Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring: Implications for Use of Continuous Data in Daily Diabetes Management.

Full realization of the benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) depends on addressing barriers such as cost, accuracy, burdens of daily use, and uncertainty about applying the data. Lack of systematic education has also hampered widespread adoption among patients and health care professionals. This article describes the practical application of an affordable and intuitive category of CGM called "flash" that requires users to scan the sensor with a handheld reader for on-demand access to continuous data. The data may be used for in-the-moment therapy adjustment, retrospective review of glucose patterns, and observation of glucose trending in response to behavior. Higher rates of flash CGM scanning have been associated with increased time in the glycemic target range and reduced time in hyper- and hypoglycemia. Growing interest in this technology suggests new opportunities for helping more patients incorporate CGM into their daily self-care.

PROFESSIONAL FLASH CONTINUOUS GLUCOSE MONITORING WITH AMBULATORY GLUCOSE PROFILE REPORTING TO SUPPLEMENT A1C: RATIONALE AND PRACTICAL IMPLEMENTATION.

OBJECTIVE: Recent consensus statements strongly advocate downloading and interpreting continuous glucose data for diabetes management in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes. Supplementing periodic glycated hemoglobin (A1C) testing with intermittent continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) using a standardized report form known as the ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) is an evolving standard of care. The rationale for this approach and its implementation with a recently approved novel monitoring technology are explored. METHODS: Search of the medical literature, professional guidelines, and real-world evidence guided this introduction of an integrative practice framework that uses AGP in conjunction with intermittent flash continuous glucose monitoring (FCGM) as a supplement to A1C testing. RESULTS: The combination of intermittent continuous glucose pattern analysis, standardized glucose metrics, and a readily interpretable data report has the potential to practically extend the recognized benefits of CGM to more patients and clarify the relationship between A1C and average glucose levels in individual cases. CONCLUSION: Novel FCGM technologies portend greater use of continuous forms of glucose monitoring and wider adoption of AGP report analysis. Additional formal and empirical evidence is needed to more fully characterize best practice. ABBREVIATIONS: A1C = glycated hemoglobin; AGP = ambulatory glucose profile; CGM = continuous glucose monitoring; FCGM = flash continuous glucose monitoring; IQR = interquartile range; SMBG = self-monitoring of blood glucose.

Culinary Medicine: Advancing a Framework for Healthier Eating to Improve Chronic Disease Management and Prevention.

Unsustainable increases in the prevalence and costs of chronic disease in the United States call for low-cost, high-impact interventions that can be readily incorporated into people's daily lives. Culinary medicine is one such intervention. As a practical discipline, culinary medicine integrates the art of preparing, cooking, and presenting food with the science of medicine to achieve desired health outcomes. This article describes how the underpinnings and components of culinary medicine enhance existing nutrition interventions. Evidence of improved well-being and reduced resource utilization as the result of culinary medicine interventions is compiled for easy reference by health care organizations, medical professionals, people living with or at risk for chronic disease, food industry specialists, and payers in both the public and private sectors. Suggestions for individual and organizational implementation of culinary medicine strategies are offered with a proposed lexicon for continued development of the field.

Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose (SMBG) in insulin- and non-insulin-using adults with diabetes: consensus recommendations for improving SMBG accuracy, utilization, and research.

Current clinical guidelines for diabetes care encourage self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) to improve glycemic control. Specific protocols remain variable, however, particularly among non-insulin-using patients. This is due in part to efficacy studies that neglect to consider (1) the performance of monitoring equipment under real-world conditions, (2) whether or how patients have been taught to take action on test results, and (3) the physiological, behavioral, and social circumstances in which SMBG is carried out. As such, a multidisciplinary group of specialists, including several endocrinologists, a health psychologist, a diabetes nurse practitioner, and a patient advocate (the Panel), discuss within this review article how the potential of SMBG might be fully realized in today's healthcare environment. The resulting recommendations cover technological, clinical, behavioral, and research considerations with the aim of achieving short- and long-term benefits, ranging from fewer hypoglycemic episodes to lower complication-related costs. The panel also made suggestions for designing future studies that increase the ability to discern optimal models of SMBG utilization for individuals with diabetes who may, or may not, use insulin.

Improving Patient Experience With Insulin Infusion Sets: Practical Guidelines and Future Directions.

PURPOSE: Insulin infusion sets (IISs) are an essential component of safe and effective insulin pump therapy. Establishing best practices for their use has been impeded by a lack of formal study and limited resources for clinician and patient education. Recent innovations in IIS science promise to change this status quo by increasing awareness of such problems as unexplained hyperglycemia and infusion set occlusion. METHODS: In August 2015, a panel of diabetologists and certified diabetes educators from various disciplines was convened to reconsider IIS-related complications of pump therapy, to better characterize infusion set factors affecting patient experience, and to update priorities for optimizing current technologies. Actionable guidelines were provided for addressing common issues, including skin reactions, site rotation and set changes, dislodgment of the infusion set, and partial or complete blockage of the catheter. These issues may underlie episodes of IIS failure and/or unexplained hyperglycemia. CONCLUSION: Development of practical tools and standardized guidelines for empowering patients to prevent, diagnose, and troubleshoot IIS problems that contribute to unexplained hyperglycemia will be necessary to realize the full benefit of insulin pump therapy along the continuum of diabetes education.

Insulin Infusion Set Use: European Perspectives and Recommendations.

Insulin pump users worldwide depend on insulin infusion sets (IISs) for predictable delivery of insulin to the subcutaneous tissue. Yet emerging data indicates that IISs are associated with many pump-related adverse events and may contribute to potentially life-threatening problem of unexplained hyperglycemia. The relative scarcity of published research on IISs to date, the heterogeneity of regional IIS practices, and the increasing demand for international standards guiding their use prompted convening of a panel of diabetologists and diabetes nurse educators last February, in Milan, Italy, to discuss a framework for optimizing IIS practice in Europe. The multinational panel was tasked, first, with identifying the often-overlooked IIS issues that can affect patients' experience of pump therapy-e.g., partial or complete blockage of the cannula, skin pathologies, unpredictable variations in insulin absorption, dislodgment, and the demands of site rotation and set changes-and, second, with establishing direction for developing cohesive protocols to assure long-term success. As reported in this article, the panel examined IIS-related complications of pump therapy encountered in clinical practice, considered country-wide policies to prevent and mitigate such complications, and updated priorities for improving IIS education on issues of device selection, skin care, and troubleshooting unexplained hyperglycemia. These recommendations may be more relevant with the possibility of closed-loop systems available in the near future.

A short-acting GLP-1 analog or prandial insulin to supplement basal insulin?--Moving toward personalized management of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

New models of health care delivery that emphasize patient-centered care affirm the need for alternatives to add-on prandial insulin therapy when optimized basal insulin fails to maintain glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Regimens that are easy to teach, convenient, and flexible generally improve the outlook for long-term success. Our review reconsiders traditional barriers to insulin intensification in primary care and provides an illustration of how the benefits and drawbacks of > 1 choice of action--specifically, adding rapid-acting insulin or a short-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 analog--can be weighed by the patient and provider together to determine the best next treatment step that balances efficacy, safety, and adherence to therapy. Technological, organizational, and interpersonal strategies for applying personalized management at this often challenging crossroads of diabetes management are also described.

Using multiple measures of glycemia to support individualized diabetes management: recommendations for clinicians, patients, and payers.

By the year 2030, the diabetes pandemic will likely affect more than 10% of the world's population. The personal, public health, and economic crises implicit in this trend call for decisive action. Yet, escalating dilemmas thwart full realization of current therapies. First, controversial studies, such as the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) Trial, have amplified calls to individualize glycated hemoglobin (A1C) targets in the absence of adequate infrastructures for supporting personalized care. Second, costlier medications and technologies addressing more nuanced aspects of metabolic dysfunction are expanding options for diabetes management amidst growing disparities between "affordable" and "best" care. Third, common clinical quandaries, such as discrepancies between A1C and self-monitoring of blood glucose data, as well as misconceptions about long-term glycemic assessment, compound entrenched cycles of inadequate self-care, delayed intervention, and suboptimal glycemic outcomes. Because individual, clinical, and public policy responses to these conflicting forces are based largely on methodologies for glucose measurement, a panel of clinical experts from Europe and North America was convened to reexamine our glucose measuring tools and determine ways in which they can be better applied toward more purposeful processes of glycemic management. Among the main issues addressed were the need for caution in interpreting A1C for individual patients, the role of alternative biomarkers in identifying aspects of glycemic dysregulation not captured by A1C, and the value of using patients' own glucose data to consolidate therapeutic, educational, and behavior-change objectives.