Dataset Information

Continuous Glucose Monitors and Automated Insulin Dosing Systems in the Hospital Consensus Guideline.

ABSTRACT: This article is the work product of the Continuous Glucose Monitor and Automated Insulin Dosing Systems in the Hospital Consensus Guideline Panel, which was organized by Diabetes Technology Society and met virtually on April 23, 2020. The guideline panel consisted of 24 international experts in the use of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) and automated insulin dosing (AID) systems representing adult endocrinology, pediatric endocrinology, obstetrics and gynecology, advanced practice nursing, diabetes care and education, clinical chemistry, bioengineering, and product liability law. The panelists reviewed the medical literature pertaining to five topics: (1) continuation of home CGMs after hospitalization, (2) initiation of CGMs in the hospital, (3) continuation of AID systems in the hospital, (4) logistics and hands-on care of hospitalized patients using CGMs and AID systems, and (5) data management of CGMs and AID systems in the hospital. The panelists then developed three types of recommendations for each topic, including clinical practice (to use the technology optimally), research (to improve the safety and effectiveness of the technology), and hospital policies (to build an environment for facilitating use of these devices) for each of the five topics. The panelists voted on 78 proposed recommendations. Based on the panel vote, 77 recommendations were classified as either strong or mild. One recommendation failed to reach consensus. Additional research is needed on CGMs and AID systems in the hospital setting regarding device accuracy, practices for deployment, data management, and achievable outcomes. This guideline is intended to support these technologies for the management of hospitalized patients with diabetes.

SUBMITTER: Galindo RJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7645140 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Continuous Glucose Monitors and Automated Insulin Dosing Systems in the Hospital Consensus Guideline.

Galindo Rodolfo J RJ Umpierrez Guillermo E GE Rushakoff Robert J RJ Basu Ananda A Lohnes Suzanne S Nichols James H JH Spanakis Elias K EK Espinoza Juan J Palermo Nadine E NE Awadjie Dessa Garnett DG Bak Leigh L Buckingham Bruce B Cook Curtiss B CB Freckmann Guido G Heinemann Lutz L Hovorka Roman R Mathioudakis Nestoras N Newman Tonya T O'Neal David N DN Rickert Michaela M Sacks David B DB Seley Jane Jeffrie JJ Wallia Amisha A Shang Trisha T Zhang Jennifer Y JY Han Julia J Klonoff David C DC

Journal of diabetes science and technology 20200928 6

This article is the work product of the Continuous Glucose Monitor and Automated Insulin Dosing Systems in the Hospital Consensus Guideline Panel, which was organized by Diabetes Technology Society and met virtually on April 23, 2020. The guideline panel consisted of 24 international experts in the use of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) and automated insulin dosing (AID) systems representing adult endocrinology, pediatric endocrinology, obstetrics and gynecology, advanced practice nursing, di ...[more]

PMID: 32985262

Similar Datasets

Project description:Hyperglycemia is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients and strict glycemic control has become standard care for adults. Recent studies have questioned the optimal targets for such management and reported increased rates of iatrogenic hypoglycemia in both critically ill children and adults. The ability to provide accurate, real-time continuous glucose monitoring would improve the efficacy and safety of this practice in critically ill patients. The aim of our study is to determine if a continuous, interstitial glucose monitor will correlate with blood glucose values in critically ill children.We evaluated 50 critically ill children age 6 weeks to 16 years old with a commercially available continuous glucose monitor (CGM; Medtronic Guardian®). CGM values and standard blood glucose (BG) values were compared. During the study, no changes in patient management were made based on CGM readings alone.Forty-seven patients had analyzable CGM data. A total of 1,555 CGM and routine BG measurements were compared using Clarke error grid and Bland-Altman analysis. For all readings, 97.9% were within clinically acceptable agreement. The mean absolute relative difference between CGM and BG readings was 15.3%. For the 1,555 paired CGM and BG measurements, there is a statistically significant linear relationship between CGM values and BG (P < .0001). A high degree of clinical agreement existed in three subpopulation analyses based on age, illness severity, and support measures. This included some of our smallest patients (that is, < 12 months old), those who required vasopressors, and those who were treated for critical illness hyperglycemia.In one of the largest studies to date, in a highly vulnerable ICU population, CGM values have a clinically acceptable correlation with the BG values now used diagnostically and therapeutically. Our data contest the theoretical concerns posed by some regarding CGM use in the ICU. The existing medical evidence may now support a role for CGM devices in the identification and management of hyperglycemia in diverse ICU settings.

Dataset Information

Continuous Glucose Monitors and Automated Insulin Dosing Systems in the Hospital Consensus Guideline.

Publications

Continuous Glucose Monitors and Automated Insulin Dosing Systems in the Hospital Consensus Guideline.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets