Current Eligibility Requirements for CGM Coverage Are Harmful, Costly, and Unjustified

Expansion of Medicaid Coverage of Continuous Glucose Monitor Reduces Health Disparity in Children and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Continuous glucose monitor (CGM) usage improves glycemia in people with type 1 diabetes (PWD) and is accepted as the standard of care. The CGM utilization is lower in patients with public insurance and minorized ethnicities. In 2022, California Medicaid reduced its barriers to obtaining CGM coverage for PWD. It is unknown whether this policy change is sufficient to increase CGM usage. We hypothesize that the change in Medicaid coverage improved CGM uptake in children and young adults with T1D.

METHODS

Data were extracted from electronic medical record of a large urban children's hospital in 2021 and 2022. The CGM usage was determined based on clinician documentation or the presence of CGM downloads. Kruskal-Wallis tests, Wald tests, and χ2 tests were used to test hypothesis (P < .05). Mixed effects logistical regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

We included 878 and 892 PWD (age ≤ 21 years) in 2021 and 2022, respectively. In 2022, Medicaid insured 59.3% of patients. Between 2021 and 2022, CGM usage did not change for privately insured patients (84%) but increased from 41% to 58% for patients receiving Medicaid. In our mixed effects logistic regression model, CGM usage was higher in 2022 and in English speakers. Public insurance, black race, and patients' age were negatively associated with CGM usage.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that Medicaid expansion of CGM coverage increases its utilization for pediatric PWD but did not eliminate the disparity. Future studies are needed to identify barriers that preclude equity in technology uptake.

Best practices and rationale for expanding Medicaid access to continuous glucose monitoring

Numerous studies have demonstrated that use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) significantly improves overall glycemic control and reduces the frequency and severity of hypoglycemic events in individuals treated with intensive insulin, nonintensive insulin, and noninsulin therapies, with reductions in both all-cause and diabetes-related health care resource utilization and lower costs. However, implementation of CGM including prescribing and assessment of the ambulatory glucose profile to make clinical decisions in primary care settings is low. A recent pilot program was initiated at MetroHealth System (Cleveland, Ohio) to implement a CGM integration program for primary care offices throughout the system. Based on the experience and successes from this health system as well as current literature, rationale will be discussed to support the expansion of CGM to individuals enrolled in all Medicaid programs.

Not all healthcare inequities in diabetes are equal: a comparison of two medically underserved cohorts

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes disparities exist based on socioeconomic status, race, and ethnicity. The aim of this study is to compare two cohorts with diabetes from California and Florida to better elucidate how health outcomes are stratified within underserved communities according to state location, race, and ethnicity.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Two cohorts were recruited for comparison from 20 Federally Qualified Health Centers as part of a larger ECHO Diabetes program. Participant-level data included surveys and HbA1c collection. Center-level data included Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set metrics. Demographic characteristics were summarized overall and stratified by state (frequencies, percentages, means (95% CIs)). Generalized linear mixed models were used to compute and compare model-estimated rates and means.

RESULTS

Participant-level cohort: 582 adults with diabetes were recruited (33.0% type 1 diabetes (T1D), 67.0% type 2 diabetes (T2D)). Mean age was 51.1 years (95% CI 49.5, 52.6); 80.7% publicly insured or uninsured; 43.7% non-Hispanic white (NHW), 31.6% Hispanic, 7.9% non-Hispanic black (NHB) and 16.8% other. Center-level cohort: 32 796 adults with diabetes were represented (3.4% with T1D, 96.6% with T2D; 72.7% publicly insured or uninsured). Florida had higher rates of uninsured (p<0.0001), lower continuous glucose monitor (CGM) use (18.3% Florida; 35.9% California, p<0.0001), and pump use (10.2% Florida; 26.5% California, p<0.0001), and higher proportions of people with T1D/T2D>9% HbA1c (p<0.001). Risk was stratified within states with NHB participants having higher HbA1c (mean 9.5 (95% CI 8.9, 10.0) compared with NHW with a mean of 8.4 (95% CI 7.8, 9.0), p=0.0058), lower pump use (p=0.0426) and CGM use (p=0.0192). People who prefer to speak English were more likely to use a CGM (p=0.0386).

CONCLUSIONS

Characteristics of medically underserved communities with diabetes vary by state and by race and ethnicity. Florida's lack of Medicaid expansion could be a factor in worsened risks for vulnerable communities with diabetes.

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.

Health literacy of patients using continuous glucose monitoring

BACKGROUND

Low health literacy and numeracy are associated with poor health outcomes and lower self-efficacy. Continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) can improve diabetes management, but their benefits may be limited by health literacy levels.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to characterize health literacy levels of ambulatory care patients using CGMs to manage their diabetes in 1 urban health system. Secondary aims were to identify specific knowledge deficits related to CGM education and determine predictors of self-rated comfort with and understanding of CGM use.

METHODS

Participants with type 1 or type 2 diabetes using CGMs were identified using electronic medical records. Participants completed a telephone survey, including the Health Literacy Scale/Subjective Numeracy Scale (HLS/SNS) and an investigator-developed survey assessing CGM comfort and understanding. Descriptive statistics were reported for demographic information. The associations between patient characteristics and survey responses were evaluated using the chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, or Wilcoxon rank-sum test.

RESULTS

Eighty-two participants completed the surveys. The median HLS/SNS score for study participants was 80 (Interquartile range 71-89). Associations were found between HLS/SNS scores and education level, reported income, and private insurance coverage. Participants with higher HLS/SNS scores reported higher levels of CGM understanding and comfort. Fifty-one percent of participants (n = 42) reported no or inadequate training prior to CGM initiation. Better A1C results (<8%) were associated with higher self-rated responses in the investigator-developed survey.

CONCLUSION

CGMs should not be withheld from individuals with low health literacy. Incorporating baseline health literacy assessment and offering literacy sensitive training will help optimize the benefits derived from this technology.

Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Adolescents and Young Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Can Improve Quality of Life

OBJECTIVE

Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is effective for diabetes management in cases of type 1 diabetes and adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) but has not been assessed in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with T2D. The objective of this pilot interventional study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of real-time CGM use in AYAs with T2D.

METHODS

Adolescents and young adults (13-21 years old) with T2D for six months or more and hemoglobin A1c (A1c) greater than 7%, on any Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment regimen, were included. After a blinded run-in period, participants were given access to a real-time CGM system for 12 weeks. The use and acceptability of the real-time CGM were evaluated by sensor usage, surveys, and focus group qualitative data.

RESULTS

Participants' (n = 9) median age was 19.1 (interquartile range [IQR] 16.8-20.5) years, 78% were female, 100% were people of color, and 67% were publicly insured. Baseline A1c was 11.9% (standard deviation ±2.8%), with median diabetes duration of 2.5 (IQR 1.4-6) years, and 67% were using insulin. Seven participants completed the study and demonstrated statistically significant improvement in diabetes-related quality of life, with the mean Pediatric Quality of Life inventory (PedsQL) diabetes score increasing from 70 to 75 after using CGM (P = .026). Focus group results supported survey results that CGM use among AYAs with T2D is feasible, can improve quality of life, and has the potential to modify behavior.

CONCLUSION

Real-time CGM is feasible and acceptable for AYAs with T2D and may improve the quality of life of patients with diabetes. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed to assess the effects on glycemic control and healthy lifestyle changes.

Addressing disparities in technology use among patients with type 1 diabetes: a review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The benefits of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) and insulin pumps in the management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) are widely recognized. However, glaring disparities in access exist, particularly in marginalized and economically disadvantaged groups that stand to benefit significantly from diabetes technology use. We will review recent data describing drivers of these disparities and approaches to address the disparities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several qualitative studies were published in recent years that have investigated the drivers of disparities reported over the past decades. These studies report that in addition to typical barriers seen in the diabetes technology, marginalized patients have unique challenges that make insulin pumps and CGMs less accessible.

SUMMARY

Barriers to technology use in these groups include stigmatization, lack of support, financial constraints, provider biases, stringent insurance policies, and clinic infrastructure. To address inequities, multifaceted strategies across community, healthcare, and provider sectors are essential. Key initiatives include enhancing public awareness, refining health policies, ensuring access to high-quality care, and emphasizing patient-centered approaches. The equitable use of technology can narrow the gap in T1D outcomes. The social and economic implications of suboptimal T1D management further underscore the urgency of these efforts for both improved health outcomes and cost-efficient care.

Patterns and Trends in Continuous Glucose Monitoring Utilization Among Commercially Insured Individuals With Type 1 Diabetes: 2010-2013 to 2016-2019

Prior studies suggest that only ∼30% of patients with type 1 diabetes use continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), but most studies to date focused on children and young adults seen by endocrinologists or in academic centers. This study examined national trends in CGM utilization among commercially insured children and adults with type 1 diabetes. Overall, CGM utilization was 20.12% in 2010-2013 and 49.78% in 2016-2019, reflecting a 2.5-fold increase in utilization within a period of <10 years. Identifying populations with low CGM use is a necessary first step in developing targeted interventions to increase CGM uptake.

Current Practices in Operationalizing and Addressing Racial Equity in the Provision of Type 1 Diabetes Care: Insights from the Type 1 Diabetes Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative Health Equity Advancement Lab

OBJECTIVE

Medical racism contributes to adverse health outcomes. Type 1 Diabetes Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative (T1DX-QI) is a large population-based cohort engaged in data sharing and quality improvement to drive system changes in T1D care. The annual T1DX-QI survey included questions to evaluate racial equity in diabetes care and practices to promote equity.

METHODS

The annual T1DX-QI survey was administered to participating clinics in fall 2022 and had a 93% response rate. There were 50 responses (pediatric: 66% and adult: 34%). Questions, in part, evaluated clinical resources and racial equity. Response data were aggregated, summarized, and stratified by pediatric/adult institutions.

RESULTS

Only 21% pediatric and 35% adult institutions felt that all their team members can articulate how medical racism contributes to adverse diabetes outcomes. Pediatric institutions reported more strategies to address medical racism than adult (3.6 vs 3.1). Organizational strategies to decrease racial discrimination included employee trainings, equity offices/committees, patient resources, and hiring practices. Patient resources included interpreter services, transportation, insurance navigation, and housing and food assistance. Hiring practices included changing prior protocols, hiring from the community, and diversifying workforces. Most institutions have offered antiracism training in the last year (pediatric: 85% and adult: 72%) and annually (pediatric: 64% and adult: 56%). Pediatric teams felt that their antiracism training was effective more often (pediatric: 60% and adult: 45%) and more commonly, they were provided resources (pediatric: 67% and adult: 47%) to help address inequities.

CONCLUSION

Despite increased antiracism training, insufficient institutional support and perceived subeffective training still represent obstacles, especially in adult institutions. Sharing effective strategies to address medical racism will help institutions take steps to mitigate inequities.

Barriers and Facilitators to Uptake of Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Youth

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to identify factors impacting the acceptability of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

In this single-center study, semistructured interviews were conducted with AYAs with T2DM and their parents to determine attitudes about CGM, including barriers and facilitators. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and evaluated using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty AYAs and 10 parents participated (n = 30 total). AYAs were mean age 16.5 years (SD 2.2, range = 13.7-20.1) and had median diabetes duration of 1.3 years. Most were female (65%) and from minoritized background (40% non-Hispanic Black, 10% Hispanic, 5% Asian). Seven (35%) used CGM. The primary facilitator elicited was convenience over glucose meter use. Important barriers included the impact of physically wearing the device and drawing unwanted attention, desire for AYA privacy, and inadequate education about the device.

CONCLUSIONS

In this diverse sample of AYAs with T2DM and their parents, CGM was generally regarded as convenient, although concerns about worsening stigma and conflict with parents were prevalent. These findings can guide the development of patient-centered approaches to CGM for AYAs with T2DM, a critical step toward reducing inequities in diabetes technology uptake.

Reducing hypoglycemia from overtreatment of type 2 diabetes in older adults: The HypoPrevent study

BACKGROUND

Hypoglycemia from overtreatment is a serious but underrecognized complication among older adults with type 2 diabetes. However, diabetes treatment is seldom deintensified. We assessed the effectiveness of a Clinical Decision Support (CDS) tool and shared decision-making (SDM) in decreasing the number of patients at risk for hypoglycemia and reducing the impact of non-severe hypoglycemic events.

METHODS

HypoPrevent was a pre-post, single arm study at a five-site primary care practice. We identified at-risk patients (≥65 years-old, with type 2 diabetes, treated with insulin or sulfonylureas, and HbA1c  < 7.0%). During three clinic visits over 6 months, clinicians used the CDS tool and SDM to assess hypoglycemic risk, set individualized HbA1c goals, and adjust use of hypoglycemic agents. We assessed the number of patients setting individualized HbA1c goals or modifying medication use, changes in the population at risk for hypoglycemia, and changes in impact of non-severe hypoglycemic events using a validated patient-reported outcome tool (TRIM-HYPO).

RESULTS

We enrolled 94 patients (mean age-74; mean HbA1c (±SD)-6.36% ± 0.43), of whom 94% set an individualized HbA1c goal at either the baseline or first follow-up visit. Ninety patients completed the study. Insulin or sulfonylurea use was decreased or eliminated in 20%. An HbA1c level before and after goal setting was obtained in 53% (N = 50). Among these patients, the mean HbA1c increased 0.53% (p < 0.0001) and the number of patients at-risk decreased by 46% (p < 0.0001). Statistically significant reductions in the impact of hypoglycemia during daily activities occurred in both the total score and each functional domain of TRIM-HYPO.

CONCLUSIONS

In a population of older patients at risk for hypoglycemia, the use of a CDS tool and SDM reduced the population at risk and decreased the use of insulin and sulfonylureas. Using a patient-reported outcome tool, we demonstrated significant reductions in the impact of hypoglycemia on daily life.

Benchmarking Diabetes Technology Use Among 21 U.S. Pediatric Diabetes Centers

The American Diabetes Association's Standards of Care in Diabetes recommends the use of diabetes technology such as continuous glucose monitoring systems and insulin pumps for people living with type 1 diabetes. Unfortunately, there are multiple barriers to uptake of these devices, including local diabetes center practices. This study aimed to examine overall change and center-to-center variation in uptake of diabetes technology across 21 pediatric centers in the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative. It found an overall increase in diabetes technology use for most centers from 2021 to 2022 with significant variation.

Patient Perspectives on the Benefits and Challenges of Diabetes and Digital Technology

Diabetes technology continues to evolve, advancing with our understanding of human biology and improving our ability to treat people with diabetes. Diabetes devices are broadly classified into the following categories: glucose sensors, insulin delivery devices, and digital health care technology (i.e., software and mobile applications). When supported by education and individually tailored, technology can play a key role in optimizing outcomes. Digital devices assist in diabetes management by tracking meals, exercise, sleep, and glycemic measurements in real time, all of which can guide physicians and other clinicians in their decision-making. Here, as people with diabetes and patient advocates, as well as diabetes specialists, primary care providers, and diabetes care and education specialists, we present our perspectives on the advances, benefits, and challenges of diabetes technology in primary care practices.

Diabetes Specialists Value Continuous Glucose Monitoring Despite Challenges in Prescribing and Data Review Process

BACKGROUND

Diabetes clinicians are key facilitators of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provision, but data on provider behavior related to CGM use and CGM generated data are limited.

METHODS

We conducted a national survey of providers caring for people with diabetes on CGM-related opinions, facilitators and barriers to prescription, and data review practices.

RESULTS

Of 182 survey respondents, 73.2% worked at academic centers, 70.6% were endocrinologists, and 70.7% practiced in urban settings. Nearly 70% of providers reported CGM use in the majority of their patients with type 1 diabetes. Half of the providers reported CGM use in 10% to 50% of their patients with type 2 diabetes. All respondents believed CGM improved quality of life and could optimize diabetes control. We found no differences in reported rates of CGM use based on providers' years of experience, patient volume, practice setting, or clinic type. Most providers reviewed CGM data each visit (97.7%) and actively involved patients in the data interpretation (98.8%). Only 14.1% of clinicians reported reviewing CGM data without any prompting from patients or their family members outside of visits. Most providers (80.7%) reported their CGM data review was valued by patients although only half reported having adequate time (45.1%) or an efficient process (56.1%) to do so.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite uniform support for CGM by providers, ongoing challenges related to cost, insurance coverage, and difficulties with prescription were major barriers to CGM use. Increased use of CGM in appropriate populations will necessitate improvements in data access and integration, clearly defined workflows, and decreased administrative burden to obtain CGM.

An Opportunity for Improvement: Evaluation of Diabetes Technology Education Among Adult Endocrinology Training Programs

BACKGROUND

Despite increases in continuous glucose monitor (CGM) and insulin pump use in adults with diabetes, there is room for expansion. Technology adoption may be influenced by the training environment and fellowship education. However, little is known about adult endocrinology trainee comfort with, understanding of, or methods by which trainees receive education about diabetes technology.

METHODS

Mixed methods, sequential explanatory evaluation using survey and semi-structured interviews of endocrinology trainees and fellowship leadership in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited adult endocrinology fellowship programs to assess trainee and leadership comfort with, perceived knowledge of, and current methods for diabetes technology education.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven respondents completed the survey. The majority of training programs have curricula for training on insulin pumps (74%) and CGM (75.3%); 52% of fellows felt curricula are adequate. First- and second-year fellows were more comfortable with CGM than insulin pump use. Only half of third-year fellows felt comfortable with starting insulin pump therapy or recommending insulin dose adjustments based on CGM rate of change arrows. Qualitative interviews identified the importance of both direct instruction and experiential learning in diabetes technology education.

CONCLUSIONS

Almost half of trainees feel that curricula for learning to use and manage insulin pumps and CGM are inadequate and feel uncomfortable with critical aspects of technology use, demonstrating the need for increased attention to trainee education in the use of diabetes technology. Based on a better understanding of current and preferred methods for instruction, this study provides direction for future development of initiatives to improve fellow education in this field.

Socioeconomic status and diabetes technology use in youth with type 1 diabetes: a comparison of two funding models

Background

Technology use, including continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and insulin pump therapy, is associated with improved outcomes in youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D). In 2017 CGM was universally funded for youth with T1D in Australia. In contrast, pump access is primarily accessed through private health insurance, self-funding or philanthropy. The study aim was to investigate the use of diabetes technology across different socioeconomic groups in Australian youth with T1D, in the setting of two contrasting funding models.

Methods

A cross-sectional evaluation of 4957 youth with T1D aged <18 years in the national registry was performed to determine technology use. The Index of Relative Socio-Economic Disadvantage (IRSD) derived from Australian census data is an area-based measure of socioeconomic status (SES). Lower quintiles represent greater disadvantage. IRSD based on most recent postcode of residence was used as a marker of SES. A multivariable generalised linear model adjusting for age, diabetes duration, sex, remoteness classification, and location within Australia was used to determine the association between SES and device use.

Results

CGM use was lower in IRSD quintile 1 in comparison to quintiles 2 to 5 (p<0.001) where uptake across the quintiles was similar. A higher percentage of pump use was observed in the least disadvantaged IRSD quintiles. Compared to the most disadvantaged quintile 1, pump use progressively increased by 16% (95% CI: 4% to 31%) in quintile 2, 19% (6% to 33%) in quintile 3, 35% (21% to 50%) in quintile 4 and 51% (36% to 67%) in the least disadvantaged quintile 5.

Conclusion

In this large national dataset, use of diabetes technologies was found to differ across socioeconomic groups. For nationally subsidised CGM, use was similar across socioeconomic groups with the exception of the most disadvantaged quintile, an important finding requiring further investigation into barriers to CGM use within a nationally subsidised model. User pays funding models for pump therapy result in lower use with socioeconomic disadvantage, highlighting inequities in this funding approach. For the full benefits of diabetes technology to be realised, equitable access to pump therapy needs to be a health policy priority.

Therapeutic Inertia and Delays in Insulin Intensification in Type 2 Diabetes: A Literature Review

Background

Therapeutic inertia leading to delays in insulin initiation or intensification is a major contributor to lack of optimal diabetes care. This report reviews the literature summarizing data on therapeutic inertia and delays in insulin intensification in the management of type 2 diabetes.

Methods

A literature search was conducted of the Allied & Complementary Medicine, BIOSIS Previews, Embase, EMCare, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, MEDLINE, and ToxFile databases for clinical studies, observational research, and meta-analyses from 2012 to 2022 using search terms for type 2 diabetes and delay in initiating/intensifying insulin. Twenty-two studies met inclusion criteria.

Results

Time until insulin initiation among patients on two to three antihyperglycemic agents was at least 5 years, and mean A1C ranged from 8.7 to 9.8%. Early insulin intensification was linked with reduced A1C by 1.4%, reduction of severe hypoglycemic events from 4 to <1 per 100 person-years, and diminution in risk of heart failure (HF) by 18%, myocardial infarction (MI) by 23%, and stroke by 28%. In contrast, delayed insulin intensification was associated with increased risk of HF (64%), MI (67%), and stroke (51%) and a higher incidence of diabetic retinopathy. In the views of both patients and providers, hypoglycemia was identified as a primary driver of therapeutic inertia; 75.5% of physicians reported that they would treat more aggressively if not for concerns about hypoglycemia.

Conclusion

Long delays before insulin initiation and intensification in clinically eligible patients are largely driven by concerns over hypoglycemia. New diabetes technology that provides continuous glucose monitoring may reduce occurrences of hypoglycemia and help overcome therapeutic inertia associated with insulin initiation and intensification.

Endocrine Health and Health Care Disparities in the Pediatric and Sexual and Gender Minority Populations: An Endocrine Society Scientific Statement

Endocrine care of pediatric and adult patients continues to be plagued by health and health care disparities that are perpetuated by the basic structures of our health systems and research modalities, as well as policies that impact access to care and social determinants of health. This scientific statement expands the Society's 2012 statement by focusing on endocrine disease disparities in the pediatric population and sexual and gender minority populations. These include pediatric and adult lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual (LGBTQIA) persons. The writing group focused on highly prevalent conditions-growth disorders, puberty, metabolic bone disease, type 1 (T1D) and type 2 (T2D) diabetes mellitus, prediabetes, and obesity. Several important findings emerged. Compared with females and non-White children, non-Hispanic White males are more likely to come to medical attention for short stature. Racially and ethnically diverse populations and males are underrepresented in studies of pubertal development and attainment of peak bone mass, with current norms based on European populations. Like adults, racial and ethnic minority youth suffer a higher burden of disease from obesity, T1D and T2D, and have less access to diabetes treatment technologies and bariatric surgery. LGBTQIA youth and adults also face discrimination and multiple barriers to endocrine care due to pathologizing sexual orientation and gender identity, lack of culturally competent care providers, and policies. Multilevel interventions to address these disparities are required. Inclusion of racial, ethnic, and LGBTQIA populations in longitudinal life course studies is needed to assess growth, puberty, and attainment of peak bone mass. Growth and development charts may need to be adapted to non-European populations. In addition, extension of these studies will be required to understand the clinical and physiologic consequences of interventions to address abnormal development in these populations. Health policies should be recrafted to remove barriers in care for children with obesity and/or diabetes and for LGBTQIA children and adults to facilitate comprehensive access to care, therapeutics, and technological advances. Public health interventions encompassing collection of accurate demographic and social needs data, including the intersection of social determinants of health with health outcomes, and enactment of population health level interventions will be essential tools.

Expanding the use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs): Screening youth with type 1 diabetes from underrepresented populations

AIM

Youth from lower socioeconomic status (SES) have suboptimal type 1 diabetes (T1D) outcomes. Patient reported outcomes (PROs) measure psychosocial states and are associated with T1D outcomes, however are understudied in low SES youth. We aimed to evaluate associations between PROs and public insurance status, a proxy for low SES.

METHODS

We analyzed survey data from 129 youth with T1D (age 15.7 ± 2.3 years, 33 % publicly insured) screened with PROMIS Global Health (PGH, measuring global health) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9, measuring depressive symptoms) during diabetes appointments. Correlation and regression analyses evaluated differences in PGH and PHQ-9 by insurance status.

RESULTS

For youth with public insurance, lower global health correlated with lower self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG; r = 0.38,p = 0.033) and older age (r = -0.45,p = 0.005). In youth with private insurance, lower global health correlated with lower SMBG (r = 0.27,p = 0.018) and female sex (rho = 0.26,p = 0.015). For youth with private insurance, higher depressive symptoms correlated with higher body mass index (r = 0.22,p = 0.03) and fewer SMBG (r = -0.35,p = 0.04). In multivariate regression analyses, public insurance was inversely associated with global health (p = 0.027).

CONCLUSION

PGH is a particularly salient PRO in youth with public insurance. Global health may be an important psychosocial factor to assess in youth with T1D from low SES backgrounds.

Disparities in Hemoglobin A1c Levels in the First Year After Diagnosis Among Youths With Type 1 Diabetes Offered Continuous Glucose Monitoring

Importance

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is associated with improvements in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in youths with type 1 diabetes (T1D); however, youths from minoritized racial and ethnic groups and those with public insurance face greater barriers to CGM access. Early initiation of and access to CGM may reduce disparities in CGM uptake and improve diabetes outcomes.

Objective

To determine whether HbA1c decreases differed by ethnicity and insurance status among a cohort of youths newly diagnosed with T1D and provided CGM.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study used data from the Teamwork, Targets, Technology, and Tight Control (4T) study, a clinical research program that aims to initiate CGM within 1 month of T1D diagnosis. All youths with new-onset T1D diagnosed between July 25, 2018, and June 15, 2020, at Stanford Children's Hospital, a single-site, freestanding children's hospital in California, were approached to enroll in the Pilot-4T study and were followed for 12 months. Data analysis was performed and completed on June 3, 2022.

Exposures

All eligible participants were offered CGM within 1 month of diabetes diagnosis.

Main Outcomes and Measures

To assess HbA1c change over the study period, analyses were stratified by ethnicity (Hispanic vs non-Hispanic) or insurance status (public vs private) to compare the Pilot-4T cohort with a historical cohort of 272 youths diagnosed with T1D between June 1, 2014, and December 28, 2016.

Results

The Pilot-4T cohort comprised 135 youths, with a median age of 9.7 years (IQR, 6.8-12.7 years) at diagnosis. There were 71 boys (52.6%) and 64 girls (47.4%). Based on self-report, participants' race was categorized as Asian or Pacific Islander (19 [14.1%]), White (62 [45.9%]), or other race (39 [28.9%]); race was missing or not reported for 15 participants (11.1%). Participants also self-reported their ethnicity as Hispanic (29 [21.5%]) or non-Hispanic (92 [68.1%]). A total of 104 participants (77.0%) had private insurance and 31 (23.0%) had public insurance. Compared with the historical cohort, similar reductions in HbA1c at 6, 9, and 12 months postdiagnosis were observed for Hispanic individuals (estimated difference, -0.26% [95% CI, -1.05% to 0.43%], -0.60% [-1.46% to 0.21%], and -0.15% [-1.48% to 0.80%]) and non-Hispanic individuals (estimated difference, -0.27% [95% CI, -0.62% to 0.10%], -0.50% [-0.81% to -0.11%], and -0.47% [-0.91% to 0.06%]) in the Pilot-4T cohort. Similar reductions in HbA1c at 6, 9, and 12 months postdiagnosis were also observed for publicly insured individuals (estimated difference, -0.52% [95% CI, -1.22% to 0.15%], -0.38% [-1.26% to 0.33%], and -0.57% [-2.08% to 0.74%]) and privately insured individuals (estimated difference, -0.34% [95% CI, -0.67% to 0.03%], -0.57% [-0.85% to -0.26%], and -0.43% [-0.85% to 0.01%]) in the Pilot-4T cohort. Hispanic youths in the Pilot-4T cohort had higher HbA1c at 6, 9, and 12 months postdiagnosis than non-Hispanic youths (estimated difference, 0.28% [95% CI, -0.46% to 0.86%], 0.63% [0.02% to 1.20%], and 1.39% [0.37% to 1.96%]), as did publicly insured youths compared with privately insured youths (estimated difference, 0.39% [95% CI, -0.23% to 0.99%], 0.95% [0.28% to 1.45%], and 1.16% [-0.09% to 2.13%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this cohort study suggest that CGM initiation soon after diagnosis is associated with similar improvements in HbA1c for Hispanic and non-Hispanic youths as well as for publicly and privately insured youths. These results further suggest that equitable access to CGM soon after T1D diagnosis may be a first step to improve HbA1c for all youths but is unlikely to eliminate disparities entirely.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04336969.

Use of Continuous Glucose Monitors to Manage Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Progress, Challenges, and Recommendations

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) management has been revolutionized with the development and routine utilization of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). CGM technology has allowed for the ability to track dynamic glycemic fluctuations and trends over time allowing for optimization of medical therapy and the prevention of dangerous hypoglycemic events. This review details currently-available real-time and intermittently-scanned CGM devices, clinical benefits, and challenges of CGM use, and current guidelines supporting its use in the clinical care of patients with T1D. We additionally describe future issues that will need to be addressed as CGM technology continues to evolve.

Glycemic Outcomes and Feature Set Engagement Among Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Users With Type 1 or Non-Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes: Retrospective Analysis of Real-World Data

BACKGROUND

The benefits of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) are well established for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, the usage and effectiveness of RT-CGM in the context of non-insulin-treated T2D has not been well studied.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess glycemic metrics and rates of RT-CGM feature utilization in users with T1D and non-insulin-treated T2D.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from 33,685 US-based users of an RT-CGM system (Dexcom G6; Dexcom, Inc) who self-identified as having either T1D (n=26,706) or T2D and not using insulin (n=6979). Data included glucose concentrations, alarm settings, feature usage, and event logs.

RESULTS

The T1D cohort had lower proportions of glucose values in the 70 mg/dl to 180 mg/dl range than the T2D cohort (52.1% vs 70.8%, respectively), with more values indicating hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia and higher glycemic variability. Discretionary alarms were enabled by a large majority in both cohorts. The data sharing feature was used by 38.7% (10,327/26,706) of those with T1D and 10.4% (727/6979) of those with T2D, and the mean number of followers was higher in the T1D cohort. Large proportions of patients with T1D or T2D enabled and customized their glucose alerts. Retrospective analysis features were used by the majority in both cohorts (T1D: 15,783/26,706, 59.1%; T2D: 3751/6979, 53.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Similar to patients with T1D, patients with non-insulin-treated T2D used RT-CGM system features, suggesting beneficial, routine engagement with data by patients and others involved in their care. Motivated patients with diabetes could benefit from RT-CGM coverage.

Racial Disparities in Access and Use of Diabetes Technology Among Adult Patients With Type 1 Diabetes in a U.S. Academic Medical Center

OBJECTIVE

Recent studies highlight racial disparities in insulin pump (PUMP) and continuous glucose monitor (CGM) use in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D). This study explored racial disparities in diabetes technology among adult patients with T1D.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a retrospective clinic-based cohort study of adult patients with T1D seen consecutively from April 2013 to January 2020. Race was categorized into non-Black (reference group) and Black. The primary outcomes were baseline and prevalent technology use, rates of diabetes technology discussions (CGMdiscn, PUMPdiscn), and prescribing (CGMrx, PUMPrx). Multivariable logistic regression analysis evaluated the association of technology discussions and prescribing with race, adjusting for social determinants of health and diabetes outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 1,258 adults with T1D, baseline technology use was significantly lower for Black compared with non-Black patients (7.9% vs. 30.3% for CGM; 18.7% vs. 49.6% for PUMP), as was prevalent use (43.6% vs. 72.1% for CGM; 30.7% vs. 64.2% for PUMP). Black patients had adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of 0.51 (95% CI 0.29, 0.90) for CGMdiscn and 0.61 (95% CI 0.41, 0.93) for CGMrx. Black patients had aORs of 0.74 (95% CI 0.44, 1.25) for PUMPdiscn and 0.40 (95% CI, 0.22, 0.70) for PUMPrx. Neighborhood context, insurance, marital and employment status, and number of clinic visits were also associated with the outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant racial disparities were observed in discussions, prescribing, and use of diabetes technology. Further research is needed to identify the causes behind these disparities and develop and evaluate strategies to reduce them.

Tele-education model for primary care providers to advance diabetes equity: Findings from Project ECHO Diabetes

Introduction

In the US, many individuals with diabetes do not have consistent access to endocrinologists and therefore rely on primary care providers (PCPs) for their diabetes management. Project ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes) Diabetes, a tele-education model, was developed to empower PCPs to independently manage diabetes, including education on diabetes technology initiation and use, to bridge disparities in diabetes.

Methods

PCPs (n=116) who participated in Project ECHO Diabetes and completed pre- and post-intervention surveys were included in this analysis. The survey was administered in California and Florida to participating PCPs via REDCap and paper surveys. This survey aimed to evaluate practice demographics, protocols with adult and pediatric T1D management, challenges, resources, and provider knowledge and confidence in diabetes management. Differences and statistical significance in pre- and post-intervention responses were evaluated via McNemar's tests.

Results

PCPs reported improvement in all domains of diabetes education and management. From baseline, PCPs reported improvement in their confidence to serve as the T1D provider for their community (pre vs post: 43.8% vs 68.8%, p=0.005), manage insulin therapy (pre vs post: 62.8% vs 84.3%, p=0.002), and identify symptoms of diabetes distress (pre vs post: 62.8% vs 84.3%, p=0.002) post-intervention. Compared to pre-intervention, providers reported significant improvement in their confidence in all aspects of diabetes technology including prescribing technology (41.2% vs 68.6%, p=0.001), managing insulin pumps (41.2% vs 68.6%, p=0.001) and hybrid closed loop (10.2% vs 26.5%, p=0.033), and interpreting sensor data (41.2% vs 68.6%, p=0.001) post-intervention.

Discussion

PCPs who participated in Project ECHO Diabetes reported increased confidence in diabetes management, with notable improvement in their ability to prescribe, manage, and troubleshoot diabetes technology. These data support the use of tele-education of PCPs to increase confidence in diabetes technology management as a feasible strategy to advance equity in diabetes management and outcomes.

Implicit Racial-Ethnic and Insurance-Mediated Bias to Recommending Diabetes Technology: Insights from T1D Exchange Multicenter Pediatric and Adult Diabetes Provider Cohort

Background: Despite documented benefits of diabetes technology in managing type 1 diabetes, inequities persist in the use of these devices. Provider bias may be a driver of inequities, but the evidence is limited. Therefore, we aimed to examine the role of race/ethnicity and insurance-mediated provider implicit bias in recommending diabetes technology. Method: We recruited 109 adult and pediatric diabetes providers across 7 U.S. endocrinology centers to complete an implicit bias assessment composed of a clinical vignette and ranking exercise. Providers were randomized to receive clinical vignettes with differing insurance and patient names as proxy for Racial-Ethnic identity. Bias was identified if providers: (1) recommended more technology for patients with an English name (Racial-Ethnic bias) or private insurance (insurance bias), or (2) Race/Ethnicity or insurance was ranked high (Racial-Ethnic and insurance bias, respectively) in recommending diabetes technology. Provider characteristics were analyzed using descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression. Result: Insurance-mediated implicit bias was common in our cohort (n = 66, 61%). Providers who were identified to have insurance-mediated bias had greater years in practice (5.3 ± 5.3 years vs. 9.3 ± 9 years, P = 0.006). Racial-Ethnic-mediated implicit bias was also observed in our study (n = 37, 34%). Compared with those without Racial-Ethnic bias, providers with Racial-Ethnic bias were more likely to state that they could recognize their own implicit bias (89% vs. 61%, P = 0.001). Conclusion: Provider implicit bias to recommend diabetes technology was observed based on insurance and Race/Ethnicity in our pediatric and adult diabetes provider cohort. These data raise the need to address provider implicit bias in diabetes care.

The Use of Diabetes Technology to Address Inequity in Health Outcomes: Limitations and Opportunities

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The management of diabetes has been revolutionized by the introduction of novel technological treatments and modalities of care, such as continuous glucose monitoring, insulin pump therapy, and telehealth. While these technologies have demonstrated improvement in health outcomes, it remains unclear whether they have reduced inequities from racial/ethnic minority or socioeconomic status. We review the current literature to discuss evidence of benefit, current limitations, and future opportunities of diabetes technologies.

FINDINGS

While there is ample evidence of the health and psychological benefit of diabetes technologies in large populations of people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, there remain wide disparities in the use of diabetes technologies, which may be perpetuating or widening inequities. Multilevel barriers include inequitable prescribing practices, lack of support for social determinants of health, mismatch of patient preferences and care models, and cost. We provide a review of disparities in diabetes technology use, possible root causes of continued inequity in outcomes, and insight into ways to overcome remaining gaps.

Relationships Between Socioeconomic Status, Insurance Coverage for Diabetes Technology and Adverse Health in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors (CGM) have many benefits in the management of type 1 diabetes. Unfortunately disparities in technology access occur in groups with increased risk for adverse effects (eg, low socioeconomic status [SES], public insurance).

RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODS

Using 2015 to 2016 data from 4,895 participants from the T1D Exchange Registry, a structural equation model (SEM) was fit to explore the hypothesized direct and indirect relationships between SES, insurance features, access to diabetes technology, and adverse clinical outcomes (diabetic ketoacidosis, hypoglycemia). SEM was estimated using the maximum likelihood method and standardized path coefficients are presented.

RESULTS

Higher SES and more generous insurance coverage were directly associated with CGM use (β = 1.52, SE = 0.12, P < .0001 and β = 1.21, SE = 0.14, P < .0001, respectively). Though SES displayed a small inverse association with pump use (β = -0.11, SE = 0.04, P = .0097), more generous insurance coverage displayed a stronger direct association with pump use (β = 0.88, SE = 0.10, P < .0001). CGM use and pump use were both directly associated with fewer adverse outcomes (β = -0.23, SE = 0.06, P = .0002 and β = -0.15, SE = 0.04, P = .0002, respectively). Both SES and insurance coverage demonstrated significant indirect effects on adverse outcomes that operated through access to diabetes technology (β = -0.33, SE = 0.09, P = .0002 and β = -0.40, SE = 0.09, P < .0001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The association between SES and insurance coverage and adverse outcomes was primarily mediated through diabetes technology use, suggesting that disparities in diabetes outcomes have the potential to be mitigated by addressing the upstream disparities in technology use.

Association Between Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitor Use and Diabetes-Related Medical Costs for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Little is known about the impact of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) on diabetes-related medical costs within the type 2 diabetes (T2D) population. A retrospective analysis of administrative claims data from the Optum Research Database was conducted. Changes in diabetes-related health care resource utilization costs were expressed as per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs. A total of 571 T2D patients (90% insulin treated) met study inclusion criteria. Average PPPM for diabetes-related medical costs decreased by -$424 (95% confidence interval [CI] -$816 to -$31, P = 0.035) after initiating rtCGM. These reductions were driven, in part, by reductions in diabetes-related inpatient medical costs: -$358 (95% CI -$706 to -$10, P = 0.044). Inpatient hospital admissions were reduced on average -0.006 PPPM (P = 0.057) and total hospital days were reduced an average of -0.042 PPPM (P = 0.139). These findings provide real-world evidence that rtCGM use was associated with diabetes-related health care resource utilization cost reductions in patients with T2D.

Delays in Continuous Glucose Monitoring Device Initiation: A Single Center Experience and a Call to Change

Background: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been increasingly shown to be beneficial in patients with both types 1 and 2 diabetes using insulin. Despite this, challenges remain in obtaining coverage for these devices. We sought to define the process of initiation of CGM and better understand factors associated with successful initiation. Methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study of 271 patients seen over a 3-year period from 2017 to 2020 in the adult endocrinology clinic at Boston Medical Center who were prescribed CGM was performed. The primary outcome was time to CGM initiation. Secondary outcomes included factors associated with initiation and continued use of CGMs and glycemic control. Results: Obtaining CGM through pharmacy benefit was significantly faster than through durable medical equipment companies (78 days vs. 152 days, P < 0.0001). Factors associated with initiation of CGM were younger age, private insurance, and education with a clinical diabetes educator. Identifying as black or Hispanic was significantly associated with decreased initiation of CGM. Glycemic control as represented by hemoglobin A1c improved in patients initiated on CGM from 9.06% to 8.22% (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Prescribing CGM as a pharmacy benefit significantly reduces the time to initiation, but on average, still takes several months, delaying potentially life-saving care for patients living with diabetes. Barriers to CGM initiation must be addressed to ensure timely delivery of optimal care to our patients.

With or Without Residual C-Peptide, Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Realize Glycemic Benefits from Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring

Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) is superior to blood glucose monitoring (BGM) for adults with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D); however, the utility of C-peptide levels for predicting the magnitude of the glycemic benefits is controversial. Data were from a subset of 147 participants in the MOBILE study who were treated with basal-only insulin and who had baseline C-peptide levels ≥0.5 ng/mL. Participants were randomized to treatment with either RT-CGM (n = 100) or BGM (n = 47). Between-group differences in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and time in range (TIR) changes were assessed. The between-group difference in HbA1c favored the RT-CGM group (by 0.58 percentage points, P = 0.004 at 3 months and by 0.42 percentage points, P = 0.04 at 8 months). TIR was 16% higher, and time >180 mg/dL was 16% lower, in the RT-CGM group at 8 months (P = 0.002 for each). In T2D managed with basal insulin, RT-CGM benefits occur for those with residual insulin secretory capacity. Clinical Trial Identifier: NCT03566693.

Adjustment of Insulin Pump Settings in Type 1 Diabetes Management: Advisor Pro Device Compared to Physicians' Recommendations

AIMS

To compare insulin dose adjustments made by physicians to those made by an artificial intelligence-based decision support system, the Advisor Pro, in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using an insulin pump and self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG).

METHODS

This was a multinational, non-interventional study surveying 17 physicians from 11 countries. Each physician was asked to provide insulin dose adjustments for the settings of the pump including basal rate, carbohydrate-to-insulin ratios (CRs), and correction factors (CFs) for 15 data sets of pumps and SMBG of people with T1D (mean age 18.4 ± 4.8 years; eight females; mean glycated hemoglobin 8.2% ± 1.4% [66 ± 11mmol/mol]). The recommendations were compared among the physicians and between the physicians and the Advisor Pro. The study endpoint was the percentage of comparison points for which there was an agreement on the direction of insulin dose adjustments.

RESULTS

The percentage (mean ± SD) of agreement among the physicians on the direction of insulin pump dose adjustments was 51.8% ± 9.2%, 54.2% ± 6.4%, and 49.8% ± 11.6% for the basal, CR, and CF, respectively. The automated recommendations of the Advisor Pro on the direction of insulin dose adjustments were comparable )49.5% ± 6.4%, 55.3% ± 8.7%, and 47.6% ± 14.4% for the basal rate, CR, and CF, respectively( and noninferior to those provided by physicians. The mean absolute difference in magnitude of change between physicians was 17.1% ± 13.1%, 14.6% ± 8.4%, and 23.9% ± 18.6% for the basal, CR, and CF, respectively, and comparable to the Advisor Pro 11.7% ± 9.7%, 10.1% ± 4.5%, and 25.5% ± 19.5%, respectively, significant for basal and CR.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable differences in the recommendations for changes in insulin dosing were observed among physicians. Since automated recommendations by the Advisor Pro were similar to those given by physicians, it could be considered a useful tool to manage T1D.

Overcoming Barriers to Diabetes Technology in Youth with Type 1 Diabetes and Public Insurance: Cases and Call to Action

Advancements in diabetes technology such as continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), insulin pumps, and automated insulin delivery provide opportunities to improve glycemic control for youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, diabetes technology use is lower in youth on public insurance, and this technology use gap is widening in the US. There is a significant need to develop effective interventions and policies to promote equitable care. The dual purpose of this case series is as follows: (1) describe success stories of the CGM Time in Range Program (CGM TIPs), which removed barriers for initiating CGM and provided asynchronous remote glucose monitoring for youth on public insurance, and (2) advocate for improving CGM coverage by public insurance. We describe a series of six youths with T1D and public insurance who obtained and sustained use of CGM with assistance from the program. Three youths had improved engagement with the care team while on CGM and the remote monitoring protocol, and three youths were able to leverage sustained CGM wear to obtain insurance coverage for automated insulin delivery systems. CGM TIPs helped these youths achieve lower hemoglobin A1c and improved time in range (TIR). Despite the successes, expansion of CGM TIPs is limited by stringent barriers for CGM approval and difficult postapproval patient workflows to receive shipments. These cases highlight the potential for combining diabetes technology and asynchronous remote monitoring to support continued use and provide education to improve glycemic control for youth with T1D on public insurance and the need to reduce barriers for obtaining CGM coverage by public insurance.

Continuous glucose monitoring in primary care - are we there?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, we examine the expanding role of continuous glucose monitoring in glycaemic management in primary care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Improving technology and decreasing cost have increased the uptake of use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for glycaemic management in primary care, wherein most diabetes is managed. Optimized use of this technology, however, will require a convergence of several factors. Availability of devices for people with diabetes, availability of data at the time of clinical interactions, and expertise in interpretation of CGM and ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) data, as well as optimization of therapies, will be required. Significant progress has been made in all three areas in recent years, yet creating systems of support for widespread use of CGM in primary care remains an area of active investigation.

SUMMARY

There has been significant uptake in the use of CGM in the management of diabetes in primary care. Optimized use, however, requires both access to CGM data and the expertise to use the data. Although promising strategies have emerged, the task of generalizing these strategies to the broad population of primary care in America is ongoing. CGM technology holds significant potential for improving glycaemic management in primary care, yet important work remains to leverage the full potential of this promising technology.

Use of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Improves Glycemic Control and Other Clinical Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Patients Treated with Less Intensive Therapy

Objective: Use of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) has been shown to improve glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who are treated with intensive insulin therapy. However, most T2D patients are denied coverage for rtCGM due to failure to meet payer eligibility requirements: treatment with ≥3 insulin injections (or pump) and history of 4 × /day blood glucose testing. We investigated the relevance of these criteria to successful rtCGM use. Methods: This 6-month, prospective, interventional, single-arm study assessed the clinical effects of use rtCGM in patients with T2D treated with basal insulin only or noninsulin therapy. Primary outcomes were changes in HbA1c, average glucose, glycemic variability (% coefficient of variation), and percent of time in range (%TIR), below range (%TBR) and above range (%TAR). Results: Thirty-eight patients were included in the analysis (10.1% ± 1.8% HbA1c, 54.7 ± 10.2 years, 35.6 ± 6.4 body mass index). At 6 months, we observed reductions in HbA1c (-3.0% ± 1.3%, P < 0.001) and average glucose (-23.6 ± 38.8, P < 0.001). %TIR increased 15.2 ± 22.3, from 57.0 ± 29.9 to 72.2 ± 23.6, P < 0.001, with all patients maintaining %TBR targets (<4% at 70 mg/dL, <1% at <54 mg/dL). No changes in glycemic variability were observed. The greatest improvements in %TIR and %TAR were seen in patients treated with ≤1 medication. Conclusions: rtCGM use was associated with significant glycemic improvements in T2D patients treated with basal insulin only or noninsulin therapy. Given the growing body of evidence supporting rtCGM use in this population, insurance eligibility criteria should be modified to expand rtCGM use by T2D patients treated with less intensive therapies.

Changes in HbA1c Between 2011 and 2017 in Germany/Austria, Sweden, and the United States: A Lifespan Perspective

Aims: This study assessed hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) across the lifespan in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in Germany/Austria, Sweden, and the United States between 2011 and 2017 to ascertain temporal and age-related trends. Methods: Data from the Diabetes-Patienten-Verlaufsdokumentation (DPV) (n = 25,651 in 2011, n = 29,442 in 2017); Swedish Pediatric Diabetes Quality Registry (SWEDIABKIDS)/National Diabetes Register (NDR), (n = 44,474 in 2011, n = 53,690 in 2017); and T1D Exchange (n = 16,198 in 2011, n = 17,087 in 2017) registries were analyzed by linear regression to compare mean HbA1c overall and by age group. Results: Controlling for age, sex, and T1D duration, HbA1c increased in the United States between 2011 and 2017, decreased in Sweden, and did not change in Germany/Austria. Controlling for sex and T1D duration, mean HbA1c decreased between 2011 and 2017 in all age cohorts in Sweden (P < 0.001). In the United States, HbA1c stayed the same for participants <6 years and 45 to <65 years and increased in all other age groups (P < 0.05). In Germany/Austria, HbA1c stayed the same for participants <6 to <13 years and 18 to <25 years; decreased for participants ages 13 to <18 years (P < 0.01); and increased for participants ≥25 years (P < 0.05). Conclusions: The comparison of international trends in HbA1c makes it possible to identify differences, explore underlying causes, and share quality improvement processes. National quality improvement initiatives are well accepted in Europe but have yet to be implemented systematically in the United States. However, disparities created by the lack of universal access to health care coverage, unequal access to diabetes technologies (e.g., continuous glucose monitoring) regardless of insurance status, and high out-of-pocket cost for the underinsured ultimately limit the potential of quality improvement initiatives.

Personal Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use Among Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: Clinical Efficacy and Economic Impacts

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews recent clinical efficacy research and economic analysis of the use of personal continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in type 2 diabetes (T2D).

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies from the past 5 years include a variety of randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and other studies which generally favor CGM over self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in T2D, especially among people with T2D treated with insulin. Concurrently, some studies show no significant difference, but there is no evidence of worse outcomes with CGM. CGM is frequently associated with greater reduction in HbA1c than is SMBG. HbA1c reductions tend to be greater when baseline HbA1c is higher. Reductions in hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia have also been demonstrated with CGM in people with T2D, as have comfort with, preference for, and psychosocial benefits of CGM compared to SMBG. There is a small but growing evidence base on the economics and cost-effectiveness of CGM in T2D. CGM has been clearly demonstrated to have clinical benefits in people with T2D, especially among those treated with insulin. Economic and cost-effectiveness data are more scant but are generally favorable. CGM should be an important consideration in the management of T2D, and its use is likely to increase as efficacy data accumulate further and as costs associated with CGM gradually decrease.

Trend of Diabetes-Related Hospital Admissions During the Transition Period From Adolescence to Adulthood in the State of California

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the incidence of diabetes-related hospital admissions and described the characteristics among youth and emerging adults with type 1 (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) in California.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted using the statewide inpatient database during the years 2014-2018. Individuals aged 13-24 years hospitalized with diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) or severe hypoglycemia (SH) were recorded. Demographic characteristics and health measures among youth (ages 13-18) and young adults (ages 19-24) were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 34,749 admission encounters for T1D and 3,304 for T2D were analyzed. Hospitalization rates significantly increased with age during the transition to adulthood, from 70/100,000 California population at age 17 to 132/100,000 at age 19 in T1D. Higher hospitalization rates were demonstrated in young adults than in youth in T1D, and the rate was significantly higher in Black young adults (23.9%) than in youth (12.0%) among the age-adjusted population with diabetes (P < 0.0001). More young adults admitted were on public insurance, and approximately half were from the lowest income quartile. No difference was observed in hospital length of stay; however, hospital charges were higher among young adults. Young adults were three times more likely to be admitted for severe conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated a significant rise in hospital admission during the transition period in individuals with T1D. There were significantly more Black young adults who were on public insurance and had lower socioeconomic status. Our findings suggest that the health care system fails many emerging adults with diabetes, particularly for people of color, and that improving medical transition is crucial.

Patterns of Continuous Glucose Monitor Use in Young Children Throughout the First 18 Months Following Type 1 Diabetes Diagnosis

Objective: To describe sociodemographic and parent psychosocial characteristics associated with patterns of continuous glucose monitor (CGM) use across the first 18 months post-type 1 diabetes (T1D) diagnosis among young children. Methods: One hundred fifty-seven parent-child dyads enrolled in a behavioral intervention for parents of young children (1-6 years) newly diagnosed with T1D. Parents reported on baseline sociodemographic characteristics and psychosocial functioning; child CGM use was assessed at five time points during the first 18 months post-diagnosis. Results: Most participants (81.8%) used CGM at least once. Four CGM trajectories emerged (always, later/stable, inconsistent, and never). Participants with private insurance were more likely to be in the always, later/stable, or inconsistent groups versus the never group. Youth in the always and later/stable groups had lower mean HbA1c at 18 months than those in the never group. Conclusions: Given the health benefits of CGM, further exploration of barriers to CGM use in families with public health insurance is needed. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02527525.

Clinically Serious Hypoglycemia Is Rare and Not Associated With Time-in-range in Youth With New-onset Type 1 Diabetes

CONTEXT

Early initiation of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is advocated for youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Data to guide CGM use on time-in-range (TIR), hypoglycemia, and the role of partial clinical remission (PCR) are limited.

OBJECTIVE

Our aims were to assess whether 1) an association between increased TIR and hypoglycemia exists, and 2) how time in hypoglycemia varies by PCR status.

METHODS

We analyzed 80 youth who were started on CGM shortly after T1D diagnosis and were followed for up to 1-year post diagnosis. TIR and hypoglycemia rates were determined by CGM data and retrospectively analyzed. PCR was defined as (visit glycated hemoglobin A1c) + (4*units/kg/day) less than 9.

RESULTS

Youth were started on CGM 8.0 (interquartile range, 6.0-13.0) days post diagnosis. Time spent at less than 70 mg/dL remained low despite changes in TIR (highest TIR 74.6 ± 16.7%, 2.4 ± 2.4% hypoglycemia at 1 month post diagnosis; lowest TIR 61.3 ± 20.3%, 2.1 ± 2.7% hypoglycemia at 12 months post diagnosis). No events of severe hypoglycemia occurred. Hypoglycemia was rare and there was minimal difference for PCR vs non-PCR youth (54-70 mg/dL: 1.8% vs 1.2%, P = .04; < 54mg/dL: 0.3% vs 0.3%, P = .55). Approximately 50% of the time spent in hypoglycemia was in the 65 to 70 mg/dL range.

CONCLUSION

As TIR gradually decreased over 12 months post diagnosis, hypoglycemia was limited with no episodes of severe hypoglycemia. Hypoglycemia rates did not vary in a clinically meaningful manner by PCR status. With CGM being started earlier, consideration needs to be given to modifying CGM hypoglycemia education, including alarm settings. These data support a trial in the year post diagnosis to determine alarm thresholds for youth who wear CGM.

Help when you need it: Perspectives of adults with T1D on the support and training they would have wanted when starting CGM

AIMS

The purpose of this study was to explore preferences that adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) have for training and support to initiate and sustain optimal use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology.

METHODS

Twenty-two adults with T1D (M age 30.95 ± 8.32; 59.1% female; 90.9% Non-Hispanic; 86.4% White; diabetes duration 13.5 ± 8.42 years; 72.7% insulin pump users) who had initiated CGM use in the past year participated in focus groups exploring two overarching questions: (1) What helped you learn to use your CGM? and (2) What additional support would you have wanted? Focus groups used a semi-structured interview guide and were recorded, transcribed and analyzed.

RESULTS

Overarching themes identified were: (1) "I got it going by myself": CGM training left to the individual; (2) Internet as diabetes educator, troubleshooter, and peer support system; and (3) domains of support they wanted, including content and format of this support.

CONCLUSION

This study identifies current gaps in training and potential avenues for enhancing device education and CGM onboarding support for adults with T1D. Providing CGM users with relevant, timely resources and attending to the emotional side of using CGM could alleviate the burden of starting a new device and promote sustained device use.

Cost considerations for adoption of diabetes technology are pervasive: A qualitative study of persons living with type 1 diabetes and their families

BACKGROUND

Cost is a major consideration in the uptake and continued use of diabetes technology. With increasing use of automated insulin delivery systems, it is important to understand the specific cost-related barriers to technology adoption. In this qualitative analysis, we were interested in understanding and examining the decision-making process around cost and diabetes technology use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four raters coded transcripts of four stakeholder groups using inductive coding for each stakeholder group to establish relevant themes/nodes. We applied the Social Ecological Model in the interpretation of five thematic levels of cost.

RESULTS

We identified five thematic levels of cost: policy, organizational, insurance, interpersonal and individual. Equitable diabetes technology access was an important policy-level theme. The insurance-level theme had multiple subthemes which predominantly carried a negative valence. Participants also emphasized the psychosocial burden of cost specifically identifying diabetes costs to their families, the guilt of diabetes related costs, and frustration in the time and involvement required to ensure insurance coverage.

CONCLUSION

We found broad consensus in how cost is experienced by stakeholder groups. Cost considerations for diabetes technology uptake extended beyond finances to include time, cost to society, morality and interpersonal relationships. Cost also reflected an important moral principle tied to the shared desire for equitable access to diabetes technology. Knowledge of these considerations can help clinicians and researchers promote equitable device uptake while anticipating barriers for all persons living with type 1 diabetes and their families.

Racial Disparities in Diabetes Technology Use and Outcomes in Type 1 Diabetes in a Safety-Net Hospital

BACKGROUND

Limited data exist regarding diabetes technology use among adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in urban racially/ethnically diverse safety-net hospitals. We examined racial/ethnic differences in the use of continuous glucose monitor (CGM) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) in this setting.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 227 patients ≥ 18 years of age with T1D seen in an urban, safety-net endocrinology clinic during 2016-2017 was completed (mean age: 39; 80% English-speaking; 50% had public insurance). Diabetes technology use, defined as either CGM or CSII or both CGM and CSII, and clinical outcomes were examined by race/ethnicity.

RESULTS

Overall, 30% used CGM and 26% used CSII. After adjusting for age, language, insurance, and annual income, diabetes technology use in non-White patients was significantly lower than in White patients, predominantly lower in Black (aOR 0.25 [95% CI 0.11-0.56]) and patients identified as other race/ethnicity (aOR 0.30 [95% CI 0.11-0.77]). At the highest household income level (≥$75,000/y), Black and Hispanic individuals were significantly less likely than White individuals to use diabetes technology (P < .0007). Mean hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was lower in patients using any diabetes technology compared with patients using no technology (P < .0001). Use of CGM and CSII together was associated with the lowest HbA1c across all racial/ethnic groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes technology use and glycemic control were observed even after adjusting for sociodemographic factors. Further research should explore barriers to accessing diabetes technology in non-White populations.

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.

Provider Implicit Bias Impacts Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes Technology Recommendations in the United States: Findings from The Gatekeeper Study

BACKGROUND

Diabetes technology use is associated with favorable type 1 diabetes (T1D) outcomes. American youth with public insurance, a proxy for low socioeconomic status, use less diabetes technology than those with private insurance. We aimed to evaluate the role of insurance-mediated provider implicit bias, defined as the systematic discrimination of youth with public insurance, on diabetes technology recommendations for youth with T1D in the United States.

METHODS

Multi-disciplinary pediatric diabetes providers completed a bias assessment comprised of a clinical vignette and ranking exercises (n = 39). Provider bias was defined as providers: (1) recommending more technology for those on private insurance versus public insurance or (2) ranking insurance in the top 2 of 7 reasons to offer technology. Bias and provider characteristics were analyzed with descriptive statistics, group comparisons, and multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

The majority of providers [44.1 ± 10.0 years old, 83% female, 79% non-Hispanic white, 49% physician, 12.2 ± 10.0 practice-years] demonstrated bias (n = 33/39, 84.6%). Compared to the group without bias, the group with bias had practiced longer (13.4±10.4 years vs 5.7 ± 3.6 years, P = .003) but otherwise had similar characteristics including age (44.4 ± 10.2 vs 42.6 ± 10.1, p = 0.701). In the logistic regression, practice-years remained significant (OR = 1.47, 95% CI [1.02,2.13]; P = .007) when age, sex, race/ethnicity, provider role, percent public insurance served, and workplace location were included.

CONCLUSIONS

Provider bias to recommend technology based on insurance was common in our cohort and increased with years in practice. There are likely many reasons for this finding, including healthcare system drivers, yet as gatekeepers to diabetes technology, providers may be contributing to inequities in pediatric T1D in the United States.

'I was ready for it at the beginning': Parent experiences with early introduction of continuous glucose monitoring following their child's Type 1 diabetes diagnosis

AIM

This study aimed to capture the experience of parents of youth with recent onset Type 1 diabetes who initiated use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology soon after diagnosis, which is a new practice.

METHODS

Focus groups and individual interviews were conducted with parents of youth with Type 1 diabetes who had early initiation of CGM as part of a new clinical protocol. Interviewers used a semi-structured interview guide to elicit feedback and experiences with starting CGM within 30 days of diagnosis, and the benefits and barriers they experienced when adjusting to this technology. Groups and interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using content analysis.

RESULTS

Participants were 16 parents (age 44.13 ± 8.43 years; 75% female; 56.25% non-Hispanic White) of youth (age 12.38 ± 4.15 years; 50% female; 50% non-Hispanic White; diabetes duration 10.35 ± 3.89 months) who initiated CGM 11.31 ± 7.33 days after diabetes diagnosis. Overall, parents reported high levels of satisfaction with starting CGM within a month of diagnosis and described a high level of reliance on the technology to help manage their child's diabetes. All participants recommended early CGM initiation for future families and were committed to continue using the technology for the foreseeable future, provided that insurance covered it.

CONCLUSION

Parents experienced CGM initiation shortly after their child's Type 1 diabetes diagnosis as a highly beneficial and essential part of adjusting to living with diabetes.