Effects of a Lifestyle Intervention to Prevent Deterioration in Glycemic Status Among South Asian Women With Recent Gestational Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Women with recent gestational diabetes (GDM) have increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Objective: To investigate whether a resource-appropriate and context-appropriate lifestyle intervention could prevent glycemic deterioration among women with recent GDM in South Asia. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized, participant-unblinded controlled trial investigated a 12-month lifestyle intervention vs usual care at 19 urban hospitals in India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh. Participants included women with recent diagnosis of GDM who did not have type 2 diabetes at an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) 3 to 18 months postpartum. They were enrolled from November 2017 to January 2020, and follow-up ended in January 2021. Data were analyzed from April to July 2021. Interventions: A 12-month lifestyle intervention focused on diet and physical activity involving group and individual sessions, as well as remote engagement, adapted to local context and resources. This was compared with usual care. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was worsening category of glycemia based on OGTT using American Diabetes Association criteria: (1) normal glucose tolerance to prediabetes (ie, impaired fasting glucose or impaired glucose tolerance) or type 2 diabetes or (2) prediabetes to type 2 diabetes. The primary analysis consisted of a survival analysis of time to change in glycemic status at or prior to the final patient visit, which occurred at varying times after 12 months for each patient. Secondary outcomes included new-onset type 2 diabetes and change in body weight. Results: A total of 1823 women (baseline mean [SD] age, 30.9 [4.9] years and mean [SD] body mass index, 26.6 [4.6]) underwent OGTT at a median (IQR) 6.5 (4.8-8.2) months postpartum. After excluding 160 women (8.8%) with type 2 diabetes, 2 women (0.1%) who met other exclusion criteria, and 49 women (2.7%) who did not consent or were uncontactable, 1612 women were randomized. Subsequently, 11 randomized participants were identified as ineligible and excluded from the primary analysis, leaving 1601 women randomized (800 women randomized to the intervention group and 801 women randomized to usual care). These included 600 women (37.5%) with prediabetes and 1001 women (62.5%) with normoglycemia. Among participants randomized to the intervention, 644 women (80.5%) received all program content, although COVID-19 lockdowns impacted the delivery model (ie, among 644 participants who engaged in all group sessions, 476 women [73.9%] received some or all content through individual engagement, and 315 women [48.9%] received some or all content remotely). After a median (IQR) 14.1 (11.4-20.1) months of follow-up, 1308 participants (81.2%) had primary outcome data. The intervention, compared with usual care, did not reduce worsening glycemic status (204 women [25.5%] vs 217 women [27.1%]; hazard ratio, 0.92; [95% CI, 0.76-1.12]; P = .42) or improve any secondary outcome. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that a large proportion of women in South Asian urban settings developed dysglycemia soon after a GDM-affected pregnancy and that a lifestyle intervention, modified owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, did not prevent subsequent glycemic deterioration. These findings suggest that alternate or additional approaches are needed, especially among high-risk individuals. Trial Registration: Clinical Trials Registry of India Identifier: CTRI/2017/06/008744; Sri Lanka Clinical Trials Registry Identifier: SLCTR/2017/001; and ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03305939.

Effect of COVID 19 pneumonia on hyperglycemia: Is it different from non COVID pneumonia?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Glycemic control in critical illness has been linked to outcomes. We sought to investigate if COVID pneumonia was causing disrupted glycemic control compared to historically similar diseases. METHODS: At Intermountain Healthcare, a 23-hospital healthcare system in the intermountain west, we performed a multicenter, retrospective cohort observational study. We compared 13,268 hospitalized patients with COVID pneumonia to 6673 patients with non -COVID-pneumonia. RESULTS: Patients with COVID-19 were younger had fewer comorbidities, had lower mortality and greater length of hospital stay. Our regression models demonstrated that daily insulin dose, indexed for weight, was associated with COVID-19, age, diabetic status, HgbA1c, admission SOFA, ICU length of stay and receipt of corticosteroids. There was significant interaction between a diagnosis of diabetes and having COVID-19. Time in range for our IV insulin protocol was not correlated with having COVID after adjustment. It was correlated with ICU length of stay, diabetic control (HgbA1C) and prior history of diabetes. Among patients with subcutaneous (SQ) insulin only percent of glucose checks in range was correlated with diabetic status, having Covid-19, HgbA1c, total steroids given and Elixhauser comorbidity score even when controlled for other factors. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who receive insulin for glycemic control require both more SQ and IV insulin than the non-COVID-19 pneumonia counterparts. Patients with COVID-19 who received SQ insulin only had a lower percent of glucose checks in range.

The change in glycaemic control immediately after COVID-19 vaccination in people with type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: Evidence suggests that some people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) experience temporary instability of blood glucose (BG) levels after COVID-19 vaccination. We aimed to assess this objectively. METHODS: We examined the interstitial glucose profile of 97 consecutive adults (age ≥ 18 years) with T1DM using the FreeStyle Libre® flash glucose monitor in the periods immediately before and after their first COVID-19 vaccination. The primary outcome measure was percentage (%) interstitial glucose readings within the target range 3.9-10 mmol/L for 7 days prior to the vaccination and the 7 days after the vaccination. Data are mean ± standard error. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in the % interstitial glucose on target (3.9-10.0) for the 7 days following vaccination (mean 52.2% ± 2.0%) versus pre-COVID-19 vaccination (mean 55.0% ± 2.0%) (p = 0.030). 58% of individuals with T1DM showed a reduction in the 'time in target range' in the week after vaccination. 30% showed a decrease of time within the target range of over 10%, and 10% showed a decrease in time within target range of over 20%. The change in interstitial glucose proportion on target in the week following vaccination was most pronounced for people taking metformin/dapagliflozin + basal bolus insulin (change -7.6%) and for people with HbA1c below the median (change -5.7%). CONCLUSION: In T1DM, we have shown that initial COVID-19 vaccination can cause temporary perturbation of interstitial glucose, with this effect more pronounced in people talking oral hypoglycaemic medication plus insulin, and when HbA1c is lower.

Impact of COVID-19 lockdown on glycemic control in type 1 diabetes.

AIM: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced governments to impose lockdown policies, thus impacting patients with chronic diseases, such as type 1 diabetes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of lockdown on glycemic control in type 1 diabetes patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patients using a continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion device during the nationwide lockdown. Children and adolescents aged 2-18 years followed up at the Pediatric Endocrinology Unit of Hospitalar São João in Portugal were included in the study. We collected data on the age, weight, insulin doses, and glycemic control of the patients before and after the restrictions. RESULTS: The study included 100 patients, 59 males, with a mean age of 12.5 years. Baseline data showed a suboptimal glycemic control with a median HbA1c of 7.9%. The lockdown was associated with an increase in the body mass index (BMI) of all patients (p = 0.009), particularly girls and older teenagers. Metabolic control deteriorated in the 10-13 age group (p = 0.03), with a 0.4% increase in HbA1c. CONCLUSION: To date, this is the largest study on the impact of lockdown on type 1 diabetes in patients using an insulin pump. The results highlight the importance of physical activity, parental supervision, and continuation of healthcare assistance through telemedicine in young individuals with type 1 diabetes.

COVID-19 Pandemic and Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes: No Significant Change in Glycemic Control During The Pandemic Lockdown of 2020.

Importance: There is no consensus on the impact of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic lockdown on glycemic control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in the US. Aim: To determine the impact of the pandemic lockdown of March 15th through July 6th, 2020 on glycemic control after controlling for confounders. Subjects and Methods: An observational study of 110 subjects of mean age 14.8 ± 4.9 years(y), [male 15.4 ± 4.0y, (n=57); female 14.1 ± 3.8y, (n=53), p=0.07] with T1D of 6.31 ± 4.3y (95% CI 1.0-19.7y). Data were collected at 1-4 months before the lockdown and 1-4 months following the lifting of the lockdown at their first post-lockdown clinic visit. Results: There was no significant change in A1c between the pre- and post-pandemic lockdown periods, 0.18 ± 1.2%, (95% CI -0.05 to 0.41), p=0.13. There were equally no significant differences in A1c between the male and female subjects, -0.16 ± 1.2 vs -0.19 ± 1.2%, p=0.8; insulin pump users and non-pump users, -0.25 ± 1.0 vs -0.12 ± 1.4%, p=0.5; and pubertal vs prepubertal subjects, 0.18 ± 1.3 vs -0.11 ± 0.3%, p=0.6. The significant predictors of decrease in A1c were pre-lockdown A1c (p<0.0001) and the use of CGM (p=0.019). The CGM users had significant reductions in point-of-care A1c (0.4 ± 0.6%, p=0.0012), the CGM-estimated A1c (p=0.0076), mean glucose concentration (p=0.022), a significant increase in sensor usage (p=0.012), with no change in total daily dose of insulin (TDDI). The non-CGM users had significantly increased TDDI (p<0.0001) but no change in HbA1c, 0.06 ± 1.8%, p=0.86. Conclusions: There was no change in glycemic control during the pandemic lockdown of 2020 in US children.

A practical guidance on the use of intravenous insulin infusion for management of inpatient hyperglycemia: Intravenous Insulin Infusion for Management of Inpatient Hyperglycemia.

BACKGROUND: We aim to provide a practical guidance on the use of intravenous insulin infusion for managing inpatient hyperglycemia. METHODS AND RESULTS: This document was formulated based on the review of available literature and personal experience of authors. We have used various case scenarios to illustrate variables which should be taken into account when deciding adjustments in infusion rate, including but not restricted to ambient blood glucose level and magnitude of blood glucose change in the previous hour. CONCLUSION: The guidance can be generalized to any situation where dedicated protocols are lacking, trained manpower is not available and resource constraints are present.

Use of Continuous Glucose Monitor in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients Requiring Insulin Infusion: An Observational Study.

CONTEXT: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created a need for remote blood glucose (BG) monitoring in the intensive care unit (ICU). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate feasibility and patient safety of a hybrid monitoring strategy of point-of-care (POC) BG plus continuous glucose monitor (CGM) in the ICU. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: ICU of an academic medical center. PATIENTS: Patients with COVID-19 on IV insulin. INTERVENTION: After meeting initial validation criteria, CGM was used for IV insulin titration and POC BG was performed every 6 hours or as needed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes included frequency of POC BG, workflow, safety, and accuracy measures. RESULTS: The study included 19 patients, 18 with CGM data, mean age 58 years, 89% on mechanical ventilation, 37% on vasopressors, and 42% on dialysis. The median time to CGM validation was 137 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 114-206). During IV insulin, the median number of POC values was 7 (IQR 6-16) on day 1, and declined slightly thereafter (71% reduction compared with standard of 24/day). The median number of CGM values used nonadjunctively to titrate IV insulin was 11.5 (IQR 0, 15) on day 1 and increased thereafter. Time in range 70 to 180 mg/dL was 64 ± 23% on day 1 and 72 ± 16% on days 2 through 7, whereas time <70 mg/dL was 1.5 ± 4.1% on day 1 and <1% on days 2 through 7. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides data to support that CGM using a hybrid protocol is feasible, accurate, safe, and has potential to reduce nursing and staff workload.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on glycemic control among outpatients with type 2 diabetes in Japan: A hospital-based survey from a country without lockdown.

AIMS: Some studies have reported changes in glycemic control of patients with diabetes mellitus under lockdown. However, no previous study examined the impact of the pandemic on glycemic control in patients with diabetes in countries that did not introduce a lockdown such as Japan. This study aimed to assess changes in glycemic control during the pandemic in patients with type 2 diabetes treated at a Japanese clinic. METHODS: We conducted a historical cohort study, using electronic medical records of patients with type 2 diabetes who visited our clinic between January 2019 and August 2020. Differences in HbA1c values before and after the outbreak of COVID-19 were the primary outcome, examined using the linear mixed model. RESULTS: HbA1c values significantly increased from 7.45% to 7.53% after the state of emergency was introduced (n = 1,009). Furthermore, a deterioration in HbA1c values was observed in particular among women, patients aged ≥ 65 years, those with body mass index of ≥ 25 kg/m2, and those that were not using insulin. CONCLUSIONS: Glycemic control deteriorated in patients with type 2 diabetes during the pandemic even in a country without a national lockdown.

Telemedicine and urban diabetes during COVID-19 pandemic in Milano, Italy during lock-down: epidemiological and sociodemographic picture.

BACKGROUND: Since 2010, more than half of World population lives in Urban Environments. Urban Diabetes has arisen as a novel nosological entity in Medicine. Urbanization leads to the accrual of a number of factors increasing the vulnerability to diabetes mellitus and related diseases. Herein we report clinical-epidemiological data of the Milano Metropolitan Area in the contest of the Cities Changing Diabetes Program. Since the epidemiological picture was taken in January 2020, on the edge of COVID-19 outbreak in the Milano Metropolitan Area, a perspective addressing potential interactions between diabetes and obesity prevalence and COVID-19 outbreak, morbidity and mortality will be presented. To counteract lock-down isolation and, in general, social distancing a pilot study was conducted to assess the feasibility and efficacy of tele-monitoring via Flash Glucose control in a cohort of diabetic patients in ASST North Milano. METHODS: Data presented derive from 1. ISTAT (National Institute of Statistics of Italy), 2. Milano ATS web site (Health Agency of Metropolitan Milano Area), which entails five ASST (Health Agencies in the Territories). A pilot study was conducted in 65 screened diabetic patients (only 40 were enrolled in the study of those 36 were affected by type 2 diabetes and 4 were affected by type 1 diabetes) of ASST North Milano utilizing Flash Glucose Monitoring for 3 months (mean age 65 years, HbA1c 7,9%. Patients were subdivided in 3 groups using glycemic Variability Coefficient (VC): a. High risk, VC > 36, n. 8 patients; Intermediate risk 20 < VC < 36, n. 26 patients; Low risk VC < 20, n. 4 patients. The control group was constituted by 26 diabetic patients non utilizing Flash Glucose monitoring. RESULTS: In a total population of 3.227.264 (23% is over 65 y) there is an overall prevalence of 5.65% with a significant difference between Downtown ASST (5.31%) and peripheral ASST (ASST North Milano, 6.8%). Obesity and overweight account for a prevalence of 7.8% and 27.7%, respectively, in Milano Metropolitan Area. We found a linear relationship (R = 0.36) between prevalence of diabetes and aging index. Similarly, correlations between diabetes prevalence and both older people depending index and structural dependence index (R = 0.75 and R = 0.93, respectively), were found. A positive correlation (R = 0.46) with percent of unoccupied people and diabetes prevalence was also found. A reverse relationship between diabetes prevalence and University level instruction rate was finally identified (R = - 0.82). Our preliminary study demonstrated a reduction of Glycated Hemoglobin (p = 0.047) at 3 months follow-up during the lock-down period, indicating Flash Glucose Monitoring and remote control as a potential methodology for diabetes management during COVID-19 lock-down. HYPOTHESIS AND DISCUSSION: The increase in diabetes and obesity prevalence in Milano Metropolitan Area, which took place over 30 years, is related to several environmental factors. We hypothesize that some of those factors may have also determined the high incidence and virulence of COVID-19 in the Milano area. Health Agencies of Milano Metropolitan Area are presently taking care of diabetic patients facing the new challenge of maintaining sustainable diabetes care costs in light of an increase in urban population and of the new life-style. The COVID-19 pandemic will modify the management of diabetic and obese patients permanently, via the implementation of approaches that entail telemedicine technology. The pilot study conducted during the lock-down period indicates an improvement of glucose control utilizing a remote glucose control system in the Milano Metropolitan Area, suggesting a wider utilization of similar methodologies during the present "second wave" lock-down.

The impact of a prolonged lockdown and use of telemedicine on glycemic control in people with type 1 diabetes during the COVID-19 outbreak in Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: To minimize the spread of Coronavirus Disease-2019, Saudi Arabia imposed a nationwide lockdown for over 6 weeks. We examined the impact of lockdown on glycemic control in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM); and assessed whether changes in glycemic control differ between those who attended a telemedicine visit during lockdown versus those who did not. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Flash CGM data from 101 individuals with T1D were retrospectively evaluated. Participants were categorized into two groups: Attended a telemedicine visit during lockdown (n = 61) or did not attend (n = 40). Changes in CGM metrics from the last 2 weeks pre-lockdown period (Feb 25 - March 9, 2020) to the last 2 weeks of complete lockdown period (April 7-20, 2020) were examined in the two groups. RESULTS: Those who attended a telemedicine visit during the lockdown period had a significant improvement in the following CGM metrics by the end of lockdown: Average glucose (from 180 to 159 mg/dl, p < 0.01), glycemic management indicator (from 7.7 to 7.2%, p = 0.03), time in range (from 46 to 55%, p < 0.01), and time above range (from 48 to 35%, p < 0.01) without significant changes in time below range, number of daily scans or hypoglycemic events, and other indices. In contrast, there were no significant changes in any of the CGM metrics during lockdown in those who did not attend telemedicine. CONCLUSIONS: A six-week lockdown did not worsen, nor improve, glycemic control in individuals with T1D who did not attend a telemedicine visit. Whereas those who attended a telemedicine visit had a significant improvement in glycemic metrics; supporting the clinical effectiveness of telemedicine in diabetes care.

Glycemic control in children and teenagers with type 1 diabetes around lockdown for COVID-19: A continuous glucose monitoring-based observational study.

AIMS/INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic urged authorities to impose rigorous quarantines and brought considerable changes to people's lifestyles. The impact of these changes on glycemic control has remained unclear, especially the long-term effect. We aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 lockdown on glycemic control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This observational study enrolled children with type 1 diabetes using continuous glucose monitoring. Continuous glucose monitoring data were extracted from the cloud-based platform before, during and after lockdown. Demographics and lifestyle change-related information were collected from the database or questionnaires. We compared these data before, during and after lockdown. RESULTS: A total of 43 children with type 1 diabetes were recruited (20 girls; mean age 7.45 years; median diabetes duration 1.05 years). We collected 41,784 h of continuous glucose monitoring data. Although time in range (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) was similar before, during and after lockdown, the median time below range <3.9 mmol/L decreased from 3.70% (interquartile range [IQR] 2.25-9.53%) before lockdown to 2.91% (IQR 1.43-5.95%) during lockdown, but reversed to 4.95% (IQR 2.11-9.42%) after lockdown (P = 0.004). Time below range <3.0 mmol/L was 0.59% (IQR 0.14-2.21%), 0.38% (IQR 0.05-1.35%) and 0.82% (IQR 0.22-1.69%), respectively (P = 0.008). The amelioration of hypoglycemia during lockdown was more prominent among those who had less time spent <3.9 mmol/L at baseline. During lockdown, individuals reduced their physical activity, received longer sleep duration and spent more time on diabetes management. In addition, they attended outpatient clinics less and turned to telemedicine more frequently. CONCLUSION: Glycemic control did not deteriorate in children and teenagers with type 1 diabetes around the COVID-19 pandemic. Hypoglycemia declined during lockdown, but reversed after lockdown, and the changes related to lifestyle might not provide a long-term effect.

Observational study on Effect of Lock Down due to COVID 19 on glycemic control in patients with Diabetes: Experience from Central India.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Diabetes is a chronic metabolic condition characterized with hyperglycemia and associated with several complications. Glycemic control is important factor in preventing the complications associated with diabetes. Pillars for good glycemic control are good life style modification with proper medication under medical guidance. The aim of this study was to study the effect of lock down on glycemic control in diabetic patients and possible factor responsible for this. MATERIAL AND METHODS: - Out of 407 only 143 diabetic patients who attended the our endocrine OPD in last 3 months who had good glycemic control in past without any chronic complication and willing to participate were included in study. They were advised for the self-monitoring of blood glucose for identifying the glycemic control and with questionnaire designed possible factor was identified during the lockdown period. RESULTS: - The patients were aged between 18 and 65 years with mean age of 54.68 years and male to female ratio was 91:52.56 (39.16%) patients reported worsening of hyperglycemia and requiring addition of medications for control of blood glucose and 3 (2.09%) patients reported hypoglycemic events and medications were stepped down. Psychological stress was most common factor worsening of hyperglycemia followed by change in diet and exercise.

Glycaemic control in the paediatric and young adult population with type 1 diabetes following a single telehealth visit - what have we learned from the COVID-19 lockdown?

AIMS: Children with chronic diseases were unable to receive their usual care during COVID-19 lockdown. We assessed the feasibility and impact of telehealth visits on the time-in-range (TIR) of paediatric individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D). METHODS: An observational multicentre real-life study. Patients scheduled for an in-clinic visit during the lockdown were offered to participate in a telehealth visit. Sociodemographic, clinical, continuous glucose monitor and pump data were recorded 2 weeks prior and 2 weeks after telehealth visit. The primary endpoint was change in relative-TIR, i.e. change in TIR divided by the percent of possible change (∆TIR/(100-TIRbefore)*100). RESULTS: The study group comprised 195 individuals with T1D (47.7% males), mean±SD age 14.6 ± 5.3 years, and diabetes duration 6.0 ± 4.6 years. Telehealth was accomplished with 121 patients and their parents (62.0%); 74 (38.0%) did not transfer complete data. Mean TIR was significantly higher for the two-week period after the telehealth visit than for the two-week period prior the visit (62.9 ± 16.0, p < 0.001 vs. 59.0 ± 17.2); the improvement in relative-TIR was 5.7±26.1%. Initial higher mean glucose level, lower TIR, less time spent at <54 mg/dl range, longer time spent at 180-250 mg/dl range, higher daily insulin dose, and single-parent household were associated with improved relative-TIR. Multiple regression logistic analysis demonstrated only initial lower TIR and single-parent household were significant, odds ratio: -0.506, (95%CI -0.99,-0.023), p=0.04 and 13.82, (95%CI 0.621, 27.016), p=0.04, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Paediatric and young adult patients with T1D benefited from a telehealth visit during COVID-19. However, this modality is not yet suitable for a considerable proportion of patients.

Glycemic Control Improvement in Italian Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes Followed Through Telemedicine During Lockdown Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background/Objective: To minimize the wide spread of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, Italy was placed in an almost complete lockdown state that forced people to "stay at home". Aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of lockdown on glycemic control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) followed through telemedicine. Subjects/Methods: This observational study involved patients with T1D using the real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) Dexcom G6®. Ambulatory glucose profile data from the 3-months before schools closure (November 26, 2019-February 23, 2020; T0) and from the 3-months of consecutive lockdown (February 24-May 18, 2020; T1) were compared. Results: Sixty-two children and adolescents (11.1 ± 4.37 years, 50% males) with T1D (median time disease 3.67 years) were enrolled in the study. Insulin total daily dose was unchanged, while time spent on physical activities was decreased (p<0.0001). Despite the lack of statistical significance, median value of the glucose management indicator decreased from 7.4% to 7.25%. Glucose standard deviation (p<0.0001) and coefficient of variation (p=0.001) improved across the study. Median time in range increased from 60.5% to 63.5% (p=0.008), time above range decreased from 37.3% to 34.1% (p=0.048), and time below range decreased from 1.85% to 1.45% (p=0.001). Conclusions: Overall, in our children and adolescents with T1D glycemic control improved during lockdown. Despite patients were confined to their homes and limited to exercise, our data suggest that the use of real-time CGM, the continuous parental management, and the telemedicine can display beneficial effects on T1D care.

Diabetes, glycaemic control, and risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation: Population-based, prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the prospective association of diabetes and glycaemic control with COVID-19 hospitalisation in a large community-based cohort study. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: Participants (N = 337,802, aged 56.4 ±â€¯8.1 yr; 55.1% women) underwent biomedical assessments at baseline as part of the UK Biobank prospective cohort study. The outcome was cases of COVID-19 serious enough to warrant a hospital admission from 16-March-2020 to 26-April-2020. RESULTS: At follow up, 649 cases COVID-19 were recorded. In multivariable adjusted analyses, risk of COVID-19 was elevated in people with undiagnosed diabetes at baseline (A1C ≥ 6.5%) (risk ratio = 2.68; 95% confidence interval: 1.66, 4.33) and poorly controlled (A1C ≥ 8.6%) diagnosed diabetes (1.91;1.04, 3.52). There was a dose-dependent increase in risk of COVID-19 with increasing A1C, that persisted in multivariable adjusted models (per SD [0.9%]: 1.07; 1.03, 1.11; p[trend] < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this large community-based sample, higher levels of A1C within the normal range were a risk factor for COVID-19. Glucose regulation may play a key role in immune responses to this infection. Undiagnosed cases of diabetes in the general community may present a particularly high risk.

An overview of COVID-19 in people with diabetes: Pathophysiology and considerations in the inpatient setting.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has continued to have a devastating impact on health worldwide. There has been a rapid evolution of evidence, establishing an increased risk of morbidity and mortality associated with diabetes and concurrent COVID-19. The objective of this review is to explore the current evidence for inpatient assessment and management of diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight areas requiring further exploration. METHODS: A literature search of databases was conducted to November 2020 using variations on keywords SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, SARS, MERS and diabetes. Information relating to the impact of diabetes on severity of COVID-19 infection, the impact of COVID-19 infection on diabetes management and diabetes-related complications was integrated to create a narrative review. DISCUSSION: People with diabetes and COVID-19 are at an increased risk of morbidity and mortality. It is important that people with both known and previously unrecognised diabetes and COVID-19 be promptly identified and assessed during acute illness, with close monitoring for clinical deterioration or complications. People with diabetes may require titration or alteration of their glycaemic management due to the potential for worse outcomes with hyperglycaemia and COVID-19 infection. Comprehensive discharge planning is vital to optimise ongoing glycaemic management. CONCLUSION: Further understanding of the risk of adverse outcomes and optimisation of glycaemic management for people with diabetes during COVID-19 is required to improve outcomes. Increased glucose and ketone monitoring, substitution of insulin for some oral anti-hyperglycaemic medications and careful monitoring for complications of diabetes such as diabetic ketoacidosis should be considered.