Impact of COVID-19 lockdown on glucose control of elderly people with type 2 diabetes in Italy.

AIMS: to evaluate the effect of home confinement related to COVID-19 lockdown on metabolic control in subjects with T2DM in Italy. METHODS: we evaluated the metabolic profile of 304 individuals with T2DM (65% males; age 69 ± 9 years; diabetes duration 16 ± 10 years) attending our Diabetes Unit early at the end of lockdown period (June 8 to July 7, 2020) and compared it with the latest one recorded before lockdown. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in fasting plasma glucose (8.6 ± 2.1 vs 8.8 ± 2.5 mmol/L; P = 0.353) and HbA1c (7.1 ± 0.9 vs 7.1 ± 0.9%; P = 0.600) before and after lockdown. Worsening of glycaemic control (i.e., ΔHbA1c ≥ 0.5%) occurred more frequently in older patients (32.2% in > 80 years vs 21.3% in 61-80 years vs 9.3% in < 60 years; P = 0.05) and in insulin users (28.8 vs 16.5%; P = 0.012). On multivariable analysis, age > 80 years (OR 4.62; 95%CI: 1.22-16.07) and insulin therapy (OR 1.96; 95%CI: 1.10-3.50) remained independently associated to worsening in glycaemic control. CONCLUSIONS: Home confinement related to COVID-19 lockdown did not exert a negative effect on glycaemic control in patients with T2DM. However, age and insulin therapy can identify patients at greatest risk of deterioration of glycaemic control.

Type 1 diabetes and COVID-19: The "lockdown effect".

AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect the lockdown imposed during COVID-19 outbreak on the glycemic control of people with Type 1 diabetes (T1D) using Continuous (CGM) or Flash Glucose Monitoring (FGM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed glucose reading obtained by FGM or CGM in T1D subjects. Sensor data from 2 weeks before the lockdown (Period 0, P0), 2 weeks immediately after the lockdown (period 1, P1), in mid-lockdown (Period 2, P2) and immediately after end of lockdown (Period 3, P3) were analyzed. RESULTS: The study included 63 T1D patients, (FGM: 52, 82%; CGM:11, 18%). Sensor use (91%) were slightly reduced. Despite this reduction, Time in Range increased in P1 (62%), P2 (61%) and P3 (62%) as compared to P0 (58%, all p < 0.05 or less) with concomitant reduction in the Time Above Range (P0: 38%; P1: 34%, P2: 34%, P3: 32%, all p < 0.05 or less vs. P0). Average glucose and GMI improved achieving statistical difference in P3 (165 vs. 158 mg/dl, p = 0.040 and 7.2% (55 mmol/mol) vs. 7.0% (53 mmol/mol), p = 0.016) compared to P0. Time Below Range (TBR) and overall glucose variability remained unchanged. Bi-hourly analysis of glucose profile showed an improvement particularly in the early morning hours. CONCLUSIONS: In T1D subjects with good glycemic control on CGM or FGM, the lockdown had no negative impact. Rather a modest but significant improvement in glycemic control has been recorded, most likely reflecting more regular daily life activities and reduces work-related distress.