies have led to the development of innovative self-management tools, such as continuous glucose monitoring, automated insulin delivery systems, and smart connected insulin pens. Although the clinical advantages of today's emerging diabetes technologies are well documented, the cost of integrating these tools into clinical practice must be considered to sustain the financial viability of both public and private insurers. Most clinicians are unfamiliar with the process the commercial insurers follow when making these decisions. This article reviews the key factors the insurers consider when determining eligibility criteria.

Landscape of Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) and Integrated CGM: Accuracy Considerations

Continuous glucose monitoring devices have significantly improved in many respects compared with earlier versions. As sensor accuracy improved, U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved a nonadjunctive indication for use that no longer required confirmatory blood glucose monitoring. This article discusses the performance characteristics and regulatory classifications for the current systems that are relevant to informed clinical decision-making.

Budget Impact of the Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in Medicaid Diabetes Beneficiaries Treated with Intensive Insulin Therapy

Objective: We assessed the economic impact of using the newest flash continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) among Medicaid beneficiaries with diabetes treated with intensive insulin therapy (IIT). Research Design and Methods: A budget impact analysis was created to assess the impact of increasing the proportion of Medicaid beneficiaries with diabetes on IIT, who use flash CGM by 10%. The analysis included glucose monitoring device costs, cost savings due to reductions in glycated hemoglobin, severe hypoglycemia events, and hyperglycemic emergencies such as diabetic ketoacidosis. The net change in costs per person to adopt flash CGM for three populations treated with IIT (adults with type 1 diabetes [T1D] or type 2 diabetes [T2D], and children and adolescents with T1D or T2D) was calculated; these costs were used to estimate the impact of increasing flash CGM use by 10% to the U.S. Medicaid budget over 1-3 years. Results: The analysis found that flash CGM demonstrated cost savings in all populations on a per patient basis. Increasing use of flash CGM by 10% was associated with a $19.4 million overall decrease in costs over the year and continued to reduce costs by $25.3 million in years 2 and 3. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the new flash CGM system can offer cost savings compared to blood glucose monitoring in Medicaid beneficiaries treated with IIT, especially T1D adults, and children and adolescents. These findings support expanding access to CGM by Medicaid plans.

Just Because You Can, Doesn't Mean You Should … Now. A Practical Approach to Counseling Persons with Diabetes on Use of Optional CGM Alarms

Advances in glucose monitoring technologies have led to the development of different types of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) platforms: traditional CGM and flash CGM. Both platforms provide critical glucose data that enable persons with diabetes (PwDs) to make more informed decisions in their self-management. Until recently, a key advantage of traditional CGM over flash CGM was the availability of automatic alarms that warn users about current or impending hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia. However, with the introduction of the FreeStyle Libre 2 (FSL2) system (Abbott Diabetes Care, Alameda, CA), PwD can now utilize flash CGM with the option to set low and high glycemic thresholds and receive alarms when these thresholds are crossed. In addition, having the option to use or not use the alarms may attract previous traditional CGM users who grew fatigued by constant alarms. However, despite the additional layer of safety that alarms provide, many PwD are reluctant to switch from self-monitoring of blood glucose to CGM due to concerns about how alarms could impact the quality of their daily lives. This reluctance is heightened by their perceptions that use of alarms is mandatory. Because the functionality of the FSL2 alarms differs from current traditional CGM devices, it is important that clinicians become familiar with these differences. Moreover, clinicians will be challenged to help PwD overcome their concerns about the use of alarms. This article presents a comprehensive description of the FSL2 alarms function and provides guidance to clinicians when counseling PwDs about the strengths, limitations, and various ways that the FSL2 alarms can be used in daily diabetes self-management.

What's Wrong with This Picture? A Critical Review of Current Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Coverage Criteria for Continuous Glucose Monitoring

Numerous studies have demonstrated the clinical value of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes populations. However, the eligibility criteria for CGM coverage required by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) ignore conclusive evidence that supports CGM use in various diabetes populations that are currently deemed ineligible. This article discusses the limitations and inconsistencies of the CMS eligibility criteria relative to current scientific evidence and proposes workable solutions to address this issue and improve the safety and care of all individuals with diabetes.

Integrating Continuous Glucose Monitoring Into Clinical Practices and Patients' Lives

Numerous studies have demonstrated the clinical benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in individuals with diabetes. Within ongoing innovations in CGM technology, individuals now have an expanding array of options that allow them to select the device that meets their individual needs and preferences. Although demand for CGM in primary care continues to grow, many clinicians are reluctant to prescribe this technology due to their unfamiliarity with the various devices, uncertainty about which devices are best suited to each patient and the feasibility of using CGM. This article reviews the features and functionality of the most recent commercially available CGM devices and provides guidance for integrating CGM use into clinical practices.

Association between Flash Glucose Monitors and A1C: A Retrospective Pre-Post Analysis

Background: Randomized controlled trials have investigated the effect of continuous glucose monitors on hemoglobin A1C; however, more evidence is needed to justify their use and expand insurance coverage. Additionally, there are few published studies investigating the A1C lowering effect of flash glucose monitors (FGMs) in broad diabetes populations with varying insulin requirements. This analysis aimed to help fill this gap in medical literature and help clinicians evaluate costs/benefits when considering FGMs for their patients with diabetes. Objectives: To determine the association between FGM use and A1C reduction in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus regardless of insulin dependence. Methods: Pharmacy dispensing records were used to identify patients for inclusion. Patients who received a FGM from a University of Utah pharmacy between July 7, 2018 and July 7, 2020 were included. Patients who did not receive at least an 84-day supply of FGM sensors or did not have a baseline or follow-up A1C were excluded. Baseline and follow-up A1Cs, defined as A1Cs that are within one year before and 3-12 months after the FGM dispense date, were collected for each patient. New diabetes medications within a six-month window of the initial FGM dispense date were also recorded. Outcome variables were collected before and after patients received their first FGM (pre-FGM vs. post-FGM, respectively). The primary outcome was the difference between baseline and follow-up A1C for each patient. Secondary outcomes were the difference in baseline and follow-up A1C for various clinical subgroups within the overall sample. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize baseline characteristics and outcome data. Paired Student's t-tests were used to evaluate outcome differences (α=0.05). Results: Fifty-seven patients (50.8% male; mean age: 49 years) were included. For the primary outcome, the average baseline and follow-up A1Cs were 9.33% and 8.32%, respectively for a difference of -1.01% ([95%CI -1.31:-0.72]; p<0.0001). Conclusions: The use of FGMs is associated with decreases in A1C within a cohort of patients at one health system. Further effort to determine impact of FGM on clinical and economic outcomes is warranted.

Practical Considerations for Initiating and Utilizing Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Clinical Practice

Use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to improve clinical outcomes in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D), including improved glycemic control, better treatment adherence, and an increased understanding of their treatment regimens. Retrospective analysis of CGM data allows clinicians and patients to identify glycemic patterns that support and facilitate informed therapy adjustments. There are currently 2 types of CGM systems: real-time CGM (rtCGM) and flash CGM. The FreeStyle Libre 2 (FSL2) is the newest flash CGM system commercially available. Because the FSL2 system was only recently cleared for use in the US, many endocrinologists and diabetes specialists may be unfamiliar with the strengths, limitations, and potential of the FSL2 system. This article focuses on practical approaches and strategies for initiating and using flash CGM in endocrinology and diabetes specialty practices.

Effects of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) represented a major breakthrough in the treatment of type 1 diabetes. The aim of the present meta-analysis is to assess the effect of continues glucose monitoring (CGM) and flash glucose monitoring (FGM), on glycemic control in type 1 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present analysis includes randomized clinical trials comparing CGM or FGM with SMBG, with a duration of at least 12 weeks, identified in Medline or clinicaltrials.gov. The principal endpoint was HbA1c at the end of the trial. A secondary endpoint was severe hypoglycemia. Mean and 95% confidence intervals for HbA1c and Mantel-Haenzel odds ratio [MH-OR] for severe hypoglycemia were calculated, using random effect models. A sensitivity analysis was performed using fixed effect models. In addition, the following secondary endpoints were explored, using the same methods: time in range, health-related quality of life, and treatment satisfaction. Separate analyses were performed for trials comparing CGM with SMBG, and those comparing CGM + CSII and SMBG + MDI and CGM-regulated insulin infusion system (CRIS) and CSII + SMBG.

RESULTS

CGM was associated with a significantly lower HbA1c at endpoint in comparison with SMBG (- 0.24 [- 0.34, - 0.13]%); CGM was associated with a significantly lower risk of severe hypoglycemia than SMBG. Treatment satisfaction and quality of life were not measured, or not reported, in the majority of studies. FGM showed a significant reduction in the incidence of mild hypoglycemia and an increased treatment satisfaction, but no significant results are shown in HbA1c. CGM + CSII in comparison with SMBG + MDI was associated with a significant reduction in HbA1c. Only two trials with a duration of at least 12 weeks compared a CRIS with SMBG + CSII; HbA1c between the two treatment arms was not statistically significant (difference in means: - 0.23 [- 0.91; 0.46]%; p = 0.52).

CONCLUSION

GCM compared to SMBG has showed a reduction in HbA1c and severe hypoglycemia in patient with type 1 diabetes. The comparison between CGM + CSII and SMBG + MDI showed a large reduction in HbA1c; it is conceivable that the effects of CSII + CGM on glycemic control additives. The only comparison available between FGM and SMBG was conducted in patients in good control.

Utilizing continuous glucose monitoring in primary care practice: What the numbers mean

Use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to improve glycemia control, reduce hypoglycemia, lower glycemic variability and enhance quality of life for individuals with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes. However, many primary care physicians may be unfamiliar with the how CGM data can interpreted and acted upon. As adoption of this technology continues to grow, primary care physicians will be challenged to integrate CGM into their clinical practices. This article is intended to provide clinicians with practical guidance in interpreting and utilizing CGM data with their patients.

Assessment of FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring System Implementation in Real Life Clinical Setting: A Prospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

In this study, we investigated the effectiveness of FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring (FGM) implementation in a real life clinical setting with the emphasis on the effect of initial education on the use of the FGM system.

METHODS

This prospective observational study included 425 diabetes type 1 subjects followed up for 3 to 12 months (320 were followed up to 3 months, 267 up to 6 months and 147 up to period of one year). An FGM sensor was placed at study entry and all participants were educated through a period of 5 days on sensor usage and self-management of glycemia with follow up visits every 3 months.

RESULTS

HbA1c values significantly decreased from baseline (T0) to 3 months (T3) (p < 0.001), with a drop from 7.48% ± 0.1% to 7.30 ± 0.1%. There was no change in time spent in hypoglycemia from T3 to T12, although there was a decreasing trend present. The change in HbA1c values in the entire cohort was driven by change in the subgroup of patients with HbA1c ≥7% with a drop from 8.22% ± 1.14% to 7.68% ± 1.26% (p < 0.0001) in the first 3 months. Also, in individuals performing SMBG less than 5 times per day, there was a steady decrease in HbA1c levels up to 6 months (p < 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively) as opposed to those who performed SMBG ≥5 times per day.

CONCLUSIONS

The improvement in HbA1c was mainly driven by the increase in the number of scans per day. The subjects with poorer glycemic control and those who seldom performed SMBG benefited the most.

Expert Panel Recommendations for Use of Standardized Glucose Reporting System Based on Standardized Glucometrics Plus Visual Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP) Data in Clinical Practice

This expert panel of diabetes specialists aimed to provide guidance to healthcare providers on the best practice in the use of innovative continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) techniques through a practical and implementable document that specifically addresses the rationale for and also analysis and interpretation of the new standardized glucose reporting system based on standardized CGM metrics and visual ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) data. This guidance document presents recommendations and a useful algorithm for the use of a standardized glucose reporting system in the routine diabetes care setting.

Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Summary Review of Recent Real-World Evidence

Optimizing glycemic control remains a shared challenge for clinicians and their patients with diabetes. Flash continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides immediate information about an individual's current and projected glucose level, allowing users to respond promptly to mitigate or prevent pending hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia. Large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated the glycemic benefits of flash CGM use in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. However, whereas RCTs are mostly focused on the efficacy of this technology in defined circumstances, real-world studies can assess its effectiveness in wider clinical settings. This review assesses the most recent real-world studies demonstrating the effectiveness of flash CGM use to improve clinical outcomes and health care resource utilization in populations with diabetes.

Improving HbA1c Control in Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes Using Flash Glucose Monitoring: A Retrospective Observational Analysis in Two German Centres

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate change in laboratory-measured HbA1c in patients with either type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) on insulin therapy following initiation of the FreeStyle Libre™ flash glucose monitoring system.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study on adults with T1D or T2D on insulin, who were started on the FreeStyle Libre system as part of standard care. HbA1c was recorded at initiation and at 3-month intervals thereafter.

RESULTS

The analysis included 131 patients with T1D and 176 patients with T2D on insulin. Mean HbA1c decreased significantly by 3 months following initiation of the FreeStyle Libre system, both in T1D (- 0.75%, p < 0.001) and in T2D (- 0.54%, p < 0.001). Reductions were maintained for 12 months. Change from 3 to 12 months was not significant either in T1D or T2D. Subgroup analysis showed significant reduction in patients with a baseline HbA1c > 7.5-10%, both in T1D (- 0.59%, p < 0.001) and in T2D on insulin (- 0.62%, p < 0.005) at 12 months. Reductions for subjects with HbA1c > 10% were - 4.66% in T1D and - 3.73% in T2D. No change was seen for subjects with a baseline HbA1c ≤ 7.5% (58 mmol/mol). Linear regression confirms that baseline HbA1c is strongly negatively correlated with subsequent change in HbA1c in T1D and in T2D.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with T1D or T2D show a reduction in HbA1c by 3 months following initiation of the FreeStyle Libre system. The mean fall in HbA1c at 3 months is strongly negatively correlated with starting HbA1c. This reduction is maintained over 12 months. The significant benefit is seen in patients with a starting HbA1c > 7.5% (58 mmol/mol).

7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2021

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

People with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia have a delayed reaction to performing a glucose scan during hypoglycaemia: a prospective observational study

AIMS

Considering that people with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IAH) have a delayed perception of hypoglycaemia, the question arises whether they perform scans later in case of hypoglycaemia than people without IAH. We assessed whether time to performing a scan after reaching hypoglycaemia while using a flash glucose monitoring (flash GM) system is different in people with IAH compared with people without IAH.

METHODS

Ninety-two people with type 1 diabetes [mean (± sd) age 42 ± 14 years, HbA1c 57 ± 9 mmol/mol] using a flash GM system for 3 months were included. Flash GM data were assessed for time until scan after reaching hypoglycaemia level 1 (< 3.9 mmol/l) and level 2 (< 3.0 mmol/l) and compared for type 1 diabetes with vs. without IAH via unpaired t-test/Mann-Whitney U test (P < 0.05).

RESULTS

Significant differences were found only for the delay between reaching hypoglycaemia and scan between people with and without IAH for Gold score [hypoglycaemia level 1: IAH 78 (51-105) min vs. without IAH 63 (42-89) min, P = 0.03; night-time hypoglycaemia level 2: IAH 140 (107-227) min vs. without IAH 96 (41-155) min, P = 0.004] and Pedersen-Bjergaard score [hypoglycaemia level 1: IAH 76 (52-97) min vs. without IAH 54 (38-71) min, P = 0.011; night-time hypoglycaemia level 1: IAH 132 (79-209) min vs. without IAH 89 (59-143) min, P = 0.011; night-time hypoglycaemia level 2: IAH 134 (66-212) min vs. without IAH 80 (37-131) min, P = 0.002). Data are shown as median (i.q.r.).

CONCLUSIONS

Time until scan after reaching hypoglycaemia might be an objective assessment tool for IAH, but needs to be investigated comprehensively in future studies.

Effects of unrestricted access to flash glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes

AIMS

We assessed adherence and long-term effects on HbA1c of unrestricted access to flash glucose monitoring (FGM) in a single diabetes centre.

METHODS

In this observational study, we reviewed data files for all 411 patients with type 1 diabetes attending our clinic during a 2-year period. Adherence was reported in those who initiated FGM in our clinic (n = 321). Baseline and final HbA1c were noted for patients who continued FGM for more than 6 months without clinical conditions or interventions at baseline that could interfere with the effect of FGM on glycaemic control (n = 270).

RESULTS

After 2 years, the fraction of patients using FGM increased from 3% to 72%. Adherence to FGM was 88%. Baseline and final HbA1c was median (interquartile range) 63 mmol/mol (56, 74) (7.9% (7.3, 8.9)) and 59 mmol/mol (53, 68) (7.6% (7.0, 8.4)), respectively. The estimated difference final-baseline HbA1c was -4 mmol/mol (95% CI -5, -3) (-0.4% (-0.5, -0.3)) (P < .001). No significant difference was seen for patients with baseline HbA1c ≤ 7% (53 mmol/mol). The interval from initiation of FGM to final HbA1c was median 562 days (IQR 417, 662). The number of scans/day was median 11 (IQR 8, 13) and correlated negatively with both final and baseline HbA1c but not with change in HbA1c.

CONCLUSIONS

Following the introduction of unlimited access, nearly three quarters of the patients were FGM users. Long-term adherence was good, and HbA1c improved in all patients except in those with optimal glycaemic control at baseline.

Efficacy and safety of flash glucose monitoring in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Flash glucose monitoring (FGM) is a factory-calibrated sensor-based technology for the measurement of interstitial glucose. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess its efficacy and safety in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus and Web of Science were searched in July 2019. Twelve studies with a follow-up longer than 8 weeks, evaluating 2173 patients on prandial insulin, multiple daily insulin injections or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion were included. The following data were extracted: HbA1c, time in range, time above 180 mg/dL, time below 70 mg/dL, frequency of hypoglycemic events, number of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) measurements, total daily insulin dose, patient-reported outcomes, adverse events, and discontinuation rate. A comparison with SMBG was conducted.

RESULTS

FGM use was associated with a reduction in HbA1c (-0.26% (-3 mmol/mol); p=0.002) from baseline to the last available follow-up, which correlated with HbA1c levels at baseline (-0.4% (-4 mmol/mol) for each 1.0% (11 mmol/mol) of HbA1c above 7.2% (55 mmol/mol)). Also, a decrease in time below 70 mg/dL was found (-0.60 hours/day; p=0.04). Favorable findings in patient-reported outcomes and no device-related serious adverse events were reported. When compared with SMBG, FGM was characterized by no statistically different change in HbA1c (p=0.09), with lower number of SMBG measurements per day (-3.76 n/day; p<0.001) and risk of discontinuation (relative risk=0.42; p=0.001). A limited number of studies, with a heterogeneous design and usually with a short-term follow-up and without specific training, were found.

CONCLUSIONS

The present review provides evidence for the use of FGM as an effective strategy for the management of diabetes.

Flash glucose monitoring helps achieve better glycemic control than conventional self-monitoring of blood glucose in non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The present study aimed to evaluate the effects of flash glucose monitoring (FGM) and conventional self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) on glycemic control in patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this 24-week, multicenter, open-label, randomized (1:1), parallel-group study, patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes at five hospitals in Japan were randomly assigned to the FGM (n=49) or SMBG (n=51) groups and were provided each device for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level, and was compared using analysis of covariance model that included baseline values and group as covariates.

RESULTS

Forty-eight participants in the FGM group and 45 in the SMBG group completed the study. The mean HbA1c levels were 7.83% (62.1 mmol/mol) in the FGM group and 7.84% (62.2 mmol/mol) in the SMBG group at baseline, and the values were reduced in both FGM (-0.43% (-4.7 mmol/mol), p<0.001) and SMBG groups (-0.30% (-3.3 mmol/mol), p=0.001) at 12 weeks. On the other hand, HbA1c was significantly decreased from baseline values in the FGM group, but not in the SMBG group at 24 weeks (FGM: -0.46% (-5.0 mmol/mol), p<0.001; SMBG: -0.17% (-1.8 mmol/mol), p=0.124); a significant between-group difference was also observed (difference -0.29% (-3.2 mmol/mol), p=0.022). Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire score was significantly improved, and the mean glucose levels, SD of glucose, mean amplitude of glycemic excursions and time in hyperglycemia were significantly decreased in the FGM group compared with the SMBG group.

CONCLUSIONS

Glycemic control was better with FGM than with SMBG after cessation of glucose monitoring in patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000026452, jRCTs041180082.