Remote patient monitoring for management of diabetes mellitus in pregnancy is associated with improved maternal and neonatal outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus is a common medical complication of pregnancy, and its treatment is complex. Recent years have seen an increase in the application of mobile health tools and advanced technologies, such as remote patient monitoring, with the aim of improving care for diabetes mellitus in pregnancy. Previous studies of these technologies for the treatment of diabetes in pregnancy have been small and have not clearly shown clinical benefit with implementation. OBJECTIVE: Remote patient monitoring allows clinicians to monitor patients' health data (such as glucose values) in near real-time, between office visits, to make timely adjustments to care. Our objective was to determine if using remote patient monitoring for the management of diabetes in pregnancy leads to an improvement in maternal and neonatal outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of pregnant patients with diabetes mellitus managed by the maternal-fetal medicine practice at one academic institution between October 2019 and April 2021. This practice transitioned from paper-based blood glucose logs to remote patient monitoring in February 2020. Remote patient monitoring options included (1) device integration with Bluetooth glucometers that automatically uploaded measured glucose values to the patient's Epic MyChart application or (2) manual entry in which patients manually logged their glucose readings into their MyChart application. Values in the MyChart application directly transferred to the patient's electronic health record for review and management by clinicians. In total, 533 patients were studied. We compared 173 patients managed with paper logs to 360 patients managed with remote patient monitoring (176 device integration and 184 manual entry). Our primary outcomes were composite maternal morbidity (which included third- and fourth-degree lacerations, chorioamnionitis, postpartum hemorrhage requiring transfusion, postpartum hysterectomy, wound infection or separation, venous thromboembolism, and maternal admission to the intensive care unit) and composite neonatal morbidity (which included umbilical cord pH <7.00, 5 minute Apgar score <7, respiratory morbidity, hyperbilirubinemia, meconium aspiration, intraventricular hemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis, sepsis, pneumonia, seizures, hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, shoulder dystocia, trauma, brain or body cooling, and neonatal intensive care unit admission). Secondary outcomes were measures of glycemic control and the individual components of the primary composite outcomes. We also performed a secondary analysis in which the patients who used the two different remote patient monitoring options (device integration vs manual entry) were compared. Chi-square, Fisher's exact, 2-sample t, and Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare the groups. A result was considered statistically significant at P<.05. RESULTS: Maternal baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the remote patient monitoring and paper groups aside from a slightly higher baseline rate of chronic hypertension in the remote patient monitoring group (6.1% vs 1.2%; P=.011). The primary outcomes of composite maternal and composite neonatal morbidity were not significantly different between the groups. However, remote patient monitoring patients submitted more glucose values (177 vs 146; P=.008), were more likely to achieve glycemic control in target range (79.2% vs 52.0%; P<.0001), and achieved the target range sooner (median, 3.3 vs 4.1 weeks; P=.025) than patients managed with paper logs. This was achieved without increasing in-person visits. Remote patient monitoring patients had lower rates of preeclampsia (5.8% vs 15.0%; P=.0006) and their infants had lower rates of neonatal hypoglycemia in the first 24 hours of life (29.8% vs 51.7%; P<.0001). CONCLUSION: Remote patient monitoring for the management of diabetes mellitus in pregnancy is superior to a traditional paper-based approach in achieving glycemic control and is associated with improved maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Identification of factors associated with delayed treatment of obstetric hypertensive emergencies.

BACKGROUND: Obstetric hypertensive emergency is defined as having systolic blood pressure ≥160 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure ≥110 mm Hg, confirmed 15 minutes apart. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends that acute-onset, severe hypertension be treated with first line-therapy (intravenous labetalol, intravenous hydralazine or oral nifedipine) within 60 minutes to reduce risk of maternal morbidity and death. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to identify barriers that lead to delayed treatment of obstetric hypertensive emergency. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study was performed that compared women who were treated appropriately within 60 minutes vs those with delay in first-line therapy. We identified 604 patients with discharge diagnoses of chronic hypertension, gestational hypertension, or preeclampsia using International Classification of Diseases-10 codes and obstetric antihypertensive usage in a pharmacy database at 1 academic institution from January 2017 through June 2018. Of these, 267 women (44.2%) experienced obstetric hypertensive emergency in the intrapartum period or within 2 days of delivery; the results from 213 women were used for analysis. We evaluated maternal characteristics, presenting symptoms and circumstances, timing of hypertensive emergency, gestational age at presentation, and administered medications. Chi square, Fisher's exact, Wilcoxon rank-sum, and sample t-tests were used to compare the 2 groups. Univariable logistic regression was applied to determine predictors of delayed treatment. Multivariable regression model was also performed; C-statistic and Hosmer and Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test were used to assess the model fit. A result was considered statistically significant at P<.05. RESULTS: Of the 213 women, 110 (51.6%) had delayed treatment vs 103 (48.4%) who were treated within 60 minutes. Patients who had delayed treatment were 3.2 times more likely to have an initial blood pressure in the nonsevere range vs those who had timely treatment (odds ratio, 3.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.85-5.68). Timeliness of treatment was associated with presence or absence of preeclampsia symptoms; patients without preeclampsia symptoms were 2.7 times more likely to have delayed treatment (odds ratio, 2.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.50-4.80). Patients with hypertensive emergencies that occurred overnight between 10 pm and 6 am were 2.7 times more likely to have delayed treatment vs those emergencies that occurred between 6 am and 10 pm (odds ratio, 2.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-5.83). Delayed treatment also had an association with race, with white patients being 1.8 times more likely to have delayed treatment (odds ratio, 1.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-3.08). Patients who were treated at <60 minutes had a lower gestational age at presentation vs those with delayed treatment (34.6±5 vs 36.6±4 weeks, respectively; P<.001). For every 1-week increase in gestational age at presentation, there was a 9% increase in the likelihood of delayed treatment (odds ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.19). Another factor that was associated with delay of treatment was having a complaint of labor symptoms, which made patients 2.2 times as likely to experience treatment delay (odds ratio, 2.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-4.41). CONCLUSION: Initial blood pressure in the nonsevere range, absence of preeclampsia symptoms, presentation overnight, white race, having complaint of labor symptoms, and increasing gestational age at presentation are barriers that lead to a delay in the treatment of obstetric hypertensive emergency. Quality improvement initiatives that target these barriers should be instituted to improve timely treatment.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Telehealth Self-Management to Standard Outpatient Management in Underserved Black and Hispanic Patients Living with Heart Failure.

Background:Although the American Heart Association promotes telehealth models to improve care access, there is limited literature on its use in underserved populations. This study is the first to compare utilization and quality of life (QoL) for underserved black and Hispanic heart failure (HF) patients assigned to telehealth self-monitoring (TSM) or comprehensive outpatient management (COM) over 90 days.Methods:This randomized controlled trial enrolled 104 patients. Outcomes included emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, QoL, depression, and anxiety. Binary outcomes for utilization were analyzed using chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Poisson or negative binomial regression, repeated-measures analysis of variance, or generalized estimating equations were also used as appropriate.Results:Of 104 patients, 31% were Hispanic, 69% black, 41% women, and 72% reported incomes of <$10,000/year. Groups did not differ regarding binary ED visits (relative risk [RR] = 1.37, confidence interval [CI] = 0.83-2.27), hospitalization (RR = 0.92, CI = 0.57-1.48), or length of stay in days (TSM = 0.54 vs. COM = 0.91). Number of all-cause hospitalizations was significantly lower for COM (TSM = 0.78 vs. COM = 0.55; p = 0.03). COM patients reported greater anxiety reduction from baseline to 90 days (TSM = 50-28%; COM = 57-13%; p = 0.05).Conclusions:These findings suggest that TSM is not effective in reducing utilization or improving QoL for underserved patients with HF. Future studies are needed to determine whether TSM can be effective for populations facing health care access issues.

Survival Benefit and Cost Savings From Compliance With a Simplified 3-Hour Sepsis Bundle in a Series of Prospective, Multisite, Observational Cohorts.

OBJECTIVES: To determine mortality and costs associated with adherence to an aggressive, 3-hour sepsis bundle versus noncompliance with greater than or equal to one bundle element for severe sepsis and septic shock patients. DESIGN: Prospective, multisite, observational study following three sequential, independent cohorts, from a single U.S. health system, through their hospitalization. SETTING: Cohort 1: five tertiary and six community hospitals. Cohort 2: single tertiary, academic medical center. Cohort 3: five tertiary and four community hospitals. PATIENTS: Consecutive sample of all severe sepsis and septic shock patients (defined: infection, ≥ 2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome, and hypoperfusive organ dysfunction) identified by a quality initiative. The exposure was full 3-hour bundle compliance. Bundle elements are as follows: 1) blood cultures before antibiotics; 2) parenteral antibiotics administered less than or equal to 180 minutes from greater than or equal to two systemic inflammatory response syndrome "and" lactate ordered, or less than or equal to 60 minutes from "time-zero," whichever occurs earlier; 3) lactate result available less than or equal to 90 minutes postorder; and 4) 30 mL/kg IV crystalloid bolus initiated less than or equal to 30 minutes from "time-zero." Main outcomes were in-hospital mortality (all cohorts) and total direct costs (cohorts 2 and 3). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Cohort 1: 5,819 total patients; 1,050 (18.0%) bundle compliant. Mortality: 604 (22.6%) versus 834 (26.5%); CI, 0.9-7.1%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.72; CI, 0.61-0.86; p value is less than 0.001. Cohort 2: 1,697 total patients; 739 (43.5%) bundle compliant. Mortality: 99 (13.4%) versus 171 (17.8%), CI, 1.0-7.9%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.60; CI, 0.44-0.80; p value is equal to 0.001. Mean costs: $14,845 versus $20,056; CI, -$4,798 to -5,624; adjusted ß, -$2,851; CI, -$4,880 to -822; p value is equal to 0.006. Cohort 3: 7,239 total patients; 2,115 (29.2%) bundle compliant. Mortality: 383 (18.1%) versus 1,078 (21.0%); CI, 0.9-4.9%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.84; CI, 0.73-0.96; p value is equal to 0.013. Mean costs: $17,885 versus $22,108; CI, -$2,783 to -5,663; adjusted ß, -$1,423; CI, -$2,574 to -272; p value is equal to 0.015. CONCLUSIONS: In three independent cohorts, 3-hour bundle compliance was associated with improved survival and cost savings.

Morphometric features of the craniocervical junction region in dogs with suspected Chiari-like malformation determined by combined use of magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography.

OBJECTIVE: To objectively describe morphometric features of the craniocervical junction region of Cavalier King Charles Spaniels (CKCSs) and non-CKCS dogs with suspected Chiari-like malformation (CLM) and identify associations between these features and the presence of other malformations in this region. ANIMALS: 216 CKCSs and 58 non-CKCS dogs. PROCEDURES: Magnetic resonance and computed tomographic images of the head and craniocervical junction region of patients evaluated because of suspected CLM were assessed for cerebellar compression (CC), ventral spinal cord compression at the C1-C2 articulation (medullary kinking), and dorsal spinal cord compression at the C1-C2 articulation (dorsal compression). A compression index was calculated for each of these 3 locations in each dog. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to determine whether breed (CKCS vs non-CKCS) and compression index values were associated with the presence of other craniocervical junction abnormalities. RESULTS: All 274 dogs had CC; medullary kinking was identified in 187 (68.2%) and dorsal compression was identified in 104 (38.0%). Atlantooccipital overlapping (AOO) was identified in 76 (27.7%) dogs. Breed of dog (CKCS vs non-CKCS) and value of CC index were the only significant predictors of AOO. The CKCSs had an almost 5-fold decrease in risk of AOO, compared with the non-CKCS dogs, and the risk of AOO nearly doubled for every 10% increase in CC index. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The anatomic abnormality responsible for CC was AOO in a substantial percentage of dogs suspected to have CLM. The CC index value may be used to help differentiate subtypes of craniocervical junction abnormalities in dogs.