The goal of this article was to describe trends in publications (including conference abstracts) and clinical trials that report on glycemic time in range (TIR). Reviewed databases included but were not limited to MEDLINE and Embase. Clinical trial registries were also sourced. All studies reporting TIR published between 2010 and 2021 were included. Clinical trials reporting TIR that started in or after 2010 were also included. Non-English publications, abstracts, and clinical trials were excluded. Book chapters, nonhuman studies, and studies not reporting TIR were excluded. Manuscript/abstract category, publication year, study region, interventional versus observational role of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), and clinical trial start and completion dates were captured. Glycemic outcomes reported in publications or trials, including TIR as a primary outcome, A1C, time below range (TBR), and time above range (TAR), were also captured. A total of 373 clinical trials, 531 publications, and 620 abstracts were included in the review. The number of trials, publications, and abstracts reporting TIR significantly increased, particularly between 2018 and 2021, during which time the number of clinical trials, publications, and conference abstracts reporting TIR increased by 6-fold, 12-fold, and 4.5-fold, respectively. About 35-44% of studies reported TIR as a primary outcome. Approximately 54% of clinical trials, 47% of publications, and 47% of conference abstracts reported the role of CGM to be observational. TBR was reported more often than TAR. The marked increase in the number of trials, publications, and abstracts reporting TIR highlights the increasing significance and acceptance of TIR as an outcome measure in diabetes management.

Enteral nutrition (EN) and parenteral nutrition (PN) increase the risk of hyperglycemia and adverse outcomes, including mortality, in patients with and without diabetes. A blood glucose target range of 140-180 mg/dL is recommended for hospitalized patients receiving artificial nutrition. Using a diabetes-specific EN formula, lowering the dextrose content, and using a hypocaloric PN formula have all been shown to prevent hyperglycemia and associated adverse outcomes. Insulin, given either subcutaneously or as a continuous infusion, is the mainstay of treatment for hyperglycemia. However, no subcutaneous insulin regimen has been shown to be superior to others. This review summarizes the evidence on and provides recommendations for the treatment of EN- and PN-associated hyperglycemia and offers strategies for hypoglycemia prevention. The authors also highlight their institution's protocol for the safe use of insulin in the PN bag. Randomized controlled trials evaluating safety and efficacy of targeted insulin therapy synchronized with different types of EN or PN delivery are needed.

Previous research has suggested beneficial glycemic outcomes for people with type 2 diabetes with the use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM); yet, there is a dearth of data examining CGM in diverse populations. Additionally, the use of online peer support communities (OPSCs) can further support the application of CGM information to improve health behaviors. The purpose of this qualitative study was to assess participant experiences with a CGM+OPSC intervention. Semi-structured interviews were conducted after a 12-week combined CGM+OPSC intervention with Hispanic, Spanish-speaking people with type 2 diabetes not using insulin. The OPSC was managed by five trained bilingual peer facilitators. Interviews were conducted in Spanish. Audio recordings were translated and transcribed and then reviewed by the interviewer for accuracy. Emergent themes were identified through inductive thematic analysis. Twenty-six participants completed interviews. Three main themes emerged from the data: 1) CGM supports participants' understanding of the relationship between glucose levels and health behaviors such as healthy eating, being active, taking medication, stress reduction, and improving sleep; 2) the OPSC reinforced how to make healthy choices through personal experiments, collective learning, and social support; and 3) CGM+OPSC supports behavior change and increases confidence. When combined, CGM+OPSC interventions appear to create a positive feedback loop to reinforce and optimize healthy behaviors for diabetes self-management in individuals with type 2 diabetes who are not on insulin. The provision of such an intervention tailored to Hispanic, Spanish-speaking individuals has the potential to address the health care disparity seen in this population.

Fear of hypoglycemia in people with type 1 diabetes has a detrimental effect on glycemic control and quality of life. The association between continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and hypoglycemia confidence and fear has not previously been assessed in the young adult population. This was a prospective cohort study using questionnaires to assess the impact of CGM on hypoglycemia confidence (using the Hypoglycemia Confidence Scale [HCS]) and hypoglycemia fear (using the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey II [HFS]) in 40 young adults with a preexisting diagnosis of type 1 diabetes. Scores on the HCS were greater at baseline for those with a longer duration of diabetes. Participants with higher general anxiety scores on the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale had higher hypoglycemia fear at baseline (total score and worry component, but not behavior component of the HFS). Between baseline and follow-up, HCS scores increased on average by 0.2 (95% CI 0.1-0.4, P = 0.01) on a scale of 1-4. HFS scores decreased by 1.8 (95% CI -3.0 to -0.5, P = 0.006) on a scale of 0-24 for the worry component and by 2.5 (95% CI -4.4 to -0.6, P = 0.01) on a scale of 0-44 for total (worry + behavior components). At follow up, 83% of participants planned to continue using CGM all or most of the time. There was a very high self-reported effect of CGM on life with diabetes (median 8.0 [interquartile range 6.5-10.0], where 10 indicated a very big difference). Hypoglycemia confidence and fear improve with CGM use in young adults.

Young adults (YAs) are often faced with many new transitions and major milestones specific to their life stage. For YAs with diabetes, it can be particularly difficult to balance diabetes management with the age-typical demands of young adulthood. Clinicians can play an important role in helping YAs navigate major life changes and find balance in the competing demands of young adulthood, while protecting their health and well-being.

Type 2 diabetes management continues to increase in complexity as more pharmacologic medication classes become available and high-quality clinical trials are completed. Because many antihyperglycemic agents could be appropriate for a given patient, expert treatment guidance is indispensable. Algorithms can help to guide clinicians toward initiating more evidence-based therapy and critically thinking about patient-centered factors that may influence their medication choices. High-quality cardiovascular, renal, and heart failure outcomes trials completed in the past several years have changed the paradigm of how we think about antihyperglycemic agents. Considerations for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure, and renal insufficiency now figure prominently in treatment algorithms for type 2 diabetes, and the results of recent outcomes trials have significantly transformed algorithmic guidelines published by diabetes, endocrinology, and cardiology associations.

We sought to develop and pilot a new measure, the Diabetes-Specific Risk-Taking Inventory (DSRI), to assess unhealthy risk-taking behaviors among adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Thirteen diabetes health care providers, 30 adolescents with type 1 diabetes (aged 15-19 years, 60% female, mean A1C 8.7% [72 mmol/mol], and 33% on insulin pumps), and the adolescents' caregivers rated the perceived riskiness of each item on the DSRI. Adolescents completed the DSRI, for which they reported how often they engaged in 34 behaviors that could place them at risk for acute complications of type 1 diabetes or out-of-range blood glucose levels. Adolescents also completed the risk-taking subscale from the Risk-Taking and Self-Harm Inventory for Adolescents, and parents completed the parent-proxy Diabetes Management Questionnaire. Mean A1C during the previous year was obtained via medical chart review. Results indicated good content validity and feasibility for using the DSRI in a research context, as 100% of adolescents who consented to the study completed the measure. The DSRI was positively correlated with general risk-taking and negatively correlated with diabetes management, indicating preliminary evidence of convergent validity. The DSRI also correlated with A1C. This pilot study extends our previous work in developing a conceptual model for illness-specific risk-taking. The DSRI is a promising new measure to assess illness-specific risk-taking, including unhealthy risk-taking behaviors, for adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems are becoming part of standard care for type 1 diabetes, and their use is increasing for type 2 diabetes. Consensus has been reached on standardized metrics for reporting CGM data, with time in range of 70-180 mg/dL and time below 54 mg/dL recognized as the key metrics of focus for diabetes management. The ambulatory glucose profile report has emerged as the standard for visualization of CGM data and will continue to evolve to incorporate other elements such as insulin, food, and exercise data to support glycemic management.

Intermittent fasting has been suggested as an option for managing overweight and obesity. The purpose of this article is to present a balanced review of the practice of intermittent fasting and its impact on glycemic control in people with diabetes.

“Help! I have diabetes and I don’t know what to eat!” Every health care professional working with individuals with diabetes has heard a plea like this one at some time or another. People living with diabetes must learn about and master many complex concepts about the disease and its management. Some parts of a diabetes management plan are easier to accomplish than others. Making appropriate food choices and following a healthy eating plan often top patients’ lists of the hardest aspects of having diabetes. We try to provide the best information we can to help our patients live with this challenging disease. Understanding the latest nutrition research, healthy eating strategies, and nutrition-related treatment approaches is key to being able to help patients make food choices that are appropriate for them and work with their diabetes care team to develop a diabetes management plan that addresses their individual nutrition needs. With this Diabetes Spectrum From Research to Practice section, we hope to expand your understanding of diabetes eating patterns and other nutrition topics and improve your ability to effectively discuss these topics with your patients who have diabetes. While serving on the 2019 American Diabetes Association (ADA) …