Effect of Flash Glucose Monitoring Technology on Glycemic Control and Treatment Satisfaction in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

Flash Glucose Monitoring is Associated with HbA1c Improvement in Type 2 Diabetes Managed with Multiple Daily Injections of Insulin in the UK: A Retrospective Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

There is a growing body of evidence demonstrating the benefit of flash glucose monitoring in people living with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This real-world study aimed to evaluate the effect of initiating flash glucose monitoring on change in HbA1c after 3-6 months in adults living with T2DM treated with multiple daily injections of insulin.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study using data from ten clinical centres in the UK for adults with T2DM treated with multiple daily injections of insulin for at least 1 year was conducted. Patients who had been using the FreeStyle Libre/Libre 2 Flash Glucose Monitoring System for at least 3 months with baseline HbA1c 64-108 mmol/mol (8.0-12.0%) recorded up to 3 months prior to system use were included. Pregnant patients and those on dialysis were excluded. Patients with an HbA1c value measured 3-6 months after commencing flash glucose monitoring were included in the final analysis for evaluation of change.

RESULTS

In total, 87 patients were included in the final analysis (mean age, 60.0 ± 11.8 years, 60.9% male, mean body mass index (BMI), 31.6 ± 5.4 [mean ± SD]). From a mean baseline HbA1c of 80 ± 11 mmol/mol (9.5% ± 1.0%), HbA1c lowered by 11 ± 14 mmol/mol (1.0% ± 1.3%) at 3-6 months (p < 0.0001). A decrease was observed independent of age, baseline HbA1c, sex, duration of insulin use and BMI subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

Initiation of flash glucose monitoring was associated with a clinically and statistically significant improvement in HbA1c in a real-world setting at 3-6 months.

Association of Changes in A1C Following Continuous Glucose Monitoring Acquisition in People with Sub-Optimally Treated Type 2 Diabetes Taking GLP-1 RA Therapy

INTRODUCTION

Both glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) improve glycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, it is unknown whether adding CGM to GLP-1 RA therapy further improves A1c. We evaluated changes in A1c levels 6 months after initiation of FreeStyle Libre (FSL) in adults with sub-optimally controlled T2D already on GLP-1 RA therapy.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational study used Optum's de-identified Market Clarity Data, a linked electronic health record-claims database to assess changes in A1c after FSL acquisition. Inclusion criteria were T2D diagnosis, ≥ 18 years, baseline A1c ≥ 8%, with the first FSL acquisition between 2018 and 2022. Patients were required to be on GLP-1 RA prior to FSL with at least one GLP-1 RA prescription within 90 days of FSL acquisition. GLP-1 RA initiation was defined as the earliest GLP-1 RA prescription from 2017 onwards. Paired changes in A1c were assessed at 6 months after initial FSL acquisition.

RESULTS

The study cohort included 1454 adults with T2D (age 55 ± 10 years, 52% male, 38% with intensive insulin therapy, median 471 days from GLP-1 RA initiation to FSL, and baseline A1c 9.8 ± 1.5%). After FSL acquisition, patients experienced an A1c decrease of 1.5 ± 1.9% (p < 0.001). Patients with a baseline A1c > 10% had the largest reduction (n = 497, - 2.7 ± 2.2%, p < 0.001). Significant improvements were observed in subgroups based on insulin therapy and GLP-1 RA formulation. Those initiating GLP-1 RA therapy > 24 months before FSL acquisition also showed improvements in A1c (n = 478; - 1.3 ± 1.7%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large, real-world study of adults with T2D, those on prior GLP-1 RA therapy experienced significant A1c improvements after acquiring FSL, irrespective of GLP-1 RA duration, GLP-1 RA formulation, or insulin therapy type. These findings support the use of FSL in adults with T2D treated with GLP-1 RA.

Perspective of Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Based Interventions at the Various Stages of Type 2 Diabetes

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is now advocated for the clinical management of individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, this glucose monitoring strategy is not routinely used in type 2 diabetes (T2D), given the large population, significant cost implications and relatively limited supporting evidence. T2D is a more heterogenous condition compared with T1D with various glucose lowering therapies that do not necessarily require CGM to ensure within target glucose levels. While all individuals with T2D may benefit from CGM at certain time points, the whole T2D population does not necessarily require this technology continuously, which should be prioritized based on patient benefit and cost effectiveness. In this pragmatic opinion piece, we describe the rationale and evidence for CGM use in different subgroups of individuals with T2d, divided according to the stage of the condition, glycemic therapies, presence of diabetes complications, or associated co-morbidities. We discuss a total of 16 T2D subgroups and provide a clinical view on CGM use in each, based on current evidence while also highlighting areas of knowledge gaps. This work provides health care professionals with a simple guide to CGM use in different T2D groups and gives suggestion for future studies to justify expansion of this technology.

Continuous glucose monitoring among nurse practitioners in primary care: Characteristics associated with prescribing and resources needed to support use

BACKGROUND

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) can improve health for people with diabetes but is limited in primary care (PC). Nurse Practitioners (NPs) in PC can improve diabetes management through CGM, but NPs' interest in CGM and support needed are unclear.

PURPOSE

We describe behaviors and attitudes related to CGM for diabetes management among NPs in PC.

METHODOLOGY

This cross-sectional web-based survey of NPs practicing in PC settings used descriptive statistics to describe CGM experience and identify resources to support prescribing. We used multivariable regression to explore characteristics predicting prescribing and confidence using CGM for diabetes.

RESULTS

Nurse practitioners in hospital-owned settings were twice as likely to have prescribed CGM (odds ratio [OR] = 2.320, 95% CI [1.097, 4.903]; p = .002) than private practice; those in academic medical centers were less likely (OR = 0.098, 95% CI [0.012, 0.799]; p = .002). Past prescribing was associated with favorability toward future prescribing (coef. = 0.7284, SE = 0.1255, p < .001) and confidence using CGM to manage diabetes (type 1: coef. = 3.57, SE = 0.51, p < .001; type 2: coef. = 3.49, SE = 0.51, p < .001). Resources to prescribe CGM included consultation with an endocrinologist (62%), educational website (61%), and endocrinological e-consultations (59%).

CONCLUSIONS

Nurse practitioners are open to prescribing CGM and can improve diabetes management and health outcomes for PC patients.

IMPLICATIONS

Research should explore mechanisms behind associations with CGM experience and attitudes. Efforts to advance CGM should include educational websites and endocrinology consultations for NPs in PC.

Continuous glucose monitoring with structured education in adults with type 2 diabetes managed by multiple daily insulin injections: a multicentre randomised controlled trial

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of stand-alone intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) with or without a structured education programme and blood glucose monitoring (BGM) in adults with type 2 diabetes on multiple daily insulin injections (MDI).

METHODS

In this 24 week randomised open-label multicentre trial, adults with type 2 diabetes on intensive insulin therapy with HbA1c levels of 58-108 mmol/mol (7.5-12.0%) were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to isCGM with a structured education programme on adjusting insulin dose and timing according to graphical patterns in CGM (intervention group), isCGM with conventional education (control group 1) or BGM with conventional education (control group 2). Block randomisation was conducted by an independent statistician. Due to the nature of the intervention, blinding of participants and investigators was not possible. The primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline at 24 weeks, assessed using ANCOVA with the baseline value as a covariate.

RESULTS

A total of 159 individuals were randomised (n=53 for each group); 148 were included in the full analysis set, with 52 in the intervention group, 49 in control group 1 and 47 in control group 2. The mean (± SD) HbA1c level at baseline was 68.19±10.94 mmol/mol (8.39±1.00%). The least squares mean change (± SEM) from baseline HbA1c at 24 weeks was -10.96±1.35 mmol/mol (-1.00±0.12%) in the intervention group, -6.87±1.39 mmol/mol (-0.63±0.13%) in control group 1 (p=0.0367 vs intervention group) and -6.32±1.42 mmol/mol (-0.58±0.13%) in control group 2 (p=0.0193 vs intervention group). Adverse events occurred in 28.85% (15/52) of individuals in the intervention group, 26.42% (14/53) in control group 1 and 48.08% (25/52) in control group 2.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Stand-alone isCGM offers a greater reduction in HbA1c in adults with type 2 diabetes on MDI when education on the interpretation of graphical patterns in CGM is provided.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04926623.

FUNDING

This study was supported by Daewoong Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.

Continuous glucose monitoring for the routine care of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Although continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices are now considered the standard of care for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus, the uptake among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has been slower and is focused on those receiving intensive insulin therapy. However, increasing evidence now supports the inclusion of CGM in the routine care of people with T2DM who are on basal insulin-only regimens or are managed with other medications. Expanding CGM to these groups could minimize hypoglycaemia while allowing efficient adaptation and escalation of therapies. Increasing evidence from randomized controlled trials and observational studies indicates that CGM is of clinical value in people with T2DM on non-intensive treatment regimens. If further studies confirm this finding, CGM could soon become a part of routine care for T2DM. In this Perspective we explore the potential benefits of widening the application of CGM in T2DM, along with the challenges that must be overcome for the evidence-based benefits of this technology to be delivered for all people with T2DM.

The use of technology in type 2 diabetes and prediabetes: a narrative review

The increasing incidence of type 2 diabetes, which represents 90% of diabetes cases globally, is a major public health concern. Improved glucose management reduces the risk of vascular complications and mortality; however, only a small proportion of the type 2 diabetes population have blood glucose levels within the recommended treatment targets. In recent years, diabetes technologies have revolutionised the care of people with type 1 diabetes, and it is becoming increasingly evident that people with type 2 diabetes can also benefit from these advances. In this review, we describe the current knowledge regarding the role of technologies for people living with type 2 diabetes and the evidence supporting their use in clinical practice. We conclude that continuous glucose monitoring systems deliver glycaemic benefits for individuals with type 2 diabetes, whether treated with insulin or non-insulin therapy; further data are required to evaluate the role of these systems in those with prediabetes (defined as impaired glucose tolerance and/or impaired fasting glucose and/or HbA1c levels between 39 mmol/mol [5.7%] and 47 mmol/mol [6.4%]). The use of insulin pumps seems to be safe and effective in people with type 2 diabetes, especially in those with an HbA1c significantly above target. Initial results from studies exploring the impact of closed-loop systems in type 2 diabetes are promising. We discuss directions for future research to fully understand the potential benefits of integrating evidence-based technology into care for people living with type 2 diabetes and prediabetes.

Japanese candlestick charts for diabetes

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is a popular technology among the diabetic population, especially in patients with type 1 diabetes and those with type 2 diabetes treated with insulin. The American Diabetes Association recommends standardization of CGM reports with visual cues, such as the ambulatory glucose profile. Nevertheless, interpreting this report requires training and time for CGM to be cost-efficient. In this work it has been proposed to incorporate Japanese candlestick charts in glucose monitoring. These graphs are used in price analysis in financial markets and are easier to view. Each candle provides extra information to make prudent decisions since it reports the opening, maximum, minimum and closing glucose levels of the chosen time frame, usually the daily one. The Japanese candlestick chart is an interesting tool to be considered in glucose control. This graphic representation allows identification of glucose trends easily through the colors of the candles and maximum and minimum glucose values.

Research progress on the association between glycemic variability index derived from CGM and cardiovascular disease complications

Currently, glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) has been widely used to assess the glycemic control of patients with diabetes. However, HbA1c has certain limitations in describing both short-term and long-term glycemic control. To more accurately evaluate the glycemic control of diabetes patients, the continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology has emerged. CGM technology can provide robust data on short-term glycemic control and introduce new monitoring parameters such as time in range, time above range, and time below range as indicators of glycemic fluctuation. These indicators are used to describe the changes in glycemic control after interventions in clinical research or treatment modifications in diabetes patient care. Recent studies both domestically and internationally have shown that these indicators are not only associated with microvascular complications of diabetes mellitus but also closely related to cardiovascular disease complications and prognosis. Therefore, this article aims to comprehensively review the association between CGM-based glycemic parameters and cardiovascular disease complications by analyzing a large number of domestic and international literature. The purpose is to provide scientific evidence and guidance for the standardized application of these indicators in clinical practice, in order to better evaluate the glycemic control of diabetes patients and prevent the occurrence of cardiovascular disease complications. This research will contribute to improving the quality of life for diabetes patients and provide important references for clinical decision-making.

Utility of time in tight range (TITR) in evaluating metabolic control in pediatric and adult patients with type 1 diabetes in treatment with advanced hybrid closed-loop systems

PURPOSE

To analyze the time in tight range (TITR), and its relationship with other glucometric parameters in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) treated with advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) systems.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted on pediatric and adult patients with T1D undergoing treatment with AHCL systems for at least 3 months. Clinical variables and glucometric parameters before and after AHCL initiation were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 117 patients were evaluated. Comparison of metabolic control after AHCL initiation showed significant improvements in HbA1c (6.9 ± 0.9 vs. 6.6 ± 0.5%, p < 0.001), time in range (TIR) (68.2 ± 11.5 vs. 82.5 ± 6.9%, p < 0.001), TITR (43.7 ± 10.8 vs. 57.3 ± 9.7%, p < 0.001), glucose management indicator (GMI) (6.9 ± 0.4 vs. 6.6 ± 0.3%, p < 0.001), time below range (TBR) 70-54 mg/dl (4.3 ± 4.5 vs. 2.0 ± 1.4%, p < 0.001), and time above range (TAR) > 180 mg/dl (36.0 ± 7.6 vs. 15.1 ± 6.4%, p < 0.001). Coefficient of variation (CV) also improved (36.3 ± 5.7 vs. 30.6 ± 3.7, p < 0.001), while time between 140-180 mg/dl remained unchanged. In total, 76.3% achieved TITR > 50% (100% pediatric). Correlation analysis between TITR and TIR and GRI showed a strong positive correlation, modified by glycemic variability.

CONCLUSIONS

AHCL systems achieve significant improvements in metabolic control (TIR > 70% in 93.9% patients). The increase in TIR was not related to an increase in TIR 140-180 mg/dl. Despite being closely related to TIR, TITR allows for a more adequate discrimination of the achieved control level, especially in a population with good initial metabolic control. The correlation between TIR and TITR is directly influenced by the degree of glycemic variability.

Importance of FDA-Integrated Continuous Glucose Monitors to Ensure Accuracy of Continuous Glucose Monitoring

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to improve glycemic control and self-monitoring, as well as to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia. Integrated CGM (iCGM) FDA-cleared systems with published performance data are established nonadjunctive and accurate CGM tools that can directly inform decision-making in the treatment of diabetes (i.e., insulin dosing). Studies have assessed accuracy and safety data of CGMs that were eventually cleared for iCGM by the FDA and that informed the recommendation for their nonadjunctive use. Subsequent robust clinical trials and real-world studies demonstrated clinical effectiveness with improvements in a range of patient outcomes. In recent years, a number of non-iCGM-approved CGM devices have entered the market outside the United States worldwide. Some of these non-iCGM-approved CGM devices require additional user verification of blood glucose levels to be performed for making treatment decisions, termed adjunctive. Moreover, in many non-iCGM-approved CGM devices, accuracy studies published in peer-reviewed journals are scarce or have many limitations. Consequently, non-iCGM-approved CGM devices cannot be automatically perceived as having the same performance or quality standards than those approved for iCGM by the FDA. As a result, although these devices tend to cost less than iCGMs that carry FDA clearance and could therefore be attractive from the point of view of a health care payer, it must be emphasized that evaluation of costs should not be limited to the device (such as the usability preference that patients have for nonadjunctive sensors compared to adjunctive sensors) but to the wider value of the total benefit that the product provides to the patient.

An estimate of the need for continuous glucose monitoring in type 2 diabetes with intensive insulin treatment in secondary healthcare

AIM

To estimate the proportion of persons with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) receiving intensive insulin treatment in the secondary healthcare who could be candidates for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), based on different HbA1c criteria. For comparison, the results are also presented as proportion of persons with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) in the same region.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In the Central Denmark Region, we identified all persons with T1DM (n = 6179) and T2DM (n = 4315) who had a minimum of one contact to a diabetes outpatient clinic from September 2021 to September 2022. Insulin regimen and HbA1c measured after a minimum of 2 months with a stable insulin regimen were retrieved from the healthcare administrative electronic platform used in the region.

RESULTS

The numbers of persons with T1DM and T2DM with HbA1c meeting the criteria were 5145 and 3090, respectively. The fraction of T2DM with basal-bolus insulin was 35.3%, and the fraction with basal-bolus insulin and HbA1c >53 (7%) mmol/mol or >58 (7.5%) mmol/mol was 20.5% and 16.6%, respectively. These proportions correspond to 19.4%, 14.4% and 11.7% of the persons with T1DM in the same geographical area.

CONCLUSION

The proportion of persons with T2DM in secondary healthcare undergoing intensive insulin treatment who could be candidates for CGM corresponded to only a minor fraction of persons with T1DM in the same region, irrespective of any HbA1c criteria applied.

Diabetes Technology in People with Type 2 Diabetes: Novel Indications

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Diabetes technology has been continuously evolving. Current versions of continuous glucose monitors (CGM) use minimally invasive designs, monitor glucose values with high accuracy, and can be used to guide insulin dosing. Extensive evidence supports the use of diabetes technology for monitoring and insulin administration in people with type 1 diabetes. However, there is emerging evidence for people with type 2 diabetes. In this review, we present the different technological devices used to monitor glucose and deliver insulin and the evidence supporting their use in people with type 2 diabetes.

RECENT FINDINGS

The use of CGMs in people with type 2 diabetes treated with insulin or non-insulin therapies has been associated with improvements in glycemic control and time spent in hypoglycemia. Smart insulin pens and smart connected devices are options to track compliance and guide insulin delivery in people who do not require insulin pump therapy. Mechanical patch pumps can be used to reduce the burden of multiple daily insulin injections. Automated insulin delivery algorithms improve glycemic control without an increase in hypoglycemia. The use of technology in the management of type 2 diabetes generates glycemic data previously inaccessible, reduces barriers for insulin initiation, improves glycemic control, tracks adherence to therapy, and improves user satisfaction.

Continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is increasingly used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes, but the effects on glycaemic control are unclear. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to provide a comprehensive overview of the effect of CGM on glycaemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review using Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until 2 May 2023. We included RCTs investigating real-time CGM (rtCGM) or intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM) compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in adults with type 2 diabetes. Studies with an intervention duration <6 weeks or investigating professional CGM, a combination of CGM and additional glucose-lowering treatment strategies or GlucoWatch were not eligible. Change in HbA1c and the CGM metrics time in range (TIR), time below range (TBR), time above range (TAR) and glycaemic variability were extracted. We evaluated the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool version 2. Data were synthesised by performing a meta-analysis. We also explored the effects of CGM on severe hypoglycaemia and micro- and macrovascular complications.

RESULTS

We found 12 RCTs comprising 1248 participants, with eight investigating rtCGM and four isCGM. Compared with SMBG, CGM use (rtCGM or isCGM) led to a mean difference (MD) in HbA1c of -3.43 mmol/mol (-0.31%; 95% CI -4.75, -2.11, p<0.00001, I2=15%; moderate certainty). This effect was comparable in studies that included individuals using insulin with or without oral agents (MD -3.27 mmol/mol [-0.30%]; 95% CI -6.22, -0.31, p=0.03, I2=55%), and individuals using oral agents only (MD -3.22 mmol/mol [-0.29%]; 95% CI -5.39, -1.05, p=0.004, I2=0%). Use of rtCGM showed a trend towards a larger effect (MD -3.95 mmol/mol [-0.36%]; 95% CI -5.46 to -2.44, p<0.00001, I2=0%) than use of isCGM (MD -1.79 mmol/mol [-0.16%]; 95% CI -5.28, 1.69, p=0.31, I2=64%). CGM was also associated with an increase in TIR (+6.36%; 95% CI +2.48, +10.24, p=0.001, I2=9%) and a decrease in TBR (-0.66%; 95% CI -1.21, -0.12, p=0.02, I2=45%), TAR (-5.86%; 95% CI -10.88, -0.84, p=0.02, I2=37%) and glycaemic variability (-1.47%; 95% CI -2.94, -0.01, p=0.05, I2=0%). Three studies reported one or more events of severe hypoglycaemia and macrovascular complications. In comparison with SMBG, CGM use led to a non-statistically significant difference in the incidence of severe hypoglycaemia (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.15, 3.00, p=0.57, I2=0%) and macrovascular complications (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.42, 5.72, p=0.52, I2=29%). No trials reported data on microvascular complications.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

CGM use compared with SMBG is associated with improvements in glycaemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes. However, all studies were open label. In addition, outcome data on incident severe hypoglycaemia and incident microvascular and macrovascular complications were scarce.

REGISTRATION

This systematic review was registered on PROSPERO (ID CRD42023418005).

Effectiveness of Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Metrics of Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

To provide a systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizing the findings of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) in the management of adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on glucose control and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane were searched for RCTs that assessed the effectiveness of real-time CGM (rt-CGM) or flash CGM (FGM) in adults (≥18 years) with T2DM that reported on at least 1 of the following outcomes: hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), time in range, time in hyperglycemia, or time in hypoglycemia. The GRADE approach was used to assess certainty of evidence for primary outcomes.

RESULTS

Fourteen RCTs assessing CGM were included, with 825 patients in 9 RCTs using rt-CGM and 822 in 5 RCTs using FGM. Moderate certainty of evidence indicated that use of CGM had a modest but statistically significant reduction in HbA1c levels of about 0.32%. Our analyses of each device type separately showed similar reductions in HbA1c (0.34% and 0.33%, respectively, for rt-CGM and FGM), with trends for improvement in other glucose metrics favoring rt-CGM over self-monitored blood glucose.

CONCLUSION

Both rt-CGM and flash CGM led to modest but statistically significant declines in HbA1c among individuals with T2DM, with little heterogeneity in the results. However, the duration of the included RCTs was relatively short and few studies reported on important clinical outcomes, such as adverse events, emergency department use, or hospitalization. Longer term studies are needed to determine if the short-term improvements in glucose control leads to improvements in clinically important outcomes.

Effectiveness and Safety of the Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring System FreeStyle Libre 2 in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Treated with Basal Insulin or Oral Antidiabetic Drugs: An Observational, Retrospective Real-World Study

Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring (isCGM) devices are increasingly being used in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on insulin therapy for their benefits regarding disease management. Evidence of isCGM use in patients with T2DM on basal or non-insulin therapy is lacking. This study aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety of isCGM in this population. This was an observational, retrospective, real-world study enrolling patients with T2DM who were starting the use of isCGM. Data from medical records (i.e., demographics, clinical characteristics, laboratory assessments, and isCGM metrics) were collected over three time periods (baseline, 3 and 6 months). The endpoints were glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) changes and changes in isCGM metrics as defined by the International Consensus from baseline to 3 months and 6 months. Overall, 132 patients were included (69.5% male; mean age 68.2 ± 11.0 years; mean disease duration 19.0 ± 9.4 years; 79.7% on basal insulin ±non-insulin therapy; mean baseline HbA1c 8.1% ± 1.3%). The estimated mean change in HbA1c was statistically significant at three (-0.4 ± 1.0%; p = 0.003) and six months (-0.6 ± 1.3%; p < 0.0001). In conclusion, isCGM proved to be effective and safe in improving glycaemic control in patients with T2DM on basal insulin or non-insulin therapy.

Effects of continuous glucose monitoring on glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in maintaining glycaemic control among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023387583). PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and OVID databases were searched from 1 January 2000 until 31 December 2022 for randomized controlled trials comparing CGM with SMBG in glycaemic control among the outpatients with T2DM. The primary endpoint was glycated haemoglobin, while the secondary endpoints included time in range, time below range and time above range. Both traditional and network meta-analyses were conducted to explore the efficacy of CGM on glycaemic control in T2DM.

RESULTS

Eleven high-quality studies, involving 1425 individuals with T2DM, were identified. Traditional meta-analysis revealed that CGM exhibited a significantly decreased [mean difference (MD): -0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-0.45, -0.18)], time above range [MD: -9.06%, 95% CI (-16.00, -2.11)], time below range [MD: -0.30%, 95% CI (-0.49, -0.12)] and a significantly increased time in range [MD: 8.49%, 95% CI (3.96, 13.02)] compared with SMBG. The network meta-analysis showed that real-time CGM can improve the glycaemic control of patients with T2DM to the most extent.

CONCLUSIONS

CGM could provide T2DM with greater benefits in glycaemic management compared with SMBG, particularly in patients using real-time CGM. These findings provide an updated perspective on previous research and offer guidance for CGM use in T2DM.

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.

Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: Comparison of Holidaysversus Schooldays

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To examine the influence of school life in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) by comparing the glycemic control and Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP) between the holidays and schooldays.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study conducted on 147 patients with T1D (14-19 years) who used an intermittently scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring (isCGM) system to self-test their glucose levels during the periods of school time and holiday time. A record was maintained of the Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) metrics i.e., Glucose Variability (GV) (%), mean Time in Range (TIR), Time above Range (TAR), Time below Range (TBR), and average time period of the hypoglycemic events during schooldays and the holidays.

RESULTS

The study revealed differences between the recorded values during the holidays and schooldays, in % in target 70-180 mg/dL (38.2 vs. 49.5; p = 0.039), mean glucose (194 vs. 185; p = 0.048), frequency of low glucose events (9.2 vs. 5.1; p = 0.036), mean duration of low glucose levels (117 vs. 65; p = 0.021), % TBR below 70 mg/dL (2.9 vs. 1.45; p = 0.023), % TBR below 54 mg/dL (1.1 vs. 0.51; p = 0.031), TAR 181-250 mg/dL (21.1 vs. 16.5; p = 0.037) and TAR >250 mg/dL (8.9 vs. 6.5; p = 0.043). On comparing the HbA1c levels of the study population recorded during the holidays (8.34%) with those recorded during the schooldays (8.13%), the HbA1c values during the school days were observed to be lower; however, no significant changes were noted in the HbA1c level between the holidays and schooldays. Concerning the FreeStyle Libre (FSL) scanning, the frequency during the holidays (n = 6.2) was significantly lower than during the schooldays (n = 9.5) (p = 0.042).

CONCLUSION

From the findings, it appears that children with T1D have good diabetes control during schooldays rather than during the holidays. To improve their glucose control during the holidays, these patients may also benefit from receiving greater attention and guidance.

Clinical impact of an integrated e-health system for diabetes self-management support and shared decision making (POWER2DM): a randomised controlled trial

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

There is a lack of e-health systems that integrate the complex variety of aspects relevant for diabetes self-management. We developed and field-tested an e-health system (POWER2DM) that integrates medical, psychological and behavioural aspects and connected wearables to support patients and healthcare professionals in shared decision making and diabetes self-management.

METHODS

Participants with type 1 or type 2 diabetes (aged >18 years) from hospital outpatient diabetes clinics in the Netherlands and Spain were randomised using randomisation software to POWER2DM or usual care for 37 weeks. This RCT assessed the change in HbA1c between the POWER2DM and usual care groups at the end of the study (37 weeks) as a primary outcome measure. Participants and clinicians were not blinded to the intervention. Changes in quality of life (QoL) (WHO-5 Well-Being Index [WHO-5]), diabetes self-management (Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire - Revised [DSMQ-R]), glycaemic profiles from continuous glucose monitoring devices, awareness of hypoglycaemia (Clarke hypoglycaemia unawareness instrument), incidence of hypoglycaemic episodes and technology acceptance were secondary outcome measures. Additionally, sub-analyses were performed for participants with type 1 and type 2 diabetes separately.

RESULTS

A total of 226 participants participated in the trial (108 with type 1 diabetes; 118 with type 2 diabetes). In the POWER2DM group (n=111), HbA1c decreased from 60.6±14.7 mmol/mol (7.7±1.3%) to 56.7±12.1 mmol/mol (7.3±1.1%) (means ± SD, p<0.001), compared with no change in the usual care group (n=115) (baseline: 61.7±13.7 mmol/mol, 7.8±1.3%; end of study: 61.0±12.4 mmol/mol, 7.7±1.1%; p=0.19) (between-group difference 0.24%, p=0.008). In the sub-analyses in the POWER2DM group, HbA1c in participants with type 2 diabetes decreased from 62.3±17.3 mmol/mol (7.9±1.6%) to 54.3±11.1 mmol/mol (7.1±1.0%) (p<0.001) compared with no change in HbA1c in participants with type 1 diabetes (baseline: 58.8±11.2 mmol/mol [7.5±1.0%]; end of study: 59.2±12.7 mmol/mol [7.6±1.2%]; p=0.84). There was an increase in the time during which interstitial glucose levels were between 3.0 and 3.9 mmol/l in the POWER2DM group, but no increase in clinically relevant hypoglycaemia (interstitial glucose level below 3.0 mmol/l). QoL improved in participants with type 1 diabetes in the POWER2DM group compared with the usual care group (baseline: 15.7±3.8; end of study: 16.3±3.5; p=0.047 for between-group difference). Diabetes self-management improved in both participants with type 1 diabetes (from 7.3±1.2 to 7.7±1.2; p=0.002) and those with type 2 diabetes (from 6.5±1.3 to 6.7±1.3; p=0.003) within the POWER2DM group. The POWER2DM integrated e-health support was well accepted in daily life and no important adverse (or unexpected) effects or side effects were observed.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

POWER2DM improves HbA1c levels compared with usual care in those with type 2 diabetes, improves QoL in those with type 1 diabetes, improves diabetes self-management in those with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, and is well accepted in daily life.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03588104.

FUNDING

This study was funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme (grant agreement number 689444).

Roadmap to Achieving Continuous Glucose Monitoring Equity: Insights From the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative

This article describes successful interventions from the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative (T1DX-QI) to reduce inequities in access to and use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The author proposes a roadmap with recommendations for different stakeholders to achieve CGM equity using insights from the T1DX-QI experience.

The Influence of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Psychosocial Outcomes in Insulin-Using Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

To examine the impact of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) on psychosocial outcomes in adults with insulin-using type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

A total of 174 insulin-using adults with T2D completed questionnaires assessing diabetes distress, hypoglycemic confidence, hypoglycemic fear, device-related emotional burden, and device-related trust before and after a six-month trial of rtCGM. Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was assessed at the same time points; impaired hypoglycemic awareness (IAH) was assessed at baseline. Change in psychosocial outcomes was examined with t tests, then modeled as a function of baseline HbA1c and IAH and simultaneous change in HbA1c in multiple regression analyses.

RESULTS

Respondents were predominantly male (57.5%) and non-Hispanic white (67.8%). Significant improvement over the trial was observed in hypoglycemic fear (P = .031), hypoglycemic confidence (P < .001), diabetes distress (P < .001), and device-related emotional burden (P < .001). Impaired hypoglycemic awareness at baseline predicted greater improvement in hypoglycemic fear (P = .002), hypoglycemic confidence (P = .003), diabetes distress (P = .013), and device-related emotional burden (P < .001). Higher baseline HbA1c was linked with greater improvement in hypoglycemic fear (P = .030); HbA1c change over the trial was positively associated with change in diabetes distress (P = .010) and device-related emotional burden (P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

Introduction of rtCGM in adults with insulin-using T2D was associated with significant improvements in diabetes-related psychosocial outcomes over six months. Gains were significantly greater among participants reporting IAH and those with higher HbA1c at baseline, thus providing the first evidence regarding which users might more likely benefit.

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

BACKGROUND

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

APPROACH

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

CONTENT

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

SUMMARY

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

Flash glucose monitoring in gestational diabetes mellitus (FLAMINGO): a randomised controlled trial

AIMS

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is the most common type of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy. GDM is a risk factor of adverse perinatal outcomes, with the incidence rate increasing proportionally to the level of maternal dysglycaemia. Therefore, glycaemic control plays an important role in management of GDM. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of flash glucose monitoring (FGM) in GDM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a non-blinded, randomised controlled trial, that recruited 100 pregnant women diagnosed with GDM between 24 and 28 weeks of gestation at the 1st Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Medical University of Warsaw. After meeting the inclusion criteria patients were randomly allocated to the study group (FGM, n = 50) or control group (self-monitoring of blood glucose-SMBG, n = 50). Clinical and laboratory results were assessed at four follow-up visits. The primary outcome was mean fasting and postprandial glycaemia. The secondary outcomes were perinatal outcomes.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in mean glycaemia between the groups (p = 0.437) Compared to the control group, the study group significantly reduced their fasting (p = 0.027) and postprandial glycaemia (p = 0.034) during the first 4 weeks following GDM diagnosis, with no significant difference in progression to insulin therapy (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.47-2.57). Incidence of fetal macrosomia was significantly higher in SMBG as compared to FGM group (OR 5.63, 95% CI 1.16-27.22).

CONCLUSIONS

Study results indicate that FGM has an impact on glycaemic control, dietary habits and incidence of fetal macrosomia in patients with GDM. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT04422821.

2023 Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diabetes Mellitus of the Korean Diabetes Association

In May 2023, the Committee of Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Korean Diabetes Association published the revised clinical practice guidelines for Korean adults with diabetes and prediabetes. We incorporated the latest clinical research findings through a comprehensive systematic literature review and applied them in a manner suitable for the Korean population. These guidelines are designed for all healthcare providers nationwide, including physicians, diabetes experts, and certified diabetes educators who manage patients with diabetes or individuals at risk of developing diabetes. Based on recent changes in international guidelines and the results of a Korean epidemiological study, the recommended age for diabetes screening has been lowered. In collaboration with the relevant Korean medical societies, recently revised guidelines for managing hypertension and dyslipidemia in patients with diabetes have been incorporated into this guideline. An abridgment containing practical information on patient education and systematic management in the clinic was published separately.

The Growing Role of Technology in the Care of Older Adults With Diabetes

The integration of technologies such as continuous glucose monitors, insulin pumps, and smart pens into diabetes management has the potential to support the transformation of health care services that provide a higher quality of diabetes care, lower costs and administrative burdens, and greater empowerment for people with diabetes and their caregivers. Among people with diabetes, older adults are a distinct subpopulation in terms of their clinical heterogeneity, care priorities, and technology integration. The scientific evidence and clinical experience with these technologies among older adults are growing but are still modest. In this review, we describe the current knowledge regarding the impact of technology in older adults with diabetes, identify major barriers to the use of existing and emerging technologies, describe areas of care that could be optimized by technology, and identify areas for future research to fulfill the potential promise of evidence-based technology integrated into care for this important population.

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

BACKGROUND

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

APPROACH

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

CONTENT

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

SUMMARY

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

Expanding the Role of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Modern Diabetes Care Beyond Type 1 Disease

Application of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has moved diabetes care from a reactive to a proactive process, in which a person with diabetes can prevent episodes of hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia, rather than taking action only once low and high glucose are detected. Consequently, CGM devices are now seen as the standard of care for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Evidence now supports the use of CGM in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on any treatment regimen, not just for those on insulin therapy. Expanding the application of CGM to include all people with T1DM or T2DM can support effective intensification of therapies to reduce glucose exposure and lower the risk of complications and hospital admissions, which are associated with high healthcare costs. All of this can be achieved while minimizing the risk of hypoglycemia and improving quality of life for people with diabetes. Wider application of CGM can also bring considerable benefits for women with diabetes during pregnancy and their children, as well as providing support for acute care of hospital inpatients who experience the adverse effects of hyperglycemia following admission and surgical procedures, as a consequence of treatment-related insulin resistance or reduced insulin secretion. By tailoring the application of CGM for daily or intermittent use, depending on the patient profile and their needs, one can ensure the cost-effectiveness of CGM in each setting. In this article we discuss the evidence-based benefits of expanding the use of CGM technology to include all people with diabetes, along with a diverse population of people with non-diabetic glycemic dysregulation.

Comparing clinical outcomes between two continuous glucose monitors: similar diabetes-related events, all-cause hospitalizations and HbA1c reductions in type 1 and type 2 diabetes

Objectives

We compared clinical outcomes after acquiring a FreeStyle Libre© Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring System (FSL) or Dexcom (DEX) continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) device in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with intensive insulin therapy.

Design and Methods

This retrospective analysis of the IBM® MarketScan® Research Databases and IBM® Explorys® Electronic Health Records Database assessed differences in acute diabetes-related events (ADE), all-cause hospitalizations (ACH) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in T1D and T2D populations 6 months post CGM acquisition. Analyses were conducted in two study cohorts (Cohort 1, n = 7,494; Cohort 2, n = 678). Participants were T1D or T2D, age ≥ 18 years, treated with short or rapid-acting insulin and naïve to CGM, who acquired a CGM system. Users were propensity score matched on demographics and clinical factors.

Results

Cohort 1: Post-CGM ADE-free rates at 6 months ranged from 94.8 to 96.7% and ACH-free rates ranged from 90.4 to 95.4%, for both T1D and T2D groups, with no significant differences between CGM systems. Cohort 2: Significant HbA1c reductions were associated with use of the DEX and FSL devices in the T1D (-0.35% and -0.37%, respectively) and T2D (-0.73% and -0.79%, respectively) cohorts, both p < 0.001, with no significant differences in the magnitude of reduction between systems (T1D p = 0.99 and T2D p = 0.84).

Conclusions

Acquisition of the FSL and DEX systems was associated with similar rates of acute diabetes-related events and all-cause hospitalizations and similar HbA1c reductions in adults with T1D and T2D.

Asia-Pacific Perspectives on the Role of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Optimizing Diabetes Management

Diabetes is prevalent, and it imposes a substantial public health burden globally and in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region. The cornerstone for optimizing diabetes management and treatment outcomes is glucose monitoring, the techniques of which have evolved from self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) to glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and to continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Contextual differences with Western populations and limited regionally generated clinical evidence warrant regional standards of diabetes care, including glucose monitoring in APAC. Hence, the APAC Diabetes Care Advisory Board convened to gather insights into clinician-reported CGM utilization for optimized glucose monitoring and diabetes management in the region. We discuss the findings from a pre-meeting survey and an expert panel meeting regarding glucose monitoring patterns and influencing factors, patient profiles for CGM initiation and continuation, CGM benefits, and CGM optimization challenges and potential solutions in APAC. While CGM is becoming the new standard of care and a useful adjunct to HbA1c and SMBG globally, glucose monitoring type, timing, and frequency should be individualized according to local and patient-specific contexts. The results of this APAC survey guide methods for the formulation of future APAC-specific consensus guidelines for the application of CGM in people living with diabetes.

IMpact of flash glucose Monitoring in pEople with type 2 Diabetes Inadequately controlled with non-insulin Antihyperglycaemic ThErapy (IMMEDIATE): A randomized controlled trial

AIM

To examine the efficacy and patient satisfaction of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) in adults using non-insulin therapies for the management of type 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The IMMEDIATE study was a multisite, open label, randomized controlled trial with follow-up at 16 weeks. Adults with type 2 diabetes using at least one non-insulin therapy, with an HbA1c of 7.5% or higher (≥ 58 mmol/mol), were randomized 1:1 to receive an isCGM device plus diabetes self-management education (isCGM + DSME) or DSME alone. Enrolment occurred from 8 September 2020 to 24 December 2021. The primary outcome was percentage mean time in range (TIR), in the final 2-week period, measured via blinded CGM.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixteen participants were randomized (mean age, 58 years; diabetes duration, 10 years; mean HbA1c, 8.6% [70 mmol/mol]). At 16 weeks of follow-up, the isCGM and DSME arm had a significantly greater mean TIR by 9.9% (2.4 hours) (95% CI, -17.3% to -2.5%; P < .01), significantly less time above range by 8.1% (1.9 hours) (95% CI, 0.5% to 15.7%; P = .037), and a greater reduction in mean HbA1c by 0.3% (3 mmol/mol) (95% CI, 0% to 0.7%; P = .048) versus the DSME arm. Time below range was low and not significantly different between groups and hypoglycaemic events were few in both groups. Glucose monitoring satisfaction was higher among isCGM users (adjusted difference -0.5 [95% CI, -0.7 to -0.3], P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

The IMMEDIATE study has shown that among non-insulin-treated individuals with type 2 diabetes, use of isCGM is associated with an improvement in glycaemic outcomes.

The Clinical Impact of Flash Glucose Monitoring-a Digital Health App and Smartwatch Technology in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes has a growing prevalence and confers significant cost burden to the health care system, raising the urgent need for cost-effective and easily accessible solutions. The management of type 2 diabetes requires significant commitment from the patient, caregivers, and the treating team to optimize clinical outcomes and prevent complications. Technology and its implications for the management of type 2 diabetes is a nascent area of research. The impact of some of the more recent technological innovations in this space, such as continuous glucose monitoring, flash glucose monitoring, web-based applications, as well as smartphone- and smart watch-based interactive apps has received limited attention in the research literature.

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review aims to explore the literature available on type 2 diabetes, flash glucose monitoring, and digital health technology to improve diabetic clinical outcomes and inform future research in this area.

METHODS

A scoping review was undertaken by searching Ovid MEDLINE and CINAHL databases. A second search using all identified keywords and index terms was performed on Ovid MEDLINE (January 1966 to July 2021), EMBASE (January 1980 to July 2021), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; the Cochrane Library, latest issue), CINAHL (from 1982), IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Libraries, and Web of Science databases.

RESULTS

There were very few studies that have explored the use of mobile health and flash glucose monitoring in type 2 diabetes. These studies have explored somewhat disparate and limited areas of research, and there is a distinct lack of methodological rigor in this area of research. The 3 studies that met the inclusion criteria have addressed aspects of the proposed research question.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review has highlighted the lack of research in this area, raising the opportunity for further research in this area, focusing on the clinical impact and feasibility of the use of multiple technologies, including flash glucose monitoring in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes.

Management of Glycemia during Acute Aerobic and Resistance Training in Patients with Diabetes Type 1: A Croatian Pilot Study

(1) Background: The increased risk of developing hypoglycemia and worsening of glycemic stability during exercise is a major cause of concern for patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). (2) Aim: This pilot study aimed to assess glycemic stability and hypoglycemic episodes during and after aerobic versus resistance exercises using a flash glucose monitoring system in patients with T1DM. (3) Participants and Methods: We conducted a randomized crossover prospective study including 14 adult patients with T1DM. Patients were randomized according to the type of exercise (aerobic vs. resistance) with a recovery period of three days between a change of groups. Glucose stability and hypoglycemic episodes were evaluated during and 24 h after the exercise. Growth hormone (GH), cortisol, and lactate levels were determined at rest, 0, 30, and 60 min post-exercise period. (4) Results: The median age of patients was 53 years, with a median HbA1c of 7.1% and a duration of diabetes of 30 years. During both training sessions, there was a drop in glucose levels immediately after the exercise (0'), followed by an increase at 30' and 60', although the difference was not statistically significant. However, glucose levels significantly decreased from 60' to 24 h in the post-exercise period (p = 0.001) for both types of exercise. Glycemic stability was comparable prior to and after exercise for both training sessions. No differences in the number of hypoglycemic episodes, duration of hypoglycemia, and average glucose level in 24 h post-exercise period were observed between groups. Time to hypoglycemia onset was prolonged after the resistance as opposed to aerobic training (13 vs. 8 h, p = NS). There were no nocturnal hypoglycemic episodes (between 0 and 6 a.m.) after the resistance compared to aerobic exercise (4 vs. 0, p = NS). GH and cortisol responses were similar between the two sessions, while lactate levels were significantly more increased after resistance training. (5) Conclusion: Both exercise regimes induced similar blood glucose responses during and immediately following acute exercise.

Problem-based shared decision-making in diabetes care: a secondary analysis of video-recorded encounters

OBJECTIVES

To describe the range of collaborative approaches to shared decision-making (SDM) observed in clinical encounters of patients with diabetes and their clinicians.

DESIGN

A secondary analysis of videorecordings obtained in a randomised trial comparing usual diabetes primary care with or without using a within-encounter conversation SDM tool.

SETTING

Using the purposeful SDM framework, we classified the forms of SDM observed in a random sample of 100 video-recorded clinical encounters of patients with type 2 diabetes in primary care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We assessed the correlation between the extent to which each form of SDM was used and patient involvement (OPTION12-scale).

RESULTS

We observed at least one instance of SDM in 86 of 100 encounters. In 31 (36%) of these 86 encounters, we found only one form of SDM, in 25 (29%) two forms, and in 30 (35%), we found ≥3 forms of SDM. In these encounters, 196 instances of SDM were identified, with weighing alternatives (n=64 of 196, 33%), negotiating conflicting desires (n=59, 30%) and problemsolving (n=70, 36%) being similarly prevalent and developing existential insight accounting for only 1% (n=3) of instances. Only the form of SDM focused on weighing alternatives was correlated with a higher OPTION12-score. More forms of SDM were used when medications were changed (2.4 SDM forms (SD 1.48) vs 1.8 (SD 1.46); p=0.050).

CONCLUSIONS

After considering forms of SDM beyond weighing alternatives, SDM was present in most encounters. Clinicians and patients often used different forms of SDM within the same encounter. Recognising a range of SDM forms that clinicians and patients use to respond to problematic situations, as demonstrated in this study, opens new lines of research, education and practice that may advance patient-centred, evidence-based care.

Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Non-ICU Hospital Settings for People With Diabetes: A Scoping Review of Emerging Benefits and Issues

BACKGROUND

Evidence indicates that poor glycemic control is associated with increased morbidity and length of stay in hospital. There are a wide range of guidelines published, which seek to ensure safe and effective inpatient glycemic control in the hospital setting. However, the implementation of these protocols is limited in practice. In particular, the feasibility of "flash" and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) remains untested on general wards.

METHOD

Scoping Review.

RESULTS

If used in the general ward hospital settings, CGM and flash glucose monitoring (FGM) systems could lead to improved glycemic control, decreased length of stay, and reduced risk of severe hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia. Potential problems include lack of experience with this technology and costs of sensors. Rapid analysis of glucose measurements can facilitate clinical decision making and therapy adjustment in the hospital setting. In addition, people with diabetes may be empowered to better self-manage their condition in hospital as they have direct access to their glucose data.

CONCLUSIONS

More studies are required in which the feasibility, benefits and limitations of FGM and CGM in non-intensive care unit hospital settings are elucidated. We need evidence on which types of hospital wards might benefit from the introduction of this technology and the contexts in which they are less useful. We also need to identify the types of people who are most likely to find FGM and CGM useful for self-management and for which populations they have the most benefit in terms of clinical outcomes and length of stay.

Management of Individuals With Diabetes at High Risk for Hypoglycemia: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline

CONTEXT

Hypoglycemia in people with diabetes is common, especially in those taking medications such as insulin and sulfonylureas (SU) that place them at higher risk. Hypoglycemia is associated with distress in those with diabetes and their families, medication nonadherence, and disruption of life and work, and it leads to costly emergency department visits and hospitalizations, morbidity, and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To review and update the diabetes-specific parts of the 2009 Evaluation and Management of Adult Hypoglycemic Disorders: Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline and to address developing issues surrounding hypoglycemia in both adults and children living with diabetes. The overriding objectives are to reduce and prevent hypoglycemia.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary panel of clinician experts, together with a patient representative, and methodologists with expertise in evidence synthesis and guideline development, identified and prioritized 10 clinical questions related to hypoglycemia in people living with diabetes. Systematic reviews were conducted to address all the questions. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 10 questions specific to hypoglycemia risk and prevention in people with diabetes for which 10 recommendations were made. The guideline includes conditional recommendations for use of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and algorithm-driven insulin pumps in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D), use of CGM for outpatients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for hypoglycemia, use of long-acting and rapid-acting insulin analogs, and initiation of and continuation of CGM for select inpatient populations at high risk for hypoglycemia. Strong recommendations were made for structured diabetes education programs for those at high risk for hypoglycemia, use of glucagon preparations that do not require reconstitution vs those that do for managing severe outpatient hypoglycemia for adults and children, use of real-time CGM for individuals with T1D receiving multiple daily injections, and the use of inpatient glycemic management programs leveraging electronic health record data to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSION

The recommendations are based on the consideration of critical outcomes as well as implementation factors such as feasibility and values and preferences of people with diabetes. These recommendations can be used to inform clinical practice and health care system improvement for this important complication for people living with diabetes.

A Systematic Review Supporting the Endocrine Society Guidelines: Management of Diabetes and High Risk of Hypoglycemia

CONTEXT

Interventions targeting hypoglycemia in people with diabetes are important for improving quality of life and reducing morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To support development of the Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline for management of individuals with diabetes at high risk for hypoglycemia.

METHODS

We searched several databases for studies addressing 10 questions provided by a guideline panel from the Endocrine Society. Meta-analysis was conducted when feasible. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

We included 149 studies reporting on 43 344 patients. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) reduced episodes of severe hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and reduced the proportion of patients with hypoglycemia (blood glucose [BG] levels <54 mg/dL). There were no data on use of real-time CGM with algorithm-driven insulin pumps vs multiple daily injections with BG testing in people with T1D. CGM in outpatients with type 2 diabetes taking insulin and/or sulfonylureas reduced time spent with BG levels under 70 mg/dL. Initiation of CGM in hospitalized patients at high risk for hypoglycemia reduced episodes of hypoglycemia with BG levels lower than 54 mg/dL and time spent under 54 mg/dL. The proportion of patients with hypoglycemia with BG levels lower than 70 mg/dL and lower than 54 mg/dL detected by CGM was significantly higher than point-of-care BG testing. We found no data evaluating continuation of personal CGM in the hospital. Use of an inpatient computerized glycemic management program utilizing electronic health record data was associated with fewer patients with and episodes of hypoglycemia with BG levels lower than 70 mg/dL and fewer patients with severe hypoglycemia compared with standard care. Long-acting basal insulin analogs were associated with less hypoglycemia. Rapid-acting insulin analogs were associated with reduced severe hypoglycemia, though there were more patients with mild to moderate hypoglycemia. Structured diabetes education programs reduced episodes of severe hypoglycemia and time below 54 mg/dL in outpatients taking insulin. Glucagon formulations not requiring reconstitution were associated with longer times to recovery from hypoglycemia, although the proportion of patients who recovered completely from hypoglycemia was not different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review summarized the best available evidence about several interventions addressing hypoglycemia in people with diabetes. This evidence base will facilitate development of clinical practice guidelines by the Endocrine Society.

Multicenter Randomized Trial of Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose in Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes and Recent-Onset Acute Myocardial Infarction: Results of the LIBERATES Trial

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the impact of modern glucose-monitoring strategies on glycemic and patient-related outcomes in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and recent myocardial infarction (MI) and assess cost effectiveness.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

LIBERATES was a multicenter two-arm randomized trial comparing self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) with intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM), also known as flash CGM, in individuals with T2D and recent MI, treated with insulin and/or a sulphonylurea before hospital admission. The primary outcome measure was time in range (TIR) (glucose 3.9-10 mmol/L/day) on days 76-90 post-randomization. Secondary and exploratory outcomes included time in hypoglycemia, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), clinical outcome, quality of life (QOL), and cost effectiveness.

RESULTS

Of 141 participants randomly assigned (median age 63 years; interquartile range 53, 70), 73% of whom were men, isCGM was associated with increased TIR by 17 min/day (95% credible interval -105 to +153 min/day), with 59% probability of benefit. Users of isCGM showed lower hypoglycemic exposure (<3.9 mmol/L) at days 76-90 (-80 min/day; 95% CI -118, -43), also evident at days 16-30 (-28 min/day; 95% CI -92, 2). Compared with baseline, HbA1c showed similar reductions of 7 mmol/mol at 3 months in both study arms. Combined glycemic emergencies and mortality occurred in four isCGM and seven SMBG study participants. QOL measures marginally favored isCGM, and the intervention proved to be cost effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with SMBG, isCGM in T2D individuals with MI marginally increases TIR and significantly reduces hypoglycemic exposure while equally improving HbA1c, explaining its cost effectiveness. Studies are required to understand whether these glycemic differences translate into longer-term clinical benefit.

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.

Advances in Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Integrated Devices for Management of Diabetes with Insulin-Based Therapy: Improvement in Glycemic Control

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology has evolved over the past decade with the integration of various devices including insulin pumps, connected insulin pens (CIPs), automated insulin delivery (AID) systems, and virtual platforms. CGM has shown consistent benefits in glycemic outcomes in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with insulin. Moreover, the combined effect of CGM and education have been shown to improve glycemic outcomes more than CGM alone. Now a CIP is the expected future technology that does not need to be worn all day like insulin pumps and helps to calculate insulin doses with a built-in bolus calculator. Although only a few clinical trials have assessed the effectiveness of CIPs, they consistently show benefits in glycemic outcomes by reducing missed doses of insulin and improving problematic adherence. AID systems and virtual platforms made it possible to achieve target glycosylated hemoglobin in diabetes while minimizing hypoglycemia, which has always been challenging in T1DM. Now fully automatic AID systems and tools for diabetes decisions based on artificial intelligence are in development. These advances in technology could reduce the burden associated with insulin treatment for diabetes.

Real-world study of flash glucose monitoring among adults with type 2 diabetes within the Swedish National Diabetes Register

BACKGROUND

The Swedish National Diabetes Register (NDR) initiated registration of the FreeStyle Libre® system and other continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems in June 2016. We investigated change in HbA1c for people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) using FreeStyle Libre in Sweden.

METHODS

We included adults with T2DM, registered in the NDR after January 1, 2014, and an index date for first use of FreeStyle Libre of June 2016 or later. Methodology was a before/after comparison of HbA1c within 6 months before the index date versus HbA1c around 6 and 12 months after the index date.

RESULTS

711 adults with T2DM using FreeStyle Libre had HbA1c measurements within the study period. Mean HbA1c was significantly reduced at 6 months (-0.50%-unit) and at 12 months (-0.52%-unit) in this group. Degree of change was negatively correlated to baseline HbA1c. Reductions in HbA1c were observed in incident users of FreeStyle Libre with T2DM who were truly naïve to CGM or had unknown prior experience of CGM, and aged 25-74 years.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world study on the Swedish NDR shows that people with T2DM using FreeStyle Libre system for 6 and 12 months significantly reduced their HbA1c.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Flash Glucose Monitoring System for People with Type 2 Diabetes Receiving Intensive Insulin Treatment

AIMS

For people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) on intensive insulin therapy, the use of flash continuous glucose monitoring ("flash monitoring") is associated with improved average glucose control and/or reduced hypoglycemic exposure. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of flash monitoring versus traditional blood glucose monitoring (BGM) in people with T2D using intensive insulin in the United Kingdom (UK).

METHODS

The IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (IQVIA CDM; v9.0) was used to analyze the impact of flash monitoring versus BGM over a 40-year time horizon from the UK payer perspective. Model inputs included baseline characteristics, intervention effects, resource utilization, costs, and utilities, based on recently published literature and national databases. UK National Health Service reimbursed costs of flash monitoring and BGM were used. An intervention-related health utility was obtained from a time trade-off study. Alternative scenarios were explored to assess the impact of key assumptions on base case results.

RESULTS

In base-case analysis, flash monitoring compared with BGM resulted in an incremental cost of £5781 and an additional 0.47 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). This provides an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £12,309/QALY. HbA1c and the intervention-related health utility were the key drivers of differentiation. All scenario analyses, including different discount rates, time horizons, effects on HbA1c and on the intervention-related health utility, as well as glycemic emergencies, generated ICERs of less than £20,000 per QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

The consistent results across base case and a range of scenario analyses indicate that long-term flash glucose monitoring use is cost-effective compared with BGM in a UK population of T2D on intensive insulin therapy based on updated clinical effects and a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000-30,000 per QALY.

Type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes accounts for nearly 90% of the approximately 537 million cases of diabetes worldwide. The number affected is increasing rapidly with alarming trends in children and young adults (up to age 40 years). Early detection and proactive management are crucial for prevention and mitigation of microvascular and macrovascular complications and mortality burden. Access to novel therapies improves person-centred outcomes beyond glycaemic control. Precision medicine, including multiomics and pharmacogenomics, hold promise to enhance understanding of disease heterogeneity, leading to targeted therapies. Technology might improve outcomes, but its potential is yet to be realised. Despite advances, substantial barriers to changing the course of the epidemic remain. This Seminar offers a clinically focused review of the recent developments in type 2 diabetes care including controversies and future directions.

Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Older Adults: A Review of Benefits, Challenges and Future Directions

Many new technologies have been developed over the past decade, and these have substantially changed the way diabetes is managed. Continuous glucose monitoring is now the standard of care for many people living with diabetes, and among its numerous benefits, it has been shown to improve glycaemic outcomes and enhance quality of life. Older adults carry a high burden of diabetes and have a high risk of hypo-glycaemia and hypo-glycaemic unawareness, and continuous glucose monitoring can help to improve glycaemic management in this vulnerable population. Unfortunately, only a few trials have evaluated the effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in older adults. Certainly, the implementation of continuous glucose monitoring in older adults can come with many challenges, including logistical, educational and reimbursement barriers. This article will discuss the benefits of continuous glucose monitoring in older adults with diabetes, the clinical studies that support its use and the barriers to its optimal implementation in this population.

Effects of flash glucose monitoring on glycemic control in participants with diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

With the introduction of flash glucose monitoring (FGM) into the international market in 2014, academics worldwide are exploring whether this device improves glycemic control in participants with diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVE

A study was conducted in which participants were evaluated to determine the effect of FGM on glycemic control.

METHODS

From inception to April 9, 2022, we searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, SinoMed, Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, CNKI, Wan Fang Data, and VIP databases to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to the effect of FGM on glycemic control in participants with diabetes mellitus. Outcomes included glycated hemoglobin, the occurrence of hypoglycemic events, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and 2-h postprandial glucose (2hPG) levels. The statistical analysis was performed using R 4.1.3 software.

RESULTS

We included 19 studies involving 2013 participants, all of which were RCTs. Meta-analysis results revealed that compared to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), FGM significantly reduced glycated hemoglobin levels in participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus [mean difference = -0.74 [95 % CI-1.16, -0.32], P < 0.01] and type 1 diabetes mellitus combined with type 2 diabetes mellitus [mean difference = -1.14 [95 % CI-3.14, 0.87], P < 0.01], with a greater effect in participants aged ≤65 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus (mean difference = -1.38 [95 % CI-2.05, -0.72], P < 0.01). However, there was no effect of FGM on the improvement of glycated hemoglobin levels in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus [P = 0.45]. Furthermore, fasting plasma glucose levels and 2-h postprandial glucose levels were significantly lower in FGM than SMBG, and the number of hypoglycemic events was also significantly lower.

CONCLUSION

Comparing SMBG with FGM indicated that FGM improves fasting plasma glucose levels, 2-h postprandial glucose levels, and glycated hemoglobin levels, and it reduces the number of hypoglycemic events.

Reduced Rate of Acute Diabetes Events with Flash Glucose Monitoring Is Sustained for 2 Years After Initiation: Extended Outcomes from the RELIEF Study

Background: The RELIEF study has previously shown a fall in the rate of acute diabetes events (ADEs) in people living with type 1 diabetes (PwDT1) or people living with type 2 diabetes (PwDT2) in the 12 months after initiation of flash glucose monitoring (FLASH) in France. The 2-year follow-up has provided new insights on the frequency of ADEs, including severe hypoglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), during use of FLASH. Methods: The RELIEF study included 31,446 PwDT1 and 41,027 PwDT2 with a first delivery of FreeStyle Libre (FSL) between August 1 and December 31, 2017. Hospitalizations for DKA, severe hypoglycemia, diabetes-related coma, and hyperglycemia were recorded for the 12 months before and 24 months after FSL initiation. Persistence of the FSL system use was estimated through a Kaplan-Meier survival curve. Change in usual blood glucose monitoring was estimated through acquisition of blood glucose test strips. Results: In the 2 years after FSL initiation, hospitalizations for ADEs were reduced by 49% and by 48% in PwDT1 or PwDT2, respectively, driven by reductions in DKA. After 2 years, 88% of patients persisted with the system and estimated mean consumption of blood glucose test strips had fallen after 2 years by -82% and by -84% in type 1 diabetes mellitus and type 2 diabetes mellitus, respectively. Conclusion: Use of FSL consistently reduces the rates of hospitalization for ADEs, mainly DKA, 2 years after initiation, confirming this is not a transitory effect. Use of FSL also results in a clear and progressive drop in use of blood glucose test strips over the 2-year period.

Role of continuous glucose monitoring in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk: an expert-based multidisciplinary Delphi consensus

Background

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) shows in more detail the glycaemic pattern of diabetic subjects and provides several new parameters (“glucometrics”) to assess patients’ glycaemia and consensually guide treatment. A better control of glucose levels might result in improvement of clinical outcome and reduce disease complications. This study aimed to gather an expert consensus on the clinical and prognostic use of CGM in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk or with heart disease.

Methods

A list of 22 statements concerning type of patients who can benefit from CGM, prognostic impact of CGM in diabetic patients with heart disease, CGM use during acute cardiovascular events and educational issues of CGM were developed. Using a two-round Delphi methodology, the survey was distributed online to 42 Italian experts (21 diabetologists and 21 cardiologists) who rated their level of agreement with each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was predefined as more than 66% of the panel agreeing/disagreeing with any given statement.

Results

Forty experts (95%) answered the survey. Every statement achieved a positive consensus. In particular, the panel expressed the feeling that CGM can be prognostically relevant for every diabetic patient (70%) and that is clinically useful also in the management of those with type 2 diabetes not treated with insulin (87.5%). The assessment of time in range (TIR), glycaemic variability (GV) and hypoglycaemic/hyperglycaemic episodes were considered relevant in the management of diabetic patients with heart disease (92.5% for TIR, 95% for GV, 97.5% for time spent in hypoglycaemia) and can improve the prognosis of those with ischaemic heart disease (100% for hypoglycaemia, 90% for hyperglycaemia) or with heart failure (87.5% for hypoglycaemia, 85% for TIR, 87.5% for GV). The experts retained that CGM can be used and can impact the short- and long-term prognosis during an acute cardiovascular event. Lastly, CGM has a recognized educational role for diabetic subjects.

Conclusions

According to this Delphi consensus, the clinical and prognostic use of CGM in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk is promising and deserves dedicated studies to confirm the experts’ feelings.

Feasibility of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring Telemetry System in an Inpatient Diabetes Unit: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Hospitalization of persons with diabetes in an inpatient diabetes unit is challenging, notably for patients having different profiles. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and the benefit of a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) telemetry system to control glucose excursions in hospitalized patients with diabetes, according to their diabetes type and the reasons for their hospitalization.

METHOD

A prospective pilot study was conducted in 53 insulin-requiring diabetes patients hospitalized in the general ward. Glucose was monitored using Guardian Connect (GC, Medtronic) to adopt insulin therapy. The time in range (TIR, target 70-180 mg/dL), the time below range (TBR), and the time above range (TAR) were recorded by GC between the start of hospitalization (SH) and end of hospitalization (EH), and analyzed according to the diabetes type (type 1 diabetes n = 28, type 2 diabetes n = 25) and the reasons for hospitalization (acute complications n = 35, therapeutic education n = 18). Patient and caregiver satisfaction was also assessed.

RESULTS

In patients with type 2 diabetes and those hospitalized for acute complications, TIR significantly increased between the SH and EH, from 75.7% (95%CI 48.5-84.6) to 82.2% (95%CI 63.2-91.8) P = 0.043 and from 58.3% (95%CI 46.3-69.7) to 66.4% (95%CI 55.6-75.5) P = 0.031, respectively, and TAR significantly decreased, with no change in TBR. In patients with diabetes hospitalized for therapeutic education, TBR significantly decreased from 3.4% (95%CI 0-9.4) to 0% (95%CI 0-3.8) P = 0.037. Finally, 94% of patients and caregivers deemed the GC system useful.

CONCLUSIONS

CGM telemetry system use is feasible and well accepted in patients hospitalized in diabetes care unit and could be useful to improve therapeutic education and metabolic control, especially for specific homogenous populations with diabetes.

Use of continuous glucose monitor as a motivational device for lifestyle modifications to improve glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with non-insulin therapies

The efficacy of continuous glucose monitors (CGM) to improve glycaemic control in individuals on intensive insulin therapy (basal and prandial) has been well established in several studies; however, there is limited evidence on its usage and efficacy in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who are on non-insulin therapies. Lifestyle modifications and glucose monitoring are essential components of the management of T2D. We report a case that demonstrates the impact of CGM use as an effective tool for patient education and motivation to implement and adhere to lifestyle modifications in improving glycaemic control in a patient with long-standing poorly controlled T2D who was on oral glucose-lowering medications. CGM use is associated with high level of patient satisfaction which can improve quality of life and has the potential to reduce long-term complications related to poor glycaemic control. These observations emphasise the need to broaden the use of CGM in this patient population.