Use and Accuracy of Inpatient CGM During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Observational Study of General Medicine and ICU Patients

Threshold of hyperglycaemia associated with mortality in critically ill patients: a multicentre, prospective, observational study using continuous glucose monitoring

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides comprehensive information on the exposure to dysglycaemia. This study aimed to investigate the threshold of hyperglycaemia related to mortality risk in critically ill patients using CGM technology.

METHODS

A total of 293 adult critically ill patients admitted to intensive care units of five medical centres were prospectively included between May 2020 and November 2021. Participants wore intermittently scanned CGM for a median of 12.0 days. The relationships between different predefined time above ranges (TARs), with the thresholds of hyperglycaemia ranging from 7.8 to 13.9 mmol/l (140-250 mg/dl), and in-hospital mortality risk were assessed by multivariate Cox proportional regression analysis. Time in ranges (TIRs) of 3.9 mmol/l (70 mg/dl) to the predefined hyperglycaemic thresholds were also assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 66 (22.5%) in-hospital deaths were identified. Only TARs with a threshold of 10.5 mmol/l (190 mg/dl) or above were significantly associated with the risk of in-hospital mortality, after adjustment for covariates. Furthermore, as the thresholds for TAR increased from 10.5 mmol/l to 13.9 mmol/l (190 mg/dl to 250 mg/dl), the hazards of in-hospital mortality increased incrementally with every 10% increase in TARs. Similar results were observed concerning the associations between TIRs with various upper thresholds and in-hospital mortality risk. For per absolute 10% decrease in TIR 3.9-10.5 mmol/l (70-190 mg/dl), the risk of in-hospital mortality was increased by 12.1% (HR 1.121 [95% CI 1.003, 1.253]).

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

A glucose level exceeding 10.5 mmol/l (190 mg/dl) was significantly associated with higher risk of in-hospital mortality in critically ill patients.

Accuracy of a Continuous Glucose Monitor in the Intensive Care Unit: A Proposed Accuracy Standard and Calibration Protocol for Inpatient Use

Background and Aims: Guidelines now recommend inpatient continuous glucose monitor (CGM) use with confirmatory blood glucose measurements. However, the Food and Drug Administration has not yet officially approved CGM for inpatient use in large part because its accuracy has not been established in this setting. We tested the accuracy of the Dexcom G6 (G6) in 28 adults on an insulin infusion in a medical-surgical intensive care unit with 1064 matched CGM and arterial point-of-care pairs. Methods: The participants were on average 57.29 (SD 2.39) years, of whom 13 had a prior diagnosis of diabetes and 14 were admitted for a surgical diagnosis. The first 19 participants received the G6 without calibration and had a mean absolute relative difference (MARD) of 13.19% (IQR 5.11, 19.03) across 659 matched pairs, which just meets the critical care expert recommendation of MARD <14%. We then aimed to improve accuracy for the subsequent 9 participants using a calibration protocol. Results: The MARD for calibrated participants was 9.65% (3.03, 13.33), significantly lower than for uncalibrated participants (P < 0.001). Calibration also demonstrated excellent safety with 100% of values within the Clarke Error Grid zones A and B compared with 99.07% without calibration. Our protocol achieved the lowest MARD and safest CEG profile in the critical care setting and well exceeds the critical care expert recommendations. Our large sample of heterogenous critically ill patients also reached comparable accuracy to the MARD of 9% for G6 in outpatients. We believe our calibration protocol will allow G6 to be used with sufficient accuracy in inpatients.

Performance of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Patients With Acute Respiratory Failure: A Prospective, Single-Center Observational Study

OBJECTIVE

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) may have benefits in achieving glycemic control in critically ill patients. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of the Freestyle Libre H (professional version similar to the Libre Pro) in patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF) in the intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

Fifty-two adult patients with ARF were selected. The performance of CGM was evaluated using the arterial blood glucose (aBG) and point-of-care (POC) glucose levels as the reference values. Numerical accuracy was evaluated by the mean absolute relative difference, Bland-Altman analysis, %15/15 (the percentage of CGM values within 15 mg/dL or 15% of reference values <100 or >100 mg/dL, respectively), %20/20, and %30/30. Clinical accuracy was assessed using the Clarke error grid analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 519 and 1504 pairs of aBG/CGM and POC/CGM glucose values were analyzed. The mean absolute relative difference values were 13.8% and 14.7%, respectively. The mean deviations of the Bland-Altman analysis were 0.82 mmol/L and 0.81 mmol/L. The proportions of CGM values within %15/15, %20/20, and %30/30 of the aBG values were 62.6%, 75.5%, and 92.4%, respectively; those within %15/15, %20/20, and %30/30 of the POC values were 57.1%, 72.9%, and 88.7%, respectively. The Clarke error grid analysis showed that 97.8% and 99.3% of the values were located in zone A + B. Additionally, the accuracy of CGM was not affected by general patient factors.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that the accuracy of CGM in patients with ARF is lower than that in most outpatients and it is not affected by general patient factors. Whether CGM is beneficial to glucose management in the intensive care unit needs further evaluation.

Accuracy and Feasibility of Real-time Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Critically Ill Patients After Abdominal Surgery and Solid Organ Transplantation

OBJECTIVE

Glycemia management in critical care is posing a challenge in frequent measuring and adequate insulin dose adjustment. In recent years, continuous glucose measurement has gained accuracy and reliability in outpatient and inpatient settings. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and accuracy of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in ICU patients after major abdominal surgery.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We included patients undergoing pancreatic surgery and solid organ transplantation (liver, pancreas, islets of Langerhans, kidney) requiring an ICU stay after surgery. We used a Dexcom G6 sensor, placed in the infraclavicular region, for real-time CGM. Arterial blood glucose measured by the amperometric principle (ABL 800; Radiometer, Copenhagen, Denmark) served as a reference value and for calibration. Blood glucose was also routinely monitored by a StatStrip bedside glucose meter. Sensor accuracy was assessed by mean absolute relative difference (MARD), bias, modified Bland-Altman plot, and surveillance error grid for paired samples of glucose values from CGM and acid-base analyzer (ABL).

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 61 patients and obtained 1,546 paired glucose values from CGM and ABL. Active sensor use was 95.1%. MARD was 9.4%, relative bias was 1.4%, and 92.8% of values fell in zone A, 6.1% fell in zone B, and 1.2% fell in zone C of the surveillance error grid. Median time in range was 78%, with minimum (<1%) time spent in hypoglycemia. StatStrip glucose meter MARD compared with ABL was 5.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows clinically applicable accuracy and reliability of Dexcom G6 CGM in postoperative ICU patients and a feasible alternative sensor placement site.

Performance of Subcutaneous Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Adult Critically Ill Patients Receiving Vasopressor Therapy

Background: Subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) may facilitate glucose control in the ICU. We aimed to assess the accuracy of CGM (Dexcom G6) against arterial blood glucose (ABG) in adult critically ill patients receiving intravenous insulin infusion and vasopressor therapy. We also aimed to assess feasibility and tolerability of CGM in this setting. Methods: We included ICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation, insulin, and vasopressor therapy. Numerical accuracy was assessed by the mean absolute relative difference (MARD), overall, across arterial glucose strata, over different noradrenaline equivalent infusion rates, and over time since CGM start. MARD <14% was considered acceptable. Clinical accuracy was assessed using Clarke Error Grid (CEG) analysis. Feasibility outcome included number and duration of interrupted sensor readings due to signal loss. Tolerability outcome included skin reactions related to sensor insertion or sensor adhesives. Results: We obtained 2946 paired samples from 40 patients (18 with type 2 diabetes) receiving a median (IQR) maximum noradrenaline equivalent infusion rate of 0.18 (0.08-0.33) µg/kg/min during CGM. Overall, MARD was 12.7% (95% CI 10.7-15.3), and 99.8% of CGM readings were within CEG zones A and B. MARD values ≥14% were observed when ABG was outside target range (6-10 mmol/L [108-180 mg/dL]) and with noradrenaline equivalent infusion rates above 0.10 µg/kg/min. Accuracy improved with time after CGM start, reaching MARD values <14% after 36 h. We observed four episodes of interrupted sensor readings due to signal loss, ranging from 5 to 20 min. We observed no skin reaction related to sensor insertion or sensor adhesives. Conclusions: In our ICU cohort of patients receiving vasopressor infusion, subcutaneous CGM demonstrated acceptable overall numerical and clinical accuracy. However, suboptimal accuracy may occur outside glucose ranges of 6-10 mmol/L (108-180 mg/dL), during higher dose vasopressor infusion, and during the first 36 h after CGM start.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Older Adults: What We Know and What We Have Yet to Learn

OBJECTIVE

To assess the growing use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems by older adults and explore additional areas integration that could benefit adults with frailty.

BACKGROUND

The use of CGM devices has expanded rapidly in the last decade. This has been supported by substantial data showing significant benefit in glycemic metrics: hemoglobin A1c improvements, less hypoglycemia, and improved quality of life. However, sub-populations, such as older persons, exist where available data are limited. Furthermore, frail older adults represent a heterogeneous population with their own unique challenges to the management of diabetes. This group has some of the poorest outcomes related to the sequela of diabetes. For example, hypoglycemia resulting in significant morbidity and mortality is more frequent in older person with diabetes than in younger persons with diabetes.

METHOD

We present a concise literature review on CGM use in the older adult as well as expand upon glycemic and nonglycemic benefits of CGM for patients, caregivers, and providers. Retrospective analysis of inpatient glycemic data of 16,935 older adults with Type 2 diabetes mellitus at Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist indicated those with fraility managed with insulin or sulfonylurea had the highest rates of delirium (4.8%), hypoglycemia (3.5%), cardiovascular complications (20.2%) and ED visits/hospitalizatoins (49%). In addition, we address special consideration of specific situations including inpatient, palliative and long term care settings.

CONCLUSION

This review article summarizes the available data for CGM use in older adults, discusses the benefits and obstacles with CGM use in this population, and identifies areas of future research needed for improved delivery of care to older persons with diabetes.

Type 1 Diabetes Management in the Hospital Setting

The incidence of diabetes in children and adolescents has increased during the past decades, with a 1.9% increase per year in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Patients with diabetes have a greater risk of hospitalizations compared with those without diabetes. Clear evidence has emerged in the past decade that supports appropriate glycemic control in the hospital setting to improve clinical outcomes and reduce the risk of hospital complications and mortality. Determining the appropriate insulin regimen in patients with T1DM in the hospital depends on the clinical status, type of outpatient insulin regimen (multiple daily injections versus pump therapy), glycemic control before admission, nutritional status, procedures, and enteral versus parenteral nutrition. Due to the complexity of the inpatient management of diabetes, institutions should have an inpatient diabetes management team that includes dietitians, diabetes educators, nurses, pharmacists, social workers, and endocrinologists. The use of inpatient diabetes teams has been demonstrated to be beneficial in the management of patients with T1DM.

Accuracy of a Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitor in Pediatric Diabetic Ketoacidosis Admissions

Objective: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices are integral in the outpatient care of people with type 1 diabetes, although they lack inpatient labeling. Food and Drug Administration began allowing inpatient use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, with some accuracy data now available, primarily from adult hospitals. Pediatric inpatient data remain limited, particularly during diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) admissions and for patients receiving intravenous (IV) insulin. Design and Methods: This retrospective chart review compared point-of-care glucose values to personal Dexcom G6 sensor data during pediatric hospitalizations. Accuracy was assessed using mean absolute relative difference (MARD), Clarke Error Grids, and the percentage of values within 15/20/30% if glucose value >100 mg/dL and 15/20/30 mg/dL if glucose value ≤100 mg/dL. Results: Matched paired glucose values (N = 612) from 36 patients (median age 14 years, 58.3% non-Hispanic White, 47.2% male) and 42 inpatient encounters were included in this subanalysis of DKA admissions. The MARDs for DKA and non-DKA admissions (N = 503) were 11.8% and 11.7%, with 97.6% and 98.6% of pairs falling within A and B zones of the Clarke Error Grid, respectively. Severe DKA admissions (pH <7.15 and/or bicarbonate <5 mmol/L) had a MARD of 8.9% compared to 14.3% for nonsevere DKA admissions. The MARD during administration of IV insulin (N = 266) was 13.4%. Conclusions: CGM accuracy is similar between DKA and non-DKA admissions and is maintained in severe DKA and during IV insulin administration, suggesting potential usability in pediatric hospitalizations. Further study on the feasibility of implementation of CGM in the hospital is needed.

Cardio-renal-metabolic disease in primary care setting

In the primary care setting providers have more tools available than ever before to impact positively obesity, diabetes, and their complications, such as renal and cardiac diseases. It is important to recognise what is available for treatment taking into account diabetes heterogeneity. For those who develop type 2 diabetes (T2DM), effective treatments are available that for the first time have shown a benefit in reducing mortality and macrovascular complications, in addition to the well-established benefits of glucose control in reducing microvascular complications. Some of the newer medications for treating hyperglycaemia have also a positive impact in reducing heart failure (HF). Technological advances have also contributed to improving the quality of care in patients with diabetes. The use of technology, such as continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGM), has improved significantly glucose and glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) values, while limiting the frequency of hypoglycaemia. Other technological support derives from the use of predictive algorithms that need to be refined to help predict those subjects who are at great risk of developing the disease and/or its complications, or who may require care by other specialists. In this review we also provide recommendations for the optimal use of the new medications; sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and Glucagon-like peptide-receptor agonists 1 (GLP1RA) in the primary care setting considering the relevance of these drugs for the management of T2DM also in its early stage.

Accuracy of a Continuous Glucose Monitor During Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes Inpatient Admissions

Objective: Continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) used for type 1 diabetes management are associated with lower hemoglobin A1c. CGMs are not approved for inpatient use, when close glucose monitoring and intensive insulin management are essential for optimal health. Accuracy data from adult hospitalizations have been published, but pediatric data are limited. Design and Methods: This retrospective review of Dexcom G6 data from youth with type 1 diabetes during hospitalization assessed CGMs and matched (within 5 min) point-of-care (POC) and laboratory glucose values. Glucose values >400 and <40 mg/dL were excluded due to sensor reporting capabilities. Standard methods for CGM accuracy were used including mean absolute relative difference (MARD), Clarke Error Grids, and percentage of CGM values within 15%/20%/30% if glucose value is >100 mg/dL and 15/20/30 mg/dL if value is ≤100 mg/dL. Results: A total of 1120 POC and 288 laboratory-matched pairs were collected from 83 unique patients (median age 12.0 years, 68.7% non-Hispanic white, 54.2% male) during 100 admissions. For POC values, overall, MARD was 11.8%, that on the medical floor was 13.5%, and that in the intensive care unit was 7.9%. The MARD for all laboratory values was 6.5%. In total, 98% of matched pairs were within Clarke Error Grid A and B zones. Conclusions: Findings from our pediatric population were similar to accuracy reported in hospitalized adults, indicating the potential role for CGM use during pediatric hospitalizations. Additional research is needed to assess accuracy under various conditions, including medication use, as well as development of safe hospital protocols for successful CGM implementation for routine inpatient care.

16. Diabetes Care in the Hospital: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of 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, an interprofessional expert committee, 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 and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of 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, an interprofessional expert committee, 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 and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

A Consensus Statement for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Metrics for Inpatient Clinical Trials

Diabetes Technology Society organized an expert consensus panel to develop metrics for research in the use of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) in a hospital setting. The experts met virtually in small groups both before and after an April 13, 2023 virtual meeting of the entire panel. The goal of the panel was to develop consensus definitions in anticipation of greater use of CGMs in hospital settings in the future. Establishment of consensus definitions of inpatient analytical metrics will be easier to compare outcomes between studies. Panelists defined terms related to 10 dimensions of measurements related to the use of CGMs including (1) hospital hypoglycemia, (2) hospital hyperglycemia, (3) hospital time in range, (4) hospital glycemic variability, (5) hospital glycemia risk index, (6) accuracy of CGM devices and reference methods for CGMs in the hospital, (7) meaningful time blocks for hospital glycemic goals, (8) hospital CGM data sufficiency, (9) using CGM data for insulin dosing, and (10) miscellaneous factors. The panelists voted on 51 proposed recommendations. Based on the panel vote, 51 recommendations were classified as either strong (43) or mild (8). Additional research is needed on CGM performance in the hospital. This consensus report is intended to support that type of research intended to improve outcomes for hospitalized people with diabetes.

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in a non-Icu hospital setting: The patient's journey

AIMS

Although consistent data support the outpatient use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) to improve glycemic control and reduce hypoglycemic burden, and clinical outcomes, there are limited data regarding its use in the hospital setting, particularly in the non-intensive care unit (non-ICU) setting. The emerging use of CGM in the non-critical care setting may be useful in increasing the efficiency of hospital care and reducing the length of stay for patients with diabetes while improving glycemic control.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The purpose of this Expert Opinion paper was to evaluate the state of the art and provide a practical model of how CGM can be implemented in the hospital.

SETTING

A patient's CGM journey from admission to the ward to the application of the sensor, from patient education on the device during hospitalization until discharge of the patient to maintain remote control.

CONCLUSIONS

This practical approach for the implementation and management of CGM in patients with diabetes admitted to non-ICUs could guide hospitals in their diabetes management initiatives using CGM, helping to identify patients most likely to benefit and suggesting how this technology can be implemented to maximize clinical benefits.

Continuous glucose monitoring for inpatient diabetes management: an update on current evidence and practice

Over the last few years, several exciting changes in continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology have expanded its use and made CGM the standard of care for patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes using insulin therapy. Consequently, hospitals started to notice increased use of these devices in their hospitalized patients. Furthermore during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID) pandemic, there was a critical need for innovative approaches to glycemic monitoring, and several hospitals started to implement CGM protocols in their daily practice. Subsequently, a plethora of studies have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of CGM use in the hospital, leading to clinical practice guideline recommendations. Several studies have also suggested that CGM has the potential to become the standard of care for some hospitalized patients, overcoming the limitations of current capillary glucose testing. Albeit, there is a need for more studies and particularly regulatory approval. In this review, we provide a historical overview of the evolution of glycemic monitoring in the hospital and review the current evidence, implementation protocols, and guidance for the use of CGM in hospitalized patients.

Real-world Accuracy of CGM in Inpatient Critical and Noncritical Care Settings at a Safety-Net Hospital

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine real-world accuracy of inpatient continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) at multiple levels of acuity in a large safety-net hospital.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We analyzed records from hospitalized patients on Dexcom G6 CGM, including clinical, point of care (POC), and laboratory (Lab) glucose, and CGM data. POC/Lab values were matched to the closest timed CGM value. Encounters were divided into not critically ill (NCI) versus critically ill (CI). CGM accuracy was evaluated.

RESULTS

Paired readings (2,744 POC-CGM; 3,705 Lab-CGM) were analyzed for 233 patients with 239 encounters (83 NCI, 156 CI). POC-CGM aggregated and average mean absolute relative differences (MARD) were 15.1% and 17.1%. Lab-CGM aggregated and average MARDs were 11.4% and 12.2%. Accuracy for POC-CGM and Lab-CGM was 96.5% and 99.1% in Clarke Error Grid zones A/B.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world accuracy of inpatient CGM is acceptable for NCI and CI patients. Further exploration of conditions associated with lower CGM accuracy in real-world settings is warranted.

Perioperative maintenance of hybrid closed loop insulin pump systems in youth with type 1 diabetes mellitus: A case series

Current guidelines support the use of continuous glucose monitoring devices and insulin pumps in minor surgical procedures for pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. However, there are few reported cases of using hybrid closed loop technology in the perioperative period. This retrospective case series presents seven pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes who underwent eight surgical procedures with maintenance of hybrid closed loop systems. This paper also provides considerations for future use of hybrid closed loop systems perioperatively.

Diabetes Research and Resource Sharing During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Experience from an Academic/Non-Profit Resource Website

BACKGROUND

The magnitude of the response of the diabetes professional community to the COVID-19 pandemic is not known. We aimed to examine diabetes technology research trends and resources offered by professional organizations during this period.

METHODS

We explored patterns of the response from the professional diabetes community to the pandemic by (1) systematically searching for articles related to diabetes, COVID-19, and diabetes technologies; (2) examining publication trends of research protocols (clinicaltrials.gov) and preprints (medRxiv); and (3) reviewing online resources from professional organizations including our website (COVIDinDiabetes.org; an Emory University-Diabetes Technology Society collaboration).

RESULTS

We identified 492 articles published between December 2019 and December 2022 meeting our inclusion criteria. Telemedicine and continuous glucose monitoring were the most common reported technologies from most parts of the world. The largest number of preprint articles was published in 2020, with a decline in 2021 and 2022. The number of research protocols related to COVID-19 was the highest in 2020 and declined in 2021 and 2022. Resources from organizations included protocols adapted to treat patients with diabetes and COVID-19, training programs, emergency preparedness, and literature on diabetes and COVID-19. On our website (COVIDinDiabetes.org), there were 12 236 visits and 18 149 pageviews, with 1.6 actions per visits, with most visits coming from North America (N = 7233, 54.2%), South America (N = 2663, 21.8%), and Europe (N = 1219).

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that the COVID-19 pandemic promoted unprecedented global research productivity related to diabetes and COVID-19 and that the transition to the use of technology resources has been evident during this period.

Expert Recommendations for Using Time-in-Range and Other Continuous Glucose Monitoring Metrics to Achieve Patient-Centered Glycemic Control in People With Diabetes

New metrics for assessing glycemic control beyond HbA1c have recently emerged due to the increasing use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in diabetes clinical practice. Among them, time in range (TIR) has appeared as a simple and intuitive metric that correlates inversely with HbA1c and has also been newly linked to the risk of long-term diabetes complications. The International Consensus on Time in Range established a series of target glucose ranges (TIR, time below range and time above range) and recommendations for time spent within these ranges for different diabetes populations. These parameters should be evaluated together with the ambulatory glucose profile (AGP). Using standardized visual reporting may help people with diabetes and healthcare professionals in the evaluation of glucose control in frequent clinical situations. The objective of the present review is to provide practical insights to quick interpretation of patient-centered metrics based on flash glucose monitoring data, as well as showing some visual examples of common clinical situations and giving practical recommendations for their management.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring in the Intensive Care Unit

Traditionally, the care of critically ill patients with diabetes or stress hyperglycemia in the intensive care unit (ICU) demands the use of continuous intravenous insulin (CII) therapy to achieve narrow glycemic targets. To reduce the risk of iatrogenic hypoglycemia and to achieve glycemic targets during CII, healthcare providers (HCP) rely on hourly point-of-care (POC) arterial or capillary glucose tests obtained with glucose monitors. The burden of this approach, however, was evident during the beginning of the pandemic when the immediate reduction in close contact interactions between HCP and patients with COVID-19 was necessary to avoid potentially life-threatening exposures. Taking advantage of the advancements in current diabetes technologies, including continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices integrated with digital health tools for remote monitoring, HCP implemented novel protocols in the ICU to care for patients with COVID-19 and hyperglycemia. We provide an overview of research conducted in the ICU setting with the use of initial CGM technology to current devices and summarize our recent experience in the ICU.

Nursing Perspectives on the Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in the Intensive Care Unit

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated rapid implementation of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in the intensive care unit (ICU). Although rarely reported, perceptions from nursing staff who used the systems are critical for successful implementation and future expanded use of CGM in the inpatient setting.

METHODS

A 22-item survey focused on CGM use was distributed to ICU nurses at two large academic medical centers in the United States in 2022. Both institutions initiated inpatient CGM in the spring of 2020 using the same CGM+point of care (POC) hybrid protocol. The survey employed a 1- to 5-point Likert scale regarding CGM sensor insertion, accuracy, acceptability, usability, training, and perceptions on workload.

RESULTS

Of the 71 surveys completed, 68 (96%) nurses reported they cared for an ICU patient on CGM and 53% reported they had independently performed CGM sensor insertion. The ICU nurses overwhelmingly reported that CGM was accurate, reduced their workload, provided safer patient care, and was preferred over POC glucose testing alone. Interestingly, nearly half of nurses (49%) reported that they considered trend arrows in dosing decisions although trends were not included in the CGM+POC hybrid protocol. Nurses received training through multiple modalities, with the majority (80%) of nurses reporting that CGM training was sufficient and prepared them for its use.

CONCLUSION

These results confirm nursing acceptance and preference for CGM use within a hybrid glucose monitoring protocol in the ICU setting. These data lay a blueprint for successful implementation and training strategies for future widespread use.

Accuracy and Glycemic Efficacy of Continuous Glucose Monitors in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is approved for insulin dosing decisions in the ambulatory setting, but not currently for inpatients. CGM has the capacity to reduce patient-provider contact in inpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), thus potentially reducing in hospital virus transmission. However, there are sparse data on the accuracy and efficacy of CGM to titrate insulin doses in inpatients.

METHODS

Under an emergency use protocol, CGM (Dexcom G6) was used alongside standard point-of-care (POC) glucose measurements in patients critically ill from complications of COVID-19 requiring intravenous (IV) insulin. Glycemic control during IV insulin therapy was retrospectively assessed comparing periods with and without adjunctive CGM use. Accuracy metrics were computed and Clarke Error Grid analysis performed comparing CGM glucose values with POC measurements.

RESULTS

Twenty-four critically ill patients who met criteria for emergency use of CGM resulted in 47 333 CGM and 5677 POC glucose values. During IV insulin therapy, individuals' glycemic control improved when CGM was used (mean difference -30.7 mg/dL). Among 2194 matched CGM: POC glucose pairs, a high degree of concordance was observed with a mean absolute relative difference of 14.8% and 99.5% of CGM: POC pairs falling in Zones A and B of the Clarke Error Grid.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuous glucose monitoring use in critically ill COVID-19 patients improved glycemic control during IV insulin therapy. Continuous glucose monitoring glucose data were highly concordant with POC glucose during IV insulin therapy in critically ill patients suggesting that CGM could substitute for POC measurements in inpatients thus reducing patient-provider contact and mitigating infection transmission.

Implementation of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Critical Care: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this review is to identify the implementation approaches, strategies, and outcomes for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in the intensive care unit (ICU). Medline and Web of Science databases were searched to report relevant literature published between September 12, 2016 and September 12, 2021. Implementation outcomes and strategies, defined by the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project, were extracted.

RECENT FINDINGS

Of the 324 titles reviewed, 16 articles were included in the review. While no studies were identified as implementation research, 14 of 16 identified implementation strategies that aligned with ERIC definitions. Included studies described a multi-disciplinary approach. Clinical outcomes included Mean Absolute Relative Difference (MARD), ranging from 7.5 to 15.3%, and 33-71% reduction in frequency of point-of-care (POC) blood glucose monitoring (BGM) using hybrid protocols. This scoping review provides valuable insight into the process of CGM implementation in the ICU. Continued research should include implementation outcomes to inform widespread utilization.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia: Initial Experience at a Tertiary Care Center

OBJECTIVE

Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and hyperglycemia require frequent glucose monitoring, usually performed with glucometers. Continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) are common in the outpatient setting but not yet approved for hospital use. We evaluated CGM accuracy, safety for insulin dosing, and CGM clinical reliability in 20 adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and hyperglycemia.

METHODS

Study patients were fitted with a remotely monitored CGM. CGM values were evaluated against glucometer readings. The CGM sensor calibration was performed if necessary. CGM values were used to dose insulin, without glucometer confirmation.

RESULTS

CGM accuracy against glucometer, expressed as mean absolute relative difference (MARD), was calculated using 812 paired glucometer-CGM values. The aggregate MARD was 10.4%. For time in range and grades 1 and 2 hyperglycemia, MARD was 11.4%, 9.4%, and 9.1%, respectively, with a small variation between medical floors and intensive care units. There was no MARD correlation with mean arterial blood pressure levels, oxygen saturation, daily hemoglobin levels, and glomerular filtration rates. CGM clinical reliability was high, with 99.7% of the CGM values falling within the "safe" zones of Clarke error grid. After CGM placement, the frequency of glucometer measurements decreased from 5 to 3 and then 2 per day, reducing nurse presence in patient rooms and limiting viral exposure.

CONCLUSION

With twice daily, on-demand calibration, the inpatient CGM use was safe for insulin dosing, decreasing the frequency of glucometer fingersticks. For glucose levels >70 mg/dL, CGMs showed adequate accuracy, without interference from vital and laboratory values.

The Need for Data Standards and Implementation Policies to Integrate CGM Data into the Electronic Health Record

The current lack of continuous glucose monitor (CGM) data integration into the electronic health record (EHR) is holding back the use of this wearable technology for patient-generated health data (PGHD). This failure to integrate with other healthcare data inside the EHR disrupts workflows, removes the data from critical patient context, and overall makes the CGM data less useful than it might otherwise be. Many healthcare organizations (HCOs) are either struggling with or delaying designing and implementing CGM data integrations. In this article, the current status of CGM integration is reviewed, goals for integration are proposed, and a consensus plan to engage key stakeholders to facilitate integration is presented.

7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2023

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of 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, 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 and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Application of the New "Points in Range" Metrics in the Assessment of In-Hospital Glycemic Control

Introduction Capillary blood glucose (CBG) monitoring remains the most used testing form in hospitals and allows for "points in range (PIR)" metric calculation. This study was conceived to evaluate the metabolic control in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) at a hospital through PIR metrics. Methods This was an observational cross-sectional study conducted on October 9, 2020, that included non-critical adults admitted to Centro Hospitalar Universitário do Porto (except pregnant/postpartum women) with DM under CBG monitoring and a minimum of 24 hours of hospitalization. Glycemic control was evaluated by previous day CBG monitoring. Results The study sample consisted of 110 patients with DM (93.6% type 2) with a median number of CBG tests of 4.00 (1.00) and a median CBG of 166.20 (69.41) mg/dL, SD 41.93 ± 27.20 mg/dL, and variation coefficient of 22.56 ± 12.51%. Points below range were 0.5%, with 0% below 54 mg/dL. The points in ranges 70-140 mg/dL and 140-180 mg/dL were 32.8% and 22.0%, respectively, and the total number of patients with all points in range 70-180 mg/dL was 19 (17.3%), with only 3 (2.7%) having all points in range 140-180 mg/dL and 10 (9.1%) in range 70-140 mg/dL. Regarding points above range (PAR), 29.9% and 14.8% points were at levels 1 and 2 hyperglycemia, respectively, and 15 (13.6%) patients had all points above 180 mg/dL. Correlations were identified between PAR and the total number of CBG assessments (ρ = 0.689, p < 0.001). Conclusion We conclude that in-hospital glycemic control remains suboptimal: only few have adequate control according to the PIR metrics despite low glycemic variability. PIR metrics are a new, valuable, simple and valid way to take better advantage of CBG monitoring at no added cost.

16. Diabetes Care in the Hospital: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2023

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of 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, 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 and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Continuous glucose monitoring during therapeutic hypothermia for hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy: a feasibility study

OBJECTIVES

Glucose dysregulation is common in infants with hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE) and is likely to exacerbate cerebral injury. Infrequent measurement of glucose concentrations makes both identification and prevention of this risk challenging. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has the potential to address both these challenges, but has not been explored in these infants. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and potential impact of real-time CGM in term infants with HIE being treated with therapeutic hypothermia (TH).

DESIGN

Feasibility study.

SETTING

Tertiary-level neonatal unit, UK.

PATIENTS

Term infants with HIE undergoing TH.

INTERVENTION

A CGM sensor was inserted within 48 hours of birth and kept in situ for the first week of life. Clinical staff were blinded to the CGM recordings and clinical decisions were based on blood glucose assays.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

(1) Accuracy of CGM values during and post TH, (2) Per cent of time spent outside the clinical range (2.6-10 mmol/L), (3) Episodes of hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia, (4) Adverse effects.

RESULTS

The accuracy of CGM values during TH were comparable to those when infants were normothermic. There was wide variation in per cent time outside the target range (2.6-10 mmol/L) between infants (median 5%, range 0%-34%). CGM identified 44% of infants with ≥1 episode of hypoglycaemia (<2.6 mmol/L) and 50% with ≥1 episode of hyperglycaemia (>10 mmol/L). No adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that CGM could be a useful adjunct for glucose monitoring in babies undergoing TH who are at risk of both hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring Within Hospital: A Scoping Review and Summary of Guidelines From the Joint British Diabetes Societies for Inpatient Care

Increasing numbers of people, particularly with type 1 diabetes (T1D), are using wearable technologies. That is, continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) pumps, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, and hybrid closed-loop systems, which combine both these elements. Given over a quarter of all people admitted to hospital have diabetes, there is a need for clinical guidelines for when people using them are admitted to hospital. The Joint British Diabetes Societies for Inpatient Care (JBDS-IP) provide a scoping review and summary of guidelines on the use of diabetes technology in people with diabetes admitted to hospital.JBDS-IP advocates enabling people who can self-manage and use their own diabetes technology to continue doing so as they would do out of hospital. Whilst people with diabetes are recommended to achieve a target of 70% time within range (3.9-10.0 mmol/L [70-180 mg/dL]), this can be very difficult to achieve whilst unwell. We therefore recommend targeting hypoglycemia prevention as a priority, keeping time below 3.9 mmol/L (70 mg/dL) at < 1%, being aware of looming hypoglycemia if glucose is between 4.0 and 5.9 mmol/L (72-106 mg/dL), and consider intervening, particularly if there is a downward CGM trend arrow.Health care organizations need clear local policies and guidance to support individuals using diabetes technologies, and ensure the relevant workforce is capable and skilled enough to ensure their safe use within the hospital setting. The current set of guidelines is divided into two parts. Part 1, which follows below, outlines the guidance for use of CGM in hospital. The second part outlines guidance for use of CSII and hybrid closed-loop in hospital.

Hospital Diabetes Meeting 2022

The annual Virtual Hospital Diabetes Meeting was hosted by Diabetes Technology Society on April 1 and April 2, 2022. This meeting brought together experts in diabetes technology to discuss various new developments in the field of managing diabetes in hospitalized patients. Meeting topics included (1) digital health and the hospital, (2) blood glucose targets, (3) software for inpatient diabetes, (4) surgery, (5) transitions, (6) coronavirus disease and diabetes in the hospital, (7) drugs for diabetes, (8) continuous glucose monitoring, (9) quality improvement, (10) diabetes care and educatinon, and (11) uniting people, process, and technology to achieve optimal glycemic management. This meeting covered new technology that will enable better care of people with diabetes if they are hospitalized.

Clinical feasibility of remote intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in coronavirus disease 2019 patients with and without diabetes during dexamethasone therapy

The clinical utility of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is unclear. Hence, we investigated the accuracy of isCGM in COVID-19 patients during dexamethasone therapy. We evaluated the accuracy of the FreeStyle Libre via smartphone isCGM device compared to point-of-care (POC) fingerstick glucose level monitoring in 16 patients with COVID-19 (10 with and 6 without diabetes, 13 men; HbA1c 6.9 ± 1.0%). Overall, isCGM correlated well with POC measurements (46.2% and 53.8% within areas A and B of the Parkes error grid, respectively). The overall mean absolute relative difference (MARD) for isCGM compared to POC measurements was 19.4%. The MARDs were 19.8% and 19.7% for POC blood glucose measurements ranging from 70 to 180 mg/dL and >180 mg/dL, respectively. When divided according to the presence and absence of diabetes, both groups of paired glucose measurements showed a good correlation (56.3% and 43.7%, and 27.1% and 72.9% within the A and B areas in patients with and without diabetes, respectively), but the MARD was not significant but higher in patients without diabetes (16.5% and 24.2% in patients with and without diabetes). In conclusion, although isCGM may not be as accurate as traditional blood glucose monitoring, it has good reliability in COVID-19 patients with and without diabetes during dexamethasone therapy.

COVID-19 and Diabetes Outcomes: Rationale for and Updates from the CORONADO Study

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In France, in order to describe the phenotypic characteristics of patients with diabetes hospitalized for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) and to identify the prognostic factors in this specific population, the CORONADO (CORONAvirus and Diabetes Outcomes) study was launched. This review will summarize the key findings from the CORONADO study and put them in perspectives with others studies published on the subject.

RECENT FINDINGS

For almost 2 years, the new SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-CoronaVirus-2), which causes COVID-19, has spread all around the world leading to a pandemic. From the first epidemiological reports, diabetes mellitus has rapidly emerged as a major risk factor associated with severe forms of COVID-19 but few data were available about diabetes characteristics in hospitalized people with COVID-19. Between March 10 and April 10, 2020, 2951 patients were included in 68 centers throughout the national territory, including overseas territories. In the CORONADO study, the primary outcome was a composite endpoint combining invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and/or death within day 7 (D7). Secondary outcomes included death, IMV, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and hospital discharge, all considered within D7 and day 28 (D28). The primary outcome occurred in 29.0% participants within D7 following hospital admission. Within D28, the end of the follow-up period, the mortality rate was 20.6%, while 50.2% of patients were discharged. In multivariable analysis, advanced age, microvascular complications, treatment with insulin or statin prior to admission, dyspnea on admission, as well as biological markers reflecting the severity of the infection (high levels of transaminases, leukocytes and CRP, and low platelet levels) were associated with an increased risk of death. Several exploratory analyses were performed to clarify the influence of some parameters such as weight status, sex, type of diabetes, and some routine drugs, including metformin or statins.

Continuous glucose monitoring in the hospital: an update in the era of COVID-19

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems are Food and Drug Administration approved devices for the ambulatory setting; however, they remain investigational systems for inpatient use. This review summarizes the most recent and relevant literature on the use of continuous glucose monitoring in the hospital setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

CGM provides real-time glucose data that enable healthcare professionals to make proactive and timelier clinical decisions with regards to diabetes management. CGM devices appear to be safe and accurate systems for glucose monitoring in the hospital setting. Real-time CGM systems and glucose telemetry can decrease hypoglycemia and reduce hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients with diabetes. Remote glucose monitoring decreases the need of frequent Point-of-care checks and personal protective equipment use while also mitigating staff exposure risk which is timely in the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although most nursing staff have limited exposure and training on CGM technology, early studies show that CGM use in the hospital is well received by nurses.

SUMMARY

Given the evidence in the current literature regarding CGM use in the hospital, CGM devices may be incorporated in the inpatient setting.

Novel Glycemic Index Based on Continuous Glucose Monitoring to Predict Poor Clinical Outcomes in Critically Ill Patients: A Pilot Study

AIM

We explored the prospective relationship between continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics and clinical outcomes in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We enrolled critically ill patients admitted to the medical ICU. Patients with an Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) score ≤9 or ICU stay ≤48 h were excluded. CGM was performed for five days, and standardized CGM metrics were analyzed. The duration of ICU stay and 28-day mortality rate were evaluated as outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 36 patients were included in this study (age [range], 49-88 years; men, 55.6%). The average APACHE score was 25.4 ± 8.3; 33 (91.7%) patients required ventilator support, and 16 (44.4%) patients had diabetes. The duration of ICU stay showed a positive correlation with the average blood glucose level, glucose management indicator (GMI), time above range, and GMI minus (-) glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Eight (22.2%) patients died within 28 days, and their average blood glucose levels, GMI, and GMI-HbA1c were significantly higher than those of survivors (p<0.05). After adjustments for age, sex, presence of diabetes, APACHE score, and dose of steroid administered, the GMI-HbA1c was associated with the risk of longer ICU stay (coefficient=2.34, 95% CI 0.54-4.14, p=0.017) and higher 28-day mortality rate (HR=2.42, 95% CI 1.01-5.76, p=0.046).

CONCLUSION

The acute glycemic gap, assessed as GMI-HbA1c, is an independent risk factor for longer ICU stay and 28-day mortality rate. In the ICU setting, CGM of critically ill patients might be beneficial, irrespective of the presence of diabetes.

Endocrinology in the Time of COVID-19: A Rapid Evolution of Knowledge and Care

American singer-writer and visual artist Bob Dylan produced the song "The Times They Are a-Changin" in the 1960s, which became a rallying cry for the civil rights and anti-war movements in that decade [...].