Preethika S Ekanayake1, Patricia S Juang2, Kristen Kulasa2. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA. pekanayake@health.ucsd.edu. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The goal of this review is to summarize current literature on electronic glucose management systems (eGMS) and discuss their benefits and disadvantages in the inpatient setting. RECENT FINDINGS: We review different versions of commercially available eGMS: Glucommander™ (Glytec, Greenville, SC), EndoToolR (MD Scientific LLC, Charlotte, NC), GlucoStabilizer™ (Medical Decision Network, Charlottesville, VA), GlucoCare™ (Pronia Medical Systems, KY), and discuss advantages such as reducing rates of hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, and glycemic variability. In addition, eCGMs offer a uniform standard of care and may improve workflows across institutions as well reduce barriers. Despite ample literature on intravenous (IV) versions of eGMS, there is little published research on subcutaneous (SQ) insulin guidance. Although use of eGMS requires extensive training and institution-wide adoption, time spent on diabetes management is better facilitated by their use.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The goal of this review is to summarize current literature on electronic glucose management systems (eGMS) and discuss their benefits and disadvantages in the inpatient setting. RECENT FINDINGS: We review different versions of commercially available eGMS: Glucommander™ (Glytec, Greenville, SC), EndoToolR (MD Scientific LLC, Charlotte, NC), GlucoStabilizer™ (Medical Decision Network, Charlottesville, VA), GlucoCare™ (Pronia Medical Systems, KY), and discuss advantages such as reducing rates of hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, and glycemic variability. In addition, eCGMs offer a uniform standard of care and may improve workflows across institutions as well reduce barriers. Despite ample literature on intravenous (IV) versions of eGMS, there is little published research on subcutaneous (SQ) insulin guidance. Although use of eGMS requires extensive training and institution-wide adoption, time spent on diabetes management is better facilitated by their use.