OBJECTIVE: Little is known about glycemic control in type 2 diabetes patients treated with insulin in the high-risk period between hospital discharge and follow-up. We sought to assess the impact of remote glucose monitoring on postdischarge glycemic control and insulin titration. METHODS: We randomly assigned 28 hospitalized type 2 diabetes patients who were discharged home on insulin therapy to routine specialty care (RSC) or RSC with daily remote glucose monitoring (RGM). We compared the primary outcome of mean blood glucose and exploratory outcomes of hypoglycemia/hyperglycemia rates, change in hemoglobin A1c and glycated albumin, and insulin titration frequency between groups. RESULTS:Mean blood glucose was not significantly different between the treatment arms (144 ± 34 mg/dL in the RSC group and 172 ± 41 mg/dL in the RGM group; not significant), nor were there significant differences in any of the other measures of glycemia during the month after discharge. Hypoglycemia (glucometer reading <60 mg/dL) was common, occurring in 46% of subjects, with no difference between groups. In as-treated analysis, insulin dose adjustments (29% with an increase and 43% with decrease in insulin dose) occurred more frequently in the patients who used RGM (average of 2.8 vs. 1.2 dose adjustments; P = .03). CONCLUSION: In this pilot trial in insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, RGM did not affect glycemic control after hospital discharge; however, the high rate of hypoglycemia in the postdischarge transition period and the higher frequency of insulin titration in patients who used RGM suggest a safety role for such monitoring in the transition from hospital to home.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Little is known about glycemic control in type 2 diabetespatients treated with insulin in the high-risk period between hospital discharge and follow-up. We sought to assess the impact of remote glucose monitoring on postdischarge glycemic control and insulin titration. METHODS: We randomly assigned 28 hospitalized type 2 diabetespatients who were discharged home on insulin therapy to routine specialty care (RSC) or RSC with daily remote glucose monitoring (RGM). We compared the primary outcome of mean blood glucose and exploratory outcomes of hypoglycemia/hyperglycemia rates, change in hemoglobin A1c and glycated albumin, and insulin titration frequency between groups. RESULTS: Mean blood glucose was not significantly different between the treatment arms (144 ± 34 mg/dL in the RSC group and 172 ± 41 mg/dL in the RGM group; not significant), nor were there significant differences in any of the other measures of glycemia during the month after discharge. Hypoglycemia (glucometer reading <60 mg/dL) was common, occurring in 46% of subjects, with no difference between groups. In as-treated analysis, insulin dose adjustments (29% with an increase and 43% with decrease in insulin dose) occurred more frequently in the patients who used RGM (average of 2.8 vs. 1.2 dose adjustments; P = .03). CONCLUSION: In this pilot trial in insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, RGM did not affect glycemic control after hospital discharge; however, the high rate of hypoglycemia in the postdischarge transition period and the higher frequency of insulin titration in patients who used RGM suggest a safety role for such monitoring in the transition from hospital to home.
Authors: Eric Q Wu; Steve Zhou; Andrew Yu; Mei Lu; Hari Sharma; Jasvinder Gill; Thomas Graf Journal: Endocr Pract Date: 2012 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 3.443
Authors: Philip A Goldberg; Janis E Bozzo; Prem G Thomas; Melinda M Mesmer; Olga V Sakharova; Martha J Radford; Silvio E Inzucchi Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: Sunil Kripalani; Christianne L Roumie; Anuj K Dalal; Courtney Cawthon; Alexandra Businger; Svetlana K Eden; Ayumi Shintani; Kelly Cunningham Sponsler; L Jeff Harris; Cecelia Theobald; Robert L Huang; Danielle Scheurer; Susan Hunt; Terry A Jacobson; Kimberly J Rask; Viola Vaccarino; Tejal K Gandhi; David W Bates; Mark V Williams; Jeffrey L Schnipper Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2012-07-03 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Michael E Miller; Denise E Bonds; Hertzel C Gerstein; Elizabeth R Seaquist; Richard M Bergenstal; Jorge Calles-Escandon; R Dale Childress; Timothy E Craven; Robert M Cuddihy; George Dailey; Mark N Feinglos; Farmarz Ismail-Beigi; Joe F Largay; Patrick J O'Connor; Terri Paul; Peter J Savage; Ulrich K Schubart; Ajay Sood; Saul Genuth Journal: BMJ Date: 2010-01-08
Authors: Jeanne T Black; Patrick S Romano; Banafsheh Sadeghi; Andrew D Auerbach; Theodore G Ganiats; Sheldon Greenfield; Sherrie H Kaplan; Michael K Ong Journal: Trials Date: 2014-04-13 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Roma Y Gianchandani; Francisco J Pasquel; Daniel J Rubin; Kathleen M Dungan; Priyathama Vellanki; Heqiong Wang; Isabel Anzola; Patricia Gomez; Israel Hodish; Sangeeta Lathkar-Pradhan; Jennifer Iyengar; Guillermo E Umpierrez Journal: Endocr Pract Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 3.443
Authors: Natalie Koch Levy; Natasha A Orzeck-Byrnes; Sneha R Aidasani; Dana N Moloney; Lisa H Nguyen; Agnes Park; Lu Hu; Aisha T Langford; Binhuan Wang; Mary Ann Sevick; Erin S Rogers Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2018-03-19 Impact factor: 5.428