Prevalence, Cost, and Burden of Diabetic Ketoacidosis.

Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is a life-threatening complication, which is most common in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and is a significant risk for morbidity and mortality, and it is an economic burden on individuals, health care systems, and payers. Younger children, minority ethnic groups, and those with limited insurance are at the greatest risk for presentation of DKA at T1D diagnosis. Although monitoring ketone levels is an essential part of acute illness management and for both early detection and prevention of a DKA episode, studies have reported poor adherence to ketone monitoring. Ketone monitoring is particularly important for patients treated with sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) medications, in which DKA can present with only moderately elevated glucose levels, referred to as euglycemic DKA (euDKA). A majority of people with T1D and many with type 2 diabetes (T2D), particularly those using insulin therapy, are using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) as their preferred method for measurement and management of glycemia. These devices provide a continuous stream of glucose data that enables users to take immediate action to mitigate and/or prevent severe hyperglycemic or hypoglycemic events. An international consensus of leading diabetes experts has recommended the development of continuous ketone monitoring systems, ideally a system that combines CGM technology with measurement of 3-ß-OHB into a single sensor. In this narrative review of current literature, we report on the prevalence and burden of DKA, examine challenges to detecting and diagnosing this condition, and discuss a new monitoring option for DKA prevention.

Budget Impact of the Flash Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in Medicaid Diabetes Beneficiaries Treated with Intensive Insulin Therapy.

Objective: We assessed the economic impact of using the newest flash continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) among Medicaid beneficiaries with diabetes treated with intensive insulin therapy (IIT). Research Design and Methods: A budget impact analysis was created to assess the impact of increasing the proportion of Medicaid beneficiaries with diabetes on IIT, who use flash CGM by 10%. The analysis included glucose monitoring device costs, cost savings due to reductions in glycated hemoglobin, severe hypoglycemia events, and hyperglycemic emergencies such as diabetic ketoacidosis. The net change in costs per person to adopt flash CGM for three populations treated with IIT (adults with type 1 diabetes [T1D] or type 2 diabetes [T2D], and children and adolescents with T1D or T2D) was calculated; these costs were used to estimate the impact of increasing flash CGM use by 10% to the U.S. Medicaid budget over 1-3 years. Results: The analysis found that flash CGM demonstrated cost savings in all populations on a per patient basis. Increasing use of flash CGM by 10% was associated with a $19.4 million overall decrease in costs over the year and continued to reduce costs by $25.3 million in years 2 and 3. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the new flash CGM system can offer cost savings compared to blood glucose monitoring in Medicaid beneficiaries treated with IIT, especially T1D adults, and children and adolescents. These findings support expanding access to CGM by Medicaid plans.