The Devil Is in the Details: Use, Limitations, and Implementation of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in the Inpatient Setting.

Until recently, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems were reserved for use in the outpatient setting or for investigational purposes in hospitalized patients. However, during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, use of CGM in the inpatient setting has grown rapidly. This review outlines important details related to the accuracy, limitations, and implementation of, as well as necessary staff education for, inpatient CGM use and offers a glimpse into the future of CGM in the inpatient setting.

Personal Versus Professional Continuous Glucose Monitoring: When to Use Which on Whom.

IN BRIEF With the introduction of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems to the marketplace, providers and patients now have several options to continuously monitor glucose levels. This article addresses appropriate patient selection criteria for using patient- or practice-based CGM systems and the barriers to achieving optimal benefits from this technology. The authors have developed a flowchart to guide clinicians and patients in decision-making regarding the most appropriate type of CGM to use in various circumstances.

Use of Continuous Glucose Monitors Upon Hospital Discharge of People With Diabetes: Promise, Barriers, and Opportunity.

Continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) have increasingly been used in ambulatory and inpatient or hospital settings to improve glycemic outcomes for people with diabetes. Given their capacity to aid individuals in avoiding hypo- and hyperglycemia, they may also be useful when transitioning from hospital to home by reducing rates of hospital readmissions and emergency department visits. Several types of barriers presently exist that make the deployment of CGMs at the time of hospital discharge problematic, including (1) regulatory, (2) behavioral, (3) logistical, (4) technical, (5) staffing, and (6) systemic issues. In this commentary, we review the literature, discuss these barriers, and propose possible solutions to facilitate the use of CGMs in people with diabetes at the time of hospital discharge.

The Need for Data Standards and Implementation Policies to Integrate Insulin Delivery Data Into the Electronic Health Record.

Integration of insulin dosing data into the electronic health record (EHR), combined with other patient-generated health care data, would facilitate the use of wirelessly connected insulin delivery systems, including smart insulin pens, insulin pumps, and advanced hybrid closed-loop systems. In 2022, Diabetes Technology Society developed the Integration of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data into the EHR (iCoDE) Project, which is the first consensus standard for integrating data from a wearable device into the EHR. The iCoDE Standard is a comprehensive guide for any health care delivery organization or hospital for automatically integrating continuous glucose monitoring data into the EHR. Diabetes Technology Society is following iCoDE with the Integration of Connected Diabetes Device Data into the EHR (iCoDE-2) Project, to similarly provide guidance for integrating insulin delivery data into the EHR alongside continuous glucose monitoring data.

Use and Accuracy of Inpatient CGM During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Observational Study of General Medicine and ICU Patients.

BACKGROUND: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is widely used in the outpatient setting for people with diabetes and has been limited to investigational use only for the inpatient population. In April 2020, the US FDA exercised enforcement discretion for the temporary use of inpatient CGM during the pandemic, thus hospitals were presented the opportunity to implement this technology. METHODS: We sought to investigate the accuracy of CGM in hospitalized patients on general care floors and the intensive care unit (ICU) in attempts to decrease healthcare professional exposure to COVID-19 and ultimately improve glycemic management of patients affected by COVID-19. Point of care (POC) and laboratory (Lab) glucose values were matched with simultaneous CGM glucose values and measures of accuracy were performed to evaluate the safety and usability of CGM in this population. Our data are presented drawing a distinction between POC and Lab as reference glucose sources. RESULTS: In 808 paired samples obtained from 28 patients (10 ICU, 18 general floor), overall mean absolute relative difference (MARD) for all patients using either POC or Lab as reference was 13.2%. When using POC as the reference glucose MARD was 13.9% and using Lab glucose as reference 10.9%. Using both POC and Lab reference glucose pairs the overall MARD for critical care patients was 12.1% and for general floor patients 14%. CONCLUSION: We determined, with proper protocols and safeguards in place, use of CGM in the hospitalized patient is a reasonable alternative to standard of care to achieve the goal of reducing healthcare professional exposure. Further study is necessary to validate safety, accuracy, and efficacy of this technology. Investigation and analysis are necessary for the development of protocols to utilize CGM trend arrows, alerts, and alarms.