Ada 2023
Ada 2023
Ada 2023
SUMMARY OF REVISIONS
GENERAL CHANGES SECTION CHANGES Recommendation 2.1b was added to the
The field of diabetes care is rapidly chang- Section 1. Improving Care and “A1C” subsection to address the utility of
ing as new research, technology, and Promoting Health in Populations point-of-care A1C testing for diabetes
treatments that can improve the health (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-S001) screening and diagnosis.
and well-being of people with diabetes Recommendation 1.7 was added to
address the use of community health Section 3. Prevention or Delay of Type 2
continue to emerge. With annual updates workers to support the management of Diabetes and Associated Comorbidities
since 1989, the American Diabetes Associ- diabetes and cardiovascular risk factors, (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-S003)
ation (ADA) has long been a leader in pro- especially in underserved communities Recommendation 3.9 was added to ad-
ducing guidelines that capture the most and health care systems. dress statin use and the risk of type 2 dia-
current state of the field. Additional language and definitions betes, including the recommendation to
The 2023 Standards of Care includes regarding digital health, telehealth, and monitor glucose status regularly and en-
revisions to incorporate person-first and telemedicine were added, along with
force diabetes prevention approaches
inclusive language. Efforts were made the benefits of these modalities of care
in individuals at high risk of developing
delivery, including social determinants of
to consistently apply terminology that type 2 diabetes who were prescribed
health in the telehealth subsection.
empowers people with diabetes and statin therapy.
The subsection “Access to Care and
recognizes the individual at the center Recommendation 3.10 was added to
Quality Improvement” was revised to add
of diabetes care. language regarding value-based payments address the use of pioglitazone for reduc-
Although levels of evidence for several to listed quality improvement efforts. ing the risk of stroke or myocardial infarc-
recommendations have been updated, The “Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural tion in people with history of stroke and
these changes are not outlined below Workers” subsection was updated to include evidence of insulin resistance and
where the clinical recommendation has more recent data for this population. prediabetes.
remained the same. That is, changes in More defining terms were added for Recommendation 3.12 was added to
evidence level from, for example, E to C non-English speakers and diabetes educa- communicate that pharmacotherapy (e.g.,
are not noted below. The 2023 Standards tion in the “Language Barriers” subsection. weight management, minimizing the pro-
of Care contains, in addition to many minor gression of hyperglycemia, cardiovascular
changes that clarify recommendations or Section 2. Classification and risk reduction) may be considered to sup-
reflect new evidence, more substantive Diagnosis of Diabetes port person-centered care goals for people
revisions detailed below. (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-S002) at high risk of developing diabetes.
Recommendation 3.13 was added to Section 5. Facilitating Positive Health ning, treatment, and referrals when indi-
state that more intensive preventive ap- Behaviors and Well-being to Improve cated, and to include caregivers and
proaches should be considered for individ- Health Outcomes family members of people with dia-
uals who are at particularly high risk of (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-S005) betes. Details were added about re-
progression to diabetes. The title has been changed from “Facili-
sources for developing psychosocial
tating Behavior Change and Well-being
screening protocols and about inter-
Section 4. Comprehensive Medical to Improve Health Outcomes” to be in-
vention. Across the specific psychoso-
Evaluation and Assessment of clusive of strength-based language.
cial domains (e.g., diabetes distress,
Comorbidities Recommendation 5.8 was added to the
“Diabetes Self-Management Education anxiety), details were added about
(https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-S004)
and Support” subsection to address data supporting intervention and care
In Recommendation 4.3, language was
social determinants of health in guid- approaches to support psychosocial and
modified to include evaluation for overall
ing design and delivery of diabetes behavioral outcomes in people with dia-
health status and setting of initial goals.
use with automated insulin delivery and/or chronic kidney disease, the treat- atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk
systems. ment plan should include agents that re- factors, to reduce the LDL cholesterol by
Literature and information was added duce cardiorenal risk. $50% of baseline and to target an LDL
on benefits on glycemic outcomes of Recommendation 9.4c was added to cholesterol goal of <70 mg/dL.
early initiation of real-time CGM in chil- address the consideration of pharmaco- Recommendation 10.21 was added to
dren and adults and the need to con- logic approaches that provide the effi- consider adding treatment with ezetimibe
tinue CGM use to maximize benefits. cacy to achieve treatment goals. or a PCSK9 inhibitor to maximum toler-
The paragraph on connected pens Recommendation 9.4d was added to ated statin therapy in these individuals.
was updated to include smart pen caps. address weight management as an im- Recommendations 10.22 and 10.23
References were updated for auto- pactful component of glucose-lowering were added to recommend continuing
mated insulin delivery systems to include management in type 2 diabetes. statin therapy in adults with diabetes
all the approved systems in the U.S. in Information was added to address aged >75 years currently receiving statin
2022. considerations for a GLP-1 receptor ago- therapy and to recommend that it
Section 11. Chronic Kidney Disease Recommendation 12.20 was revised to Injections and Continuous Glucose Moni-
and Risk Management reflect that gabapentinoids, serotonin- toring in Diabetes) trial.
(https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-S011) norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, tricy- A new Recommendation 13.7 was
The recommendation order was rear- clic antidepressants, and sodium channel added: for older adults with type 1 diabe-
ranged to reflect the appropriate order blockers are recommended as initial phar- tes, consider the use of automated insulin
for clinical interventions aimed at pre- macologic treatments for neuropathic delivery systems (evidence grade B) and
venting and slowing progression of pain in diabetes and that health care pro- other advanced insulin delivery devices
chronic kidney disease. fessionals should refer to a neurologist or such as connected pens (evidence grade
In Recommendation 11.5a, the levels pain specialist when pain control is not E) should be considered to reduce risk of
at which a sodium–glucose cotransporter achieved within the scope of practice of hypoglycemia, based on individual ability.
2 inhibitor could be initiated were the treating physician. The addition of this recommendation
changed. The new levels for initiation are New information was added in the was based on the results of two small
an estimated glomerular filtration rate “Neuropathy” subsection, under “Treat-
for more consistency in the Standards of different methodologies and different use of computerized prescriber order en-
Care. outcomes. Both RCTs support stricter try (CPOE) to facilitate glycemic manage-
In Recommendation 14.110, “patients” blood pressure targets in pregnancy to ment as well as insulin dosing algorithms
was changed to “adolescents and young improve outcomes. This modification is using machine learning in the future to
adults” for clarity. based on new data from the Chronic inform these algorithms.
In Recommendation 14.111,“pediatric di- Hypertension and Pregnancy (CHAP) trial, In Recommendation 16.5, the need
abetes provider” was changed to “pediatric which included individuals with preexist- for individualization of targets was ex-
diabetes care teams” to reflect the team- ing diabetes. panded to include a target range of
based nature of diabetes care. The new Recommendation 15.27 sup- 100–180 mg/dL (5.6–10.0 mmol/L) for
In Recommendation 14.113, “patient” ports breastfeeding to reduce the risk of noncritically ill patients with “new” hy-
was changed to “young adult” for clarity. maternal type 2 diabetes. The benefit of perglycemia as well as patients with
breastfeeding should be considered when known diabetes prior to admission.
choosing whether to breastfeed or for-
Diabetes is a complex, chronic condition online should the PPC determine that new outcomes of people with diabetes. They
requiring continuous medical care with evidence or regulatory changes (e.g., drug also cover the prevention, screening, di-
multifactorial risk-reduction strategies be- or technology approvals, label changes) agnosis, and management of diabetes-
yond glucose management. Ongoing dia- merit immediate inclusion. More informa- associated complications and comorbid-
betes self-management education and tion on the “Living Standards” can be ities. The recommendations encompass
support are critical to empowering peo- found on the ADA professional website care throughout the lifespan, for youth
ple, preventing acute complications, and DiabetesPro at professional.diabetes.org/ (children aged birth to 11 years and ado-
reducing the risk of long-term complica- content-page/living-standards. The Stand- lescents aged 12–17 years), adults (aged
tions. Significant evidence exists that ards of Care supersedes all previously 18–64 years), and older adults (aged
supports a range of interventions to im- published ADA position statements—and $65 years). The recommendations cover
prove diabetes outcomes. the recommendations therein—on clini- the management of type 1 diabetes, type 2
The American Diabetes Association (ADA) cal topics within the purview of the diabetes, gestational diabetes mellitus,
“Standards of Care in Diabetes,” referred Standards of Care; while still containing and other types of diabetes.
to here as the Standards of Care, is in- valuable analysis, ADA position state- The Standards of Care does not pro-
tended to provide clinicians, researchers, vide comprehensive treatment plans for
ments should not be considered the cur-
policy makers, and other interested indi- complications associated with diabetes,
rent position of the ADA. The Standards
viduals with the components of diabetes such as diabetic retinopathy or diabetic
of Care receives annual review and ap-
care, general treatment goals, and tools foot ulcers, but offers guidance on how
proval by the ADA Board of Directors and
to evaluate the quality of care. and when to screen for diabetes compli-
is reviewed by ADA staff and clinical lead-
The ADA Professional Practice Com- cations, management of complications
ership. The Standards of Care also under-
mittee (PPC) updates the Standards of in the primary care and diabetes care
goes external peer review annually. settings, and referral to specialists as
Care annually and strives to include dis-
cussion of emerging clinical considerations appropriate. Similarly, regarding the psy-
in the text, and as evidence evolves, clini- SCOPE OF THE GUIDELINES chosocial factors often associated with
cal guidance is added to the recommen- The recommendations in the Standards diabetes and that can affect diabetes
dations in the Standards of Care. The of Care include screening, diagnostic, care, the Standards of Care provides
Standards of Care is a “living” document and therapeutic actions that are known guidance on how and when to screen,
where important updates are published or believed to favorably affect health management in the primary care and
The “Standards of Care in Diabetes,” formerly called “Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes,” was originally approved in 1988. Most recent review/
revision: December 2022.
Disclosure information for each author is available at https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-SDIS.
Suggested citation: ElSayed NA, Aleppo G, Aroda VR, et al., American Diabetes Association. Introduction and methodology: Standards of Care in
Diabetes—2023. Diabetes Care 2023;46(Suppl. 1):S1–S4
© 2022 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not
for profit, and the work is not altered. More information is available at https://www.diabetesjournals.org/journals/pages/license.
S2 Introduction and Methodology Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
diabetes care settings, and referral but diabetes care and education specialists, guideline topic. For transparency, ADA re-
does not provide comprehensive manage- registered dietitian nutritionists, behavioral quires full disclosure of all relationships.
ment plans for conditions that require health scientists, and others who have ex- Full disclosure statements from all com-
specialized care, such as mental illness. pertise in a range of areas including but mittee members are solicited and re-
not limited to adult/pediatric endocri- viewed during the appointment
TARGET AUDIENCE nology, epidemiology, public health, process. Disclosures are then updated
The target audience for the Standards of behavioral health, cardiovascular risk throughout the guideline development
Care includes primary care physicians, en- management, microvascular complica- process (specifically before the start of
docrinologists, nurse practitioners, physi- tions, nephrology, neurology, ophthal- every meeting), and disclosure state-
cian associates/assistants, pharmacists, mology, podiatry, clinical pharmacology, ments are submitted by every Stand-
dietitians, and diabetes care and education preconception and pregnancy care, weight ards of Care author upon submission of
specialists. The Standards of Care also pro- management and diabetes prevention, the revised Standards of Care section.
and use of technology in diabetes man- Members are required to disclose for a
ADA adheres to the Council for Medical gaps. A consensus report is not an ADA Members of the PPC
Specialty Societies “Revised CMSS Prin- position but represents expert opinion Nuha Ali ElSayed, MD, MMSc (Chair)
Grazia Aleppo, MD
ciples for Clinical Practice Guideline only and is produced under the aus- Vanita R. Aroda, MD
Development” (4). pices of the ADA by invited experts. A Raveendhara R. Bannuru, MD, PhD, FAGE
consensus report may be developed af- (Chief Methodologist)
ADA STANDARDS, STATEMENTS, ter an ADA Clinical Conference or Re- Florence M. Brown, MD
Dennis Bruemmer, MD, PhD
REPORTS, AND REVIEWS search Symposium. Billy S. Collins, DHSc, PA-C
The ADA has been actively involved in Marisa E. Hilliard, PhD
Scientific Review
developing and disseminating diabetes Diana Isaacs, PharmD, BCPS, BCACP, CDCES,
A scientific review is a balanced review BC-ADM, FADCES, FCCP
care clinical practice recommendations
and analysis of the literature on a scien- Eric L. Johnson, MD
and related documents for more than Scott Kahan, MD, MPH
tific or medical topic related to diabetes.
30 years. The ADA Standards of Care is Kamlesh Khunti, MD, PhD, FRCP, FRCGP, FMedSci
A scientific review is not an ADA position
Recommendations
1.1 Ensure treatment decisions are timely, rely on evidence-based guidelines,
include social community support, and are made collaboratively with pa-
tients based on individual preferences, prognoses, comorbidities, and in-
formed financial considerations. B
1.2 Align approaches to diabetes management with the Chronic Care Model.
This model emphasizes person-centered team care, integrated long-term
treatment approaches to diabetes and comorbidities, and ongoing collab-
orative communication and goal setting between all team members. A
1.3 Care systems should facilitate in-person and virtual team–based care, in-
cluding those knowledgeable and experienced in diabetes management
as part of the team, and utilization of patient registries, decision support
tools, and community involvement to meet patient needs. B
1.4 Assess diabetes health care maintenance (Table 4.1) using reliable and Disclosure information for each author is
relevant data metrics to improve processes of care and health outcomes, available at https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-SDIS.
with attention to care costs. B Suggested citation: ElSayed NA, Aleppo G, Aroda
VR, et al., American Diabetes Association. 1.
Improving care and promoting health in po-
Population health is defined as “the health outcomes of a group of individuals, includ- pulations: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023.
Diabetes Care 2023;46(Suppl. 1):S10–S18
ing the distribution of health outcomes within the group”; these outcomes can be
measured in terms of health outcomes (mortality, morbidity, health, and functional © 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.
status), disease burden (incidence and prevalence), and behavioral and metabolic fac- Readers may use this article as long as the
work is properly cited, the use is educational
tors (physical activity, nutrition, A1C, etc.) (1). Clinical practice recommendations for and not for profit, and the work is not altered.
health care professionals are tools that can ultimately improve health across popula- More information is available at https://www.
tions; however, for optimal outcomes, diabetes care must also be individualized for diabetesjournals.org/journals/pages/license.
diabetesjournals.org/care Improving Care and Promoting Health in Populations S11
each patient. Thus, efforts to improve of the population, such as young adults 6. Health systems (to create a quality-
population health will require a combi- and individuals with complex comorbid- oriented culture)
nation of policy-level, system-level, and ities, financial or other social hardships,
patient-level approaches. With such an and/or limited English proficiency, face A 5-year effectiveness study of the
integrated approach in mind, the Ameri- particular challenges to goal-based care CCM in 53,436 people with type 2 diabe-
can Diabetes Association (ADA) highlights (5–7). Even after adjusting for these tes in the primary care setting suggested
the importance of patient-centered care, patient factors, the persistent variability that the use of this model of care delivery
defined as care that considers individual in the quality of diabetes care across reduced the cumulative incidence of
patient comorbidities and prognoses; is health care professionals and prac- diabetes-related complications and all-
respectful of and responsive to patient tice settings indicates that substan- cause mortality (10). Patients who were
preferences, needs, and values; and en- tial system-level improvements are enrolled in the CCM experienced a re-
sures that patient values guide all clinical still needed. duction in cardiovascular disease risk by
Diabetes poses a significant financial
and identifying, developing, and engaging a growing variety of applications and content and skills, behavioral strategies
community resources and public policies services using two-way video, smartphones, (goal setting, problem-solving), and en-
that support healthy lifestyles (29). The wireless tools, and other forms of tele- gagement with psychosocial concerns.
National Diabetes Education Program communications technology (40). Often Increasingly, such support is being ada-
maintains an online resource (cdc.gov/ used interchangeably with telemedicine, pted for online platforms that have the
diabetes/professional-info/training.html) telehealth describes a broader range of potential to promote patient access to
to help health care professionals design digital health services in health care deliv- this important resource. These curricu-
and implement more effective health ery (41). This includes synchronous, asyn- lums need to be tailored to the needs of
care delivery systems for those with dia- chronous, and remote patient monitoring. the intended populations, including ad-
betes. Given the pluralistic needs of peo- Telehealth should be used comple- dressing the “digital divide,” i.e., access
ple with diabetes and that the constant mentary to in-person visits to optimize to the technology required for imple-
challenges they experience vary over the glycemic management in people with mentation (53–56).
Access to Care and Quality Improvement personalized care goals (7,73). (Also see framework for educating health care
The Affordable Care Act and Medicaid COST CONSIDERATIONS FOR MEDICATION-TAKING professionals on the importance of
expansion have increased access to BEHAVIORS, above, regarding cost-related SDOH (84). Furthermore, there are re-
care for many individuals with diabetes, barriers to medication use.) sources available for the inclusion of stan-
emphasizing the protection of people dardized sociodemographic variables in
with preexisting conditions, health pro- TAILORING TREATMENT FOR electronic health records to facilitate the
motion, and disease prevention (60). In SOCIAL CONTEXT measurement of health inequities and
fact, health insurance coverage increased the impact of interventions designed to
from 84.7% in 2009 to 90.1% in 2016 for Recommendations
reduce those inequities (65,84,85).
adults with diabetes aged 18–64 years. 1.5 Assess food insecurity, housing
SDOH are not consistently recognized
Coverage for those aged $65 years re- insecurity/homelessness, financial
and often go undiscussed in the clinical
mained nearly universal (61). Patients barriers, and social capital/social encounter (77). Among people with
who have either private or public in- community support to inform
headed by single mothers. The food obtain nutritious food more regularly Migrant farmworkers encounter nu-
insecurity rate in individuals with diabe- (98). merous and overlapping barriers to re-
tes may be up to 20% (90). Additionally, ceiving care. Migration, which may occur
the risk for type 2 diabetes is increased Homelessness and Housing Insecurity as frequently as every few weeks for
twofold in those with food insecurity Homelessness/housing insecurity often farmworkers, disrupts care. In addition,
(81) and has been associated with lower accompanies many additional barriers cultural and linguistic barriers, lack of
engagement in self-care behaviors and to diabetes self-management, including transportation and money, lack of avail-
medication use, depression, diabetes food insecurity, literacy and numeracy able work hours, unfamiliarity with new
distress, and worse glycemic manage- deficiencies, lack of insurance, cognitive communities, lack of access to resour-
ment when compared with individuals dysfunction, and mental health issues ces, and other barriers prevent migrant
who are food secure (91–93). Older (99). The prevalence of diabetes in the farmworkers from accessing health care.
adults with food insecurity are more homeless population is estimated to be Without regular care, those with diabetes
diabetes care and education specialists be lifelong (112). These factors are rarely 3. Haire-Joshu D, Hill-Briggs F. The next generation
should ensure they provide easy- addressed in routine treatment or disease of diabetes translation: a path to health equity.
Annu Rev Public Health 2019;40:391–410
to-understand information and reduce management but may be underlying 4. Kazemian P, Shebl FM, McCann N, Walensky
unnecessary complexity when develop- reasons for lower engagement in self- RP, Wexler DJ. Evaluation of the cascade of
ing care plans with patients. Interven- care behaviors and medication use. diabetes care in the United States, 2005–2016.
tions addressing low health literacy in Identification or development of com- JAMA Intern Med 2019;179:1376–1385
munity resources to support healthy 5. Kerr EA, Heisler M, Krein SL, et al. Beyond
populations with diabetes seem effec-
comorbidity counts: how do comorbidity type and
tive in improving diabetes outcomes, in- lifestyles is a core element of the CCM severity influence diabetes patients’ treatment
cluding ones focusing primarily on patient (9), with a particular need to incorporate priorities and self-management? J Gen Intern Med
education, self-care training, or disease relevant social support networks. There is 2007;22:1635–1640
management. Combining easily adapted currently a paucity of evidence regarding 6. Fernandez A, Schillinger D, Warton EM, et al.
Language barriers, physician-patient language
materials with formal diabetes education enhancing these resources for those
concordance, and glycemic control among insured
19. Jaffe MG, Lee GA, Young JD, Sidney S, Go AS. compared with current treatment guidelines. 51. Garcia JF, Fogel J, Reid M, Bisno DI, Raymond
Improved blood pressure control associated with Diabetes Educ 2011;37:78–84 JK. Telehealth for young adults with diabetes:
a large-scale hypertension program. JAMA 2013; 35. Tamhane S, Rodriguez-Gutierrez R, Hargraves addressing social determinants of health. Diabetes
310:699–705 I, Montori VM. Shared decision-making in diabetes Spectr 2021;34:357–362
20. Peikes D, Chen A, Schore J, Brown R. Effects care. Curr Diab Rep 2015;15:112 52. Haynes SC, Kompala T, Neinstein A, Rosenthal J,
of care coordination on hospitalization, quality 36. Garg AX, Adhikari NKJ, McDonald H, et al. Crossen S. Disparities in telemedicine use for
of care, and health care expenditures among Effects of computerized clinical decision support subspecialty diabetes care during COVID-19
Medicare beneficiaries: 15 randomized trials. systems on practitioner performance and patient shelter-in-place orders. J Diabetes Sci Technol
JAMA 2009;301:603–618 outcomes: a systematic review. JAMA 2005;293: 2021;15:986–992
21. Raebel MA, Schmittdiel J, Karter AJ, Konieczny 1223–1238 53. Dack C, Ross J, Stevenson F, et al. A digital
JL, Steiner JF. Standardizing terminology and 37. Smith SA, Shah ND, Bryant SC, et al.; Evidens self-management intervention for adults with
definitions of medication adherence and persistence Research Group. Chronic care model and shared type 2 diabetes: combining theory, data and
in research employing electronic databases. Med care in diabetes: randomized trial of an electronic participatory design to develop HeLP-Diabetes.
Care 2013;51(Suppl. 3):S11–S21 decision support system. Mayo Clin Proc 2008; Internet Interv 2019;17:100241
22. Feifer C, Nemeth L, Nietert PJ, et al. Different 83:747–757 54. Lee MK, Lee DY, Ahn HY, Park CY. A novel
from https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/ Objectives for 2020. Phase I report: recom- 99. White BM, Logan A, Magwood GS. Access to
professionals/clinical-tools-patient-management/ mendations for the framework and format of diabetes care for populations experiencing home-
diabetes Healthy People 2020. Accessed 11 October lessness: an integrated review. Curr Diab Rep
68. O’Connor PJ, Sperl-Hillen JM, Fazio CJ, 2022. Available from https://www.healthypeople. 2016;16:112
Averbeck BM, Rank BH, Margolis KL. Outpatient gov/2010/hp2020/advisory/PhaseI/default.htm 100. Bernstein RS, Meurer LN, Plumb EJ, Jackson
diabetes clinical decision support: current status 84. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, JL. Diabetes and hypertension prevalence in
and future directions. Diabet Med 2016;33: and Medicine. A Framework for Educating Health homeless adults in the United States: a
734–741 Professionals to Address the Social Determinants systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J
69. Institute of Medicine, Committee on Health of Health. Washington, DC, National Academies Public Health 2015;105:e46–e60
Literacy. Health Literacy: A Prescription to End Press, 2016 101. Montgomery AE, Fargo JD, Kane V, Culhane
Confusion. Nielsen-Bohlman L, Panzer AM, Kindig 85. Chin MH, Clarke AR, Nocon RS, et al. A DP. Development and validation of an instrument
DA, Eds. Washington, DC, National Academies roadmap and best practices for organizations to to assess imminent risk of homelessness among
Press, 2004. PMID: 25009856 reduce racial and ethnic disparities in health care. veterans. Public Health Rep 2014;129:428–436
70. Schaffler J, Leung K, Tremblay S, et al. The J Gen Intern Med 2012;27:992–1000 102. Stahre M, VanEenwyk J, Siegel P, Njai R.
effectiveness of self-management interventions 86. Hershey JA, Morone J, Lipman TH, Hawkes Housing Insecurity and the association with
prevention-chronic-care/improve/community/ prevention and disease management with special Qualities. CHW Central, 2016. Available from
index.html reference to diabetes: systematic reviews. Clin https://files.ctctcdn.com/a907c850501/1c1289f0-
114. Egbujie BA, Delobelle PA, Levitt N, Puoane T, Diabetes Endocrinol 2017;3:4 88cc-49c3-a238-66def942c147.pdf
Sanders D, van Wyk B. Role of community 118. Foster G, Taylor SJC, Eldridge SE, Ramsay J, 121. Guide to Community Preventive Services.
health workers in type 2 diabetes mellitus Griffiths CJ. Self-management education pro- Community health workers help patients manage
self-management: a scoping review. PLoS One grammes by lay leaders for people with chronic diabetes. Updated 2018. Accessed 11 October 2022.
2018;13:e0198424 conditions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007(4): Available from https://www.thecommunityguide.
115. Heisler M, Vijan S, Makki F, Piette JD. CD005108 org/content/community-health-workers-help-
Diabetes control with reciprocal peer support 119. Piatt GA, Rodgers EA, Xue L, Zgibor JC. patients-manage-diabetes
versus nurse care management: a randomized Integration and utilization of peer leaders for 122. The Network for Public Health Law. Legal
trial. Ann Intern Med 2010;153:507–515 diabetes self-management support: results from considerations for community health workers
116. Long JA, Jahnle EC, Richardson DM, Project SEED (Support, Education, and Evaluation and their employers. Accessed 11 October 2022.
Loewenstein G, Volpp KG. Peer mentoring in Diabetes). Diabetes Educ 2018;44:373–382 Available from https://www.networkforphl.org/
and financial incentives to improve glucose 120. Rosenthal EL, Rush CH, Allen CG. Under- wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Legal-Considerations-
control in African American veterans: a standing scope and competencies: a contemporary Community-Health-Workers.pdf
CLASSIFICATION
Diabetes can be classified into the following general categories:
approximately half present with diabetic combining clinical, pathophysiological, progressive autoimmune b-cell destruc-
ketoacidosis (DKA) (2–4). The onset of and genetic characteristics to more pre- tion (16), thus accelerating insulin initiation
type 1 diabetes may be more variable cisely define the subsets of diabetes that prior to deterioration of glucose manage-
in adults; they may not present with are currently clustered into the type 1 ment or development of DKA (6,17).
the classic symptoms seen in children diabetes versus type 2 diabetes nomen- The paths to b-cell demise and dys-
and may experience temporary remis- clature with the goal of optimizing per- function are less well defined in type 2
sion from the need for insulin (5–7). The sonalized treatment approaches. Many diabetes, but deficient b-cell insulin se-
features most useful in discrimination of of these studies show great promise cretion, frequently in the setting of insulin
type 1 diabetes include younger age at and may soon be incorporated into the resistance, appears to be the common de-
diagnosis (<35 years) with lower BMI diabetes classification system (13). nominator. Type 2 diabetes is associated
(<25 kg/m2), unintentional weight loss, Characterization of the underlying path- with insulin secretory defects related to
ketoacidosis, and glucose >360 mg/dL ophysiology is more precisely developed genetics, inflammation, and metabolic
FPG, fasting plasma glucose; IFG, impaired fasting glucose; IGT, impaired glucose tolerance; 2-h PG, 2-h plasma glucose.
diabetesjournals.org/care Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes S21
diagnose diabetes included only adult measured with continuous glucose on the basis of the confirmatory screen-
populations (33). However, recent ADA monitoring (46). A recent report in ing test. For example, if a patient meets
clinical guidance concluded that A1C, Afro-Caribbean people demonstrated a the diabetes criterion of the A1C (two
FPG, or 2-h PG could be used to test lower A1C than predicted by glucose lev- results $6.5% [48 mmol/mol]) but not
for prediabetes or type 2 diabetes in els (47). Despite these and other reported FPG (<126 mg/dL [7.0 mmol/L]), that
children and adolescents (see SCREENING differences, the association of A1C with person should nevertheless be consid-
AND TESTING FOR PREDIABETES AND TYPE 2 DIABETES risk for complications appears to be ered to have diabetes.
IN CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS below for addi- similar in African American and non- Each of the screening tests has prea-
tional information) (36). Hispanic White populations (42,48). nalytic and analytic variability, so it is
In the Taiwanese population, age and possible that a test yielding an abnor-
Race/Ethnicity/Hemoglobinopathies sex have been reported to be associ- mal result (i.e., above the diagnostic
Hemoglobin variants can interfere with ated with increased A1C in men (49); threshold), when repeated, will produce
the clinical implications of this finding
can be considered an option dependent on insulin for survival and are checkpoint inhibitors (73). To date, the
for first-degree family mem- at risk for DKA (5–7,67,68). At this majority of immune checkpoint inhibitor–
bers of a proband with type 1 later stage of the disease, there is lit- related cases of type 1 diabetes occur in
tle or no insulin secretion, as manifested people with high-risk HLA-DR4 (present in
diabetes. B
by low or undetectable levels of plasma C- 76% of patients), whereas other high-risk
2.6 Development of and persistence
peptide. Immune-mediated diabetes is HLA alleles are not more common than
of multiple islet autoantibodies
the most common form of diabetes in those in the general population (73). To
is a risk factor for clinical di-
childhood and adolescence, but it can date, risk cannot be predicted by family
abetes and may serve as an
occur at any age, even in the 8th and history or autoantibodies, so all health care
indication for intervention in
9th decades of life. professionals administering these medica-
the setting of a clinical trial or Autoimmune destruction of b-cells has tions should be mindful of this adverse ef-
screening for stage 2 type 1 multiple genetic factors and is also re- fect and educate patients appropriately.
diabetes. B
recruited from the general popula- 2.8 Testing for prediabetes and/ 2.14 Risk-based screening for predi-
tion. Remarkably, the findings in all or type 2 diabetes in asymp- abetes and/or type 2 diabetes
three groups were the same, suggesting tomatic people should be should be considered after
that the same sequence of events led to considered in adults of any age the onset of puberty or after
clinical disease in both “sporadic” and fa- with overweight or obesity 10 years of age, whichever
milial cases of type 1 diabetes. Indeed, (BMI $25 kg/m2 or $23 kg/m2 occurs earlier, in children and
the risk of type 1 diabetes increases as in Asian American individuals) adolescents with overweight
the number of relevant autoantibodies who have one or more risk (BMI $85th percentile) or
detected increases (63,78,79). In The En- factors (Table 2.3). B obesity (BMI $95th percentile)
vironmental Determinants of Diabetes in 2.9 For all people, screening should
the Young (TEDDY) study, type 1 diabetes and who have one or more
begin at age 35 years. B risk factors for diabetes. (See
developed in 21% of 363 subjects with 2.10 If tests are normal, repeat
at least one autoantibody at 3 years of Table 2.4 for evidence grad-
American
Diabetes
® Association®
5. Have you ever been diagnosed with high 6’ 0” 184–220 221–293 294+
blood pressure? ..................................................... 6’ 1” 189–226 227–301 302+
Yes (1 point) No (0 points) 6’ 2” 194–232 233–310 311+
6’ 3” 200–239 240–318 319+
6. Are you physically active? ....................................
6’ 4” 205–245 246–327 328+
Yes (0 points) No (1 point)
1 point 2 points 3 points
7. What is your weight category? ............................. If you weigh less than the amount in
See chart at right. the left column: 0 points
which blood glucose levels are higher than normal risk for type 2 diabetes. Small steps make
but not yet high enough to be diagnosed as diabetes. a big difference in helping you live a longer,
Talk to your doctor to see if additional testing is needed. healthier life.
If you are at high risk, your first step is to
Type 2 diabetes is more common in African Americans, visit your doctor to see if additional testing
Hispanics/Latinos, Native Americans, Asian Americans, is needed.
and Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders.
Visit diabetes.org or call 1-800-DIABETES
Higher body weight increases diabetes risk for everyone. (800-342-2383) for information, tips on
Asian Americans are at increased diabetes risk at lower getting started, and ideas for simple, small
body weight than the rest of the general public (about 15 steps you can take to help lower your risk.
pounds lower).
overweight or obesity. Excess weight it- percentage of body fat distributed pre- illness such as infection or myocardial infarc-
self causes some degree of insulin re- dominantly in the abdominal region. tion or with the use of certain drugs (e.g.,
sistance. Individuals who do not have DKA seldom occurs spontaneously in corticosteroids, atypical antipsychotics, and
obesity or overweight by traditional type 2 diabetes; when seen, it usually arises sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors)
weight criteria may have an increased in association with the stress of another (90,91). Type 2 diabetes frequently goes
diabetesjournals.org/care Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes S27
undiagnosed for many years because guide health care professionals on (109). Employing a probabilistic model,
hyperglycemia develops gradually and, whether performing a diagnostic test Peterson et al. (110) demonstrated cost
at earlier stages, is often not severe (Table 2.2) is appropriate. Prediabetes and health benefits of preconception
enough for the patient to notice the and type 2 diabetes meet criteria for screening.
classic diabetes symptoms caused by hy- conditions in which early detection via A large European randomized con-
perglycemia, such as dehydration or un- screening is appropriate. Both conditions trolled trial compared the impact of
intentional weight loss. Nevertheless, are common and impose significant clin- screening for diabetes and intensive
even undiagnosed people with diabetes ical and public health burdens. There is multifactorial intervention with that of
are at increased risk of developing macro- often a long presymptomatic phase be- screening and routine care (111). Gen-
vascular and microvascular complications. fore the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes. eral practice patients between the ages
People with type 2 diabetes may have Simple tests to detect preclinical disease of 40 and 69 years were screened for
insulin levels that appear normal or ele- are readily available (101). The duration diabetes and randomly assigned by prac-
(sensitivity of 80%) for nearly all Asian pancreatic b-cells. NRTIs also affect fat and 14.60% meeting criteria for pre-
American subgroups (with levels slightly distribution (both lipohypertrophy and diabetes and diabetes, respectively,
lower for Japanese American individ- lipoatrophy), which is associated with using random blood glucose. Further
uals). This makes a rounded cut point insulin resistance. For people with HIV research is needed to demonstrate
of 23 kg/m2 practical. An argument can and ARV-associated hyperglycemia, it may the feasibility, effectiveness, and cost-
be made to push the BMI cut point to be appropriate to consider discontinuing effectiveness of screening in this setting.
lower than 23 kg/m2 in favor of in- the problematic ARV agents if safe and
creased sensitivity; however, this would effective alternatives are available (124). Screening and Testing for Prediabetes
lead to an unacceptably low specificity Before making ARV substitutions, care- and Type 2 Diabetes in Children and
(13.1%). Data from the World Health fully consider the possible effect on Adolescents
Organization also suggest that a BMI of HIV virological control and the poten- In the last decade, the incidence and
$23 kg/m2 should be used to define in- tial adverse effects of new ARV agents. prevalence of type 2 diabetes in chil-
dren and adolescents has increased dra-
not previously diagnosed associated with preservation of lung diabetes mellitus is best made
with cystic fibrosis–related dia- function. The European Cystic Fibrosis once the individual is stable on
betes. B Society Patient Registry reported an in- an immunosuppressive regi-
2.17 A1C is not recommended as crease in CFRD with age (increased 10% men and in the absence of
per decade), genotype, decreased lung
a screening test for cystic an acute infection. B
function, and female sex (140,141). Con-
fibrosis–related diabetes. B 2.21 The oral glucose tolerance test
tinuous glucose monitoring or HOMA of
2.18 People with cystic fibrosis– is the preferred test to make a
b-cell function (142) may be more sensi-
related diabetes should be diagnosis of posttransplanta-
tive than OGTT to detect risk for progres-
treated with insulin to attain in- tion diabetes mellitus. B
sion to CFRD; however, evidence linking
dividualized glycemic goals. A 2.22 Immunosuppressive regimens
these results to long-term outcomes is
2.19 Beginning 5 years after the shown to provide the best out-
lacking, and these tests are not recom-
diagnosis of cystic fibrosis– comes for patient and graft
in the absence of acute infection people with liver and kidney transplants, 6 months of age. Neonatal diabetes can
(151–153,156). In a recent study of 152 but side effects include fluid retention, either be transient or permanent. Tran-
heart transplant recipients, 38% had heart failure, and osteopenia (167,168). sient diabetes is most often due to over-
PTDM at 1 year. Risk factors for PTDM Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors do not expression of genes on chromosome
included elevated BMI, discharge from interact with immunosuppressant drugs 6q24, is recurrent in about half of cases,
the hospital on insulin, and glucose val- and have demonstrated safety in small and may be treatable with medications
ues in the 24 h prior to hospital dis- clinical trials (169,170). Well-designed inter- other than insulin. Permanent neonatal
charge (157). In an Iranian cohort, 19% vention trials examining the efficacy and diabetes is most commonly due to auto-
had PTDM after heart and lung trans- safety of these and other antihyperglyce- somal dominant mutations in the genes
plant (158). The OGTT is considered mic agents in people with PTDM are encoding the Kir6.2 subunit (KCNJ11)
the gold-standard test for the diagnosis needed. and SUR1 subunit (ABCC8) of the b-cell
of PTDM (1 year posttransplant) (148, KATP channel. A recent report details a
Individuals with HNF1A- or HNF4A-MODY with diabetes not characteristic of type 1 be incorrectly diagnosed with type 1
usually respond well to low doses of sul- or type 2 diabetes, although admit- or type 2 diabetes, leading to subopti-
fonylureas, which are considered first-line tedly, “atypical diabetes” is becoming mal, even potentially harmful, treatment
therapy; in some instances, insulin will increasingly difficult to precisely define plans and delays in diagnosing other
be required over time. Mutations or de- in the absence of a definitive set of tests family members (188). The correct diag-
letions in HNF1B are associated with re- for either type of diabetes (173–175, nosis is especially critical for those with
nal cysts and uterine malformations (renal 178–184). In most cases, the presence GCK-MODY mutations, where multiple
cysts and diabetes [RCAD] syndrome). of autoantibodies for type 1 diabetes studies have shown that no complications
Other extremely rare forms of MODY precludes further testing for mono- ensue in the absence of glucose-lowering
have been reported to involve other genic diabetes, but the presence of auto- therapy (189). The risks of microvascular
antibodies in people with monogenic and macrovascular complications with
transcription factor genes, including PDX1
diabetes has been reported (185). Indi-
(IPF1) and NEUROD1. HNFIA- and HNF4A-MODY are similar
viduals in whom monogenic diabetes is
to those observed in people with type 1
suspected should be referred to a spe-
Diagnosis of Monogenic Diabetes and type 2 diabetes (190,191). Genetic
cialist for further evaluation if available,
A diagnosis of one of the three most counseling is recommended to ensure
and consultation can be obtained from
common forms of MODY, including HFN1A- that affected individuals understand the
several centers. Readily available com-
MODY, GCK-MODY, and HNF4A-MODY, patterns of inheritance and the impor-
mercial genetic testing following the
allows for more cost-effective therapy criteria listed below now enables a tance of a correct diagnosis and address-
(no therapy for GCK-MODY; sulfonylureas cost-effective (186), often cost-saving, ge- ing comprehensive cardiovascular risk.
as first-line therapy for HNF1A-MODY netic diagnosis that is increasingly sup- The diagnosis of monogenic diabetes
and HNF4A-MODY). Additionally, diag- ported by health insurance. A biomarker should be considered in children and
nosis can lead to identification of other screening pathway, such as the combina- adults diagnosed with diabetes in early
affected family members. Genetic screen- tion of urinary C-peptide/creatinine ratio adulthood with the following findings:
ing is increasingly available and cost- and antibody screening, may aid in deter-
effective (176,178). mining who should get genetic testing for • Diabetes diagnosed within the first
A diagnosis of MODY should be con- MODY (187). It is critical to correctly diag- 6 months of life (with occasional cases
sidered in individuals who have atypical nose one of the monogenic forms of di- presenting later, mostly INS and ABCC8
diabetes and multiple family members abetes because these individuals may mutations) (172,192)
S32 Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
• Diabetes without typical features of GESTATIONAL DIABETES MELLITUS found to have prediabetes
type 1 or type 2 diabetes (negative should receive intensive life-
Recommendations
diabetes-associated autoantibodies, no style interventions and/or met-
2.26a In individuals who are plan-
obesity, lacking other metabolic fea- formin to prevent diabetes. A
ning pregnancy, screen those
tures, especially with strong family
with risk factors B and con-
history of diabetes)
sider testing all individuals of
• Stable, mild fasting hyperglycemia Definition
childbearing potential for un-
(100–150 mg/dL [5.5–8.5 mmol/L]), For many years, GDM was defined as
diagnosed diabetes. E
stable A1C between 5.6% and 7.6% any degree of glucose intolerance that
2.26b Before 15 weeks of gestation,
(between 38 and 60 mmol/mol), es-
test individuals with risk factors was first recognized during pregnancy
pecially if no obesity (86), regardless of the degree of hyper-
B and consider testing all indi-
viduals E for undiagnosed dia- glycemia. This definition facilitated a
diabetes by the standard diagnostic crite- gestation or later. See Recommendation GDM diagnosis (Table 2.7) can be ac-
ria used outside of pregnancy should be 2.3 above. complished with either of two strategies:
classified as having diabetes complicat- GDM is often indicative of underlying
ing pregnancy (most often type 2 diabe- b-cell dysfunction (225), which confers 1. The “one-step” 75-g OGTT derived
tes, rarely type 1 diabetes or monogenic marked increased risk for later develop- from the IADPSG criteria, or
diabetes) and managed accordingly. ment of diabetes, generally but not al- 2. The older “two-step” approach with
Early abnormal glucose metabolism, ways type 2 diabetes, in the mother after a 50-g (nonfasting) screen followed
defined as fasting glucose threshold of delivery (226,227). As effective prevention by a 100-g OGTT for those who
110 mg/dL (6.1 mmol/L) or an A1C of interventions are available (228,229), screen positive based on the work
5.9% (39 mmol/mol), may identify in- individuals diagnosed with GDM should of Carpenter-Coustan’s interpretation
dividuals who are at higher risk of ad- receive lifelong screening for prediabetes of the older O’Sullivan and Mahan
verse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes to allow interventions to reduce diabetes (232) criteria.
not two, became sufficient to make the one-step method using IADPSG criteria ver- Two-Step Strategy
diagnosis (233). Many regional studies sus the two-step method using a 1-h 50-g In 2013, the NIH convened a consensus
have investigated the impact of adopting glucose loading test (GLT) and, if posi- development conference to consider
the IADPSG criteria on prevalence and tive, a 3-h OGTT by Carpenter-Coustan diagnostic criteria for diagnosing GDM
have seen a roughly one- to threefold in- criteria identified twice as many individu- (246). The 15-member panel had repre-
crease (234). The anticipated increase als with GDM using the one-step method sentatives from obstetrics and gynecol-
in the incidence of GDM could have a compared with the two-step method. ogy, maternal-fetal medicine, pediatrics,
substantial impact on costs and medical Despite treating more individuals for diabetes research, biostatistics, and other
infrastructure needs and has the po- related fields. The panel recommended a
GDM using the one-step method, there
tential to “medicalize” pregnancies pre- was no difference in pregnancy and peri-
two-step approach to screening that used
viously categorized as normal. A recent a 1-h 50-g GLT followed by a 3-h 100-g
natal complications (239). However, con-
follow-up study of individuals participating OGTT for those who screened positive.
cerns have been raised about sample
The American College of Obstetricians
either of two sets of diagnostic thresh- References Society, and the American Diabetes Association.
olds for the 3-h 100-g OGTT–Carpenter- 1. American Diabetes Association. Diagnosis and Diabetes Care 2015;38:1964–1974
classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 16. Zhu Y, Qian L, Liu Q, et al. Glutamic acid
Coustan or National Diabetes Data decarboxylase autoantibody detection by electro-
2014;37(Suppl. 1):S81–S90
Group (251,252). Each is based on dif- 2. Rewers A, Dong F, Slover RH, Klingensmith GJ, chemiluminescence assay identifies latent
ferent mathematical conversions of the Rewers M. Incidence of diabetic ketoacidosis at autoimmune diabetes in adults with poor
original recommended thresholds by diagnosis of type 1 diabetes in Colorado youth, islet function. Diabetes Metab J 2020;44:260–266
1998-2012. JAMA 2015;313:1570–1572 17. Lynam A, McDonald T, Hill A, et al. Develop-
O’Sullivan and Mahan (232), which ment and validation of multivariable clinical
3. Alonso GT, Coakley A, Pyle L, Manseau K,
used whole blood and nonenzymatic Thomas S, Rewers A. Diabetic ketoacidosis at diagnostic models to identify type 1 diabetes
methods for glucose determination. A diagnosis of type 1 diabetes in Colorado children, requiring rapid insulin therapy in adults aged
secondary analysis of data from a ran- 2010–2017. Diabetes Care 2020;43:117–121 18–50 years. BMJ Open 2019;9:e031586
4. Jensen ET, Stafford JM, Saydah S, et al. 18. Chung WK, Erion K, Florez JC, et al. Precision
domized clinical trial of identification and
Increase in prevalence of diabetic ketoacidosis at medicine in diabetes: a consensus report from
treatment of mild GDM (253) demon- the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the
31. Nathan DM, Griffin A, Perez FM, Basque E, concentrations and hemoglobin A1c levels. Ann Childhood Diabetes: The Environmental Deter-
Do L, Steiner B. Accuracy of a point-of-care Intern Med 2017;167:95–102 minants of Diabetes in the Young (TEDDY).
hemoglobinA1c assay. J Diabetes Sci Technol 47. Khosla L, Bhat S, Fullington LA, Horlyck- Diabetes Care 2015;38:808–813
2019;13:1149–1153 Romanovsky MF. HbA1c performance in African 64. McKeigue PM, Spiliopoulou A, McGurnaghan
32. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. CLIA descent populations in the United States with S, Colombo M, Blackbourn L, McDonald TJ, et al.
Brochures. Accessed 26 August 2022. Available from normal glucose tolerance, prediabetes, or Persistent C-peptide secretion in type 1 diabetes
https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/ diabetes: a scoping review. Prev Chronic Dis and its relationship to the genetic architecture of
Legislation/CLIA/CLIA_Brochures 2021;18:E22 diabetes. BMC Med 2019;17:165
33. Cowie CC, Rust KF, Byrd-Holt DD, et al. 48. Selvin E. Are there clinical implications of 65. Bogun MM, Bundy BN, Goland RS, Greenbaum
Prevalence of diabetes and high risk for diabetes racial differences in HbA1c? A difference, to be a CJ. C-peptide levels in subjects followed
using A1C criteria in the U.S. population in difference, must make a difference. Diabetes Care longitudinally before and after type 1 diabetes
1988–2006. Diabetes Care 2010;33:562–568 2016;39:1462–1467 diagnosis in TrialNet. Diabetes Care 2020;43:
34. Eckhardt BJ, Holzman RS, Kwan CK, Baghdadi 49. Huang SH, Huang PJ, Li JY, Su YD, Lu CC, Shih 1836–1842
J, Aberg JA. Glycated hemoglobin A1c as screening CL. Hemoglobin A1c levels associated with age 66. Greenbaum CJ, Beam CA, Boulware D, et al.;
for diabetes mellitus in HIV-infected individuals. and gender in Taiwanese adults without prior Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet Study Group. Fall in
type 1 diabetes in the Diabetes Prevention Trial- 95. Roth AE, Thornley CJ, Blackstone RP. birth outcomes associated with pregestational
Type 1. Diabetes Care 2009;32:2269–2274 Outcomes in bariatric and metabolic surgery: diabetes in the United States. Am J Obstet
80. Jacobsen LM, Larsson HE, Tamura RN, et al.; an updated 5-year review. Curr Obes Rep 2020; Gynecol 2015;212:74.e1–74.e9
TEDDY Study Group. Predicting progression to 9:380–389 111. Griffin SJ, Borch-Johnsen K, Davies MJ,
type 1 diabetes from ages 3 to 6 in islet 96. Conte C, Lapeyre-Mestre M, Hanaire H, Ritz et al. Effect of early intensive multifactorial therapy
autoantibody positive TEDDY children. Pediatr P. Diabetes remission and relapse after bariatric on 5-year cardiovascular outcomes in individuals
Diabetes 2019;20:263–270 surgery: a nationwide population-based study. with type 2 diabetes detected by screening
81. Barker JM, Goehrig SH, Barriga K, et al.; Obes Surg 2020;30:4810–4820 (ADDITION-Europe): a cluster-randomised trial.
DAISY study. Clinical characteristics of children 97. Yoshino M, Kayser BD, Yoshino J, Stein RI, Lancet 2011;378:156–167
diagnosed with type 1 diabetes through intensive Reeds D, Eagon JC, et al. Effects of diet versus 112. Herman WH, Ye W, Griffin SJ, et al. Early
screening and follow-up. Diabetes Care 2004; gastric bypass on metabolic function in diabetes. detection and treatment of type 2 diabetes
27:1399–1404 N Engl J Med. 2020 20;383(8):721–32. reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality: a
82. Elding Larsson H, Vehik K, Gesualdo P, et al.; 98. Cresci B, Cosentino C, Monami M, Mannucci simulation of the results of the Anglo-Danish-
TEDDY Study Group. Children followed in the E. Metabolic surgery for the treatment of type 2 Dutch Study of Intensive Treatment in People
TEDDY study are diagnosed with type 1 diabetes diabetes: a network meta-analysis of randomized With Screen-Detected Diabetes in Primary Care
U.S. population 45-74 years of age. Diabetes Care function in young children with cystic fibrosis. experience. Exp Clin Transplant 2020;18(Suppl. 1):
2005;28:307–311 J Cyst Fibros 2020;19:305–309 36–40
126. Tabaei BP, Burke R, Constance A, et al. 142. Mainguy C, Bellon G, Delaup V, et al. 157. Munshi VN, Saghafian S, Cook CB, Eric
Community-based screening for diabetes in Sensitivity and specificity of different methods Steidley D, Hardaway B, Chakkera HA. Incidence,
Michigan. Diabetes Care 2003;26:668–670 for cystic fibrosis-related diabetes screening: is risk factors, and trends for postheart trans-
127. Lalla E, Kunzel C, Burkett S, Cheng B, the oral glucose tolerance test still the standard? plantation diabetes mellitus. Am J Cardiol 2020;
Lamster IB. Identification of unrecognized diabetes J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab 2017;30:27–35 125:436–440
and pre-diabetes in a dental setting. J Dent Res 143. Ode KL, Moran A. New insights into cystic 158. Kgosidialwa O, Blake K, O’Connell O, Egan J,
2011;90:855–860 fibrosis-related diabetes in children. Lancet Diabetes O’Neill J, Hatunic M. Post-transplant diabetes
128. Lalla E, Cheng B, Kunzel C, Burkett S, Endocrinol 2013;1:52–58 mellitus associated with heart and lung transplant.
Lamster IB. Dental findings and identification of 144. Moran A, Pekow P, Grover P, et al. Insulin Ir J Med Sci 2020;189:185–189
undiagnosed hyperglycemia. J Dent Res 2013;92: therapy to improve BMI in cystic fibrosis-related 159. Sharif A, Moore RH, Baboolal K. The use of
888–892 diabetes without fasting hyperglycemia: results oral glucose tolerance tests to risk stratify for
129. Herman WH, Taylor GW, Jacobson JJ, Burke R, of the cystic fibrosis related diabetes therapy new-onset diabetes after transplantation: an
Brown MB. Screening for prediabetes and type 2 trial. Diabetes Care 2009;32:1783–1788 underdiagnosed phenomenon. Transplantation
173. Sanyoura M, Letourneau L, Knight Johnson monogenic diabetes in children and adolescents. Ontario, Canada, 1996-2010. Diabetes Care 2014;
AE, et al. GCK-MODY in the US Monogenic Pediatr Diabetes 2009;10(Suppl. 12):33–42 37:1590–1596
Diabetes Registry: description of 27 unpublished 189. Rubio-Cabezas O, Hattersley AT, Njølstad 205. Peng TY, Ehrlich SF, Crites Y, et al. Trends
variants. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2019;151:231–236 PR, et al.; International Society for Pediatric and and racial and ethnic disparities in the prevalence
174. Carmody D, Naylor RN, Bell CD, et al. GCK- Adolescent Diabetes. ISPAD clinical practice of pregestational type 1 and type 2 diabetes in
MODY in the US National Monogenic Diabetes consensus guidelines 2014. The diagnosis and Northern California: 1996-2014. Am J Obstet
Registry: frequently misdiagnosed and unnecessarily management of monogenic diabetes in children Gynecol 2017;216:177.e1–177.e8
treated. Acta Diabetol 2016;53:703–708 and adolescents. Pediatr Diabetes 2014;15(Suppl. 20): 206. Jovanovic L, Liang Y, Weng W, Hamilton M,
175. Timsit J, Saint-Martin C, Dubois-Laforgue D, 47–64 Chen L, Wintfeld N. Trends in the incidence of
Bellanne-Chantelot C. Searching for maturity- 190. Steele AM, Shields BM, Shepherd M, Ellard diabetes, its clinical sequelae, and associated
onset diabetes of the young (MODY): when and S, Hattersley AT, Pearson ER. Increased all-cause costs in pregnancy. Diabetes Metab Res Rev
what for? Can J Diabetes 2016;40:455–461 and cardiovascular mortality in monogenic 2015;31:707–716
176. De Franco E, Caswell R, Johnson MB, et al. diabetes as a result of mutations in the HNF1A 207. Poltavskiy E, Kim DJ, Bang H. Comparison
De novo mutations in EIF2B1 affecting eIF2 gene. Diabet Med 2010;27:157–161 of screening scores for diabetes and prediabetes.
signaling cause neonatal/early-onset diabetes 191. Anõk A, Çatlõ G, Abacõ A, B€ ober E. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2016;118:146–153
glycated hemoglobin: a systematic review. J on health services, clinical care, and outcomes. 247. Committee on Practice Bulletins—Obstetrics.
Obstet Gynaecol Can 2020;42:1379–1384 Curr Diab Rep 2017;17:85 ACOG practice bulletin no. 190: gestational diabetes
221. Chen L, Pocobelli G, Yu O, et al. Early 235. Lowe WL Jr, Scholtens DM, Lowe LP, et al.; mellitus. Obstet Gynecol 2018;131:e49–e64
pregnancy hemoglobin A1c and pregnancy HAPO Follow-up Study Cooperative Research 248. Pillay J, Donovan L, Guitard S, et al.
outcomes: a population-based study. Am J Group. Association of gestational diabetes with Screening for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A
Perinatol 2019;36:1045–1053 maternal disorders of glucose metabolism and Systematic Review to Update the 2014 U.S.
222. Osmundson SS, Zhao BS, Kunz L, et al. First childhood adiposity. JAMA 2018;320:1005–1016 Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation.
trimester hemoglobin A1c prediction of gestational 236. Lowe WL Jr, Scholtens DM, Kuang A, et al.; Rockville, MD, Agency for Healthcare Research
diabetes. Am J Perinatol 2016;33:977–982 HAPO Follow-up Study Cooperative Research and Quality (U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
223. McIntyre HD, Sacks DA, Barbour LA, et al. Group. Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Evidence Syntheses, formerly Systematic Evidence
Issues with the diagnosis and classification of Outcome Follow-up Study (HAPO FUS): maternal Reviews), 2021. Accessed 8 September 2022.
hyperglycemia in early pregnancy. Diabetes Care gestational diabetes mellitus and childhood Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
2016;39:53–54 glucose metabolism. Diabetes Care 2019;42: books/NBK573100/
224. Cavagnolli G, Pimentel AL, Freitas PAC, 372–380 249. Khalafallah A, Phuah E, Al-Barazan AM,
Gross JL, Camargo JL. Factors affecting A1C in 237. Landon MB, Spong CY, Thom E, et al.; et al. Glycosylated haemoglobin for screening
For guidelines related to screening for increased risk for type 2 diabetes (prediabe-
tes), please refer to Section 2, “Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes.” For guide-
lines related to screening, diagnosis, and management of type 2 diabetes in youth,
please refer to Section 14, “Children and Adolescents.”
Recommendation
3.1 Monitor for the development of type 2 diabetes in those with prediabetes
at least annually; modify based on individual risk/benefit assessment. E
Screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes risk through an informal assessment
of risk factors (Table 2.3) or with an assessment tool, such as the American Diabetes
Association risk test (Fig. 2.1), is recommended to guide health care professionals on
whether performing a diagnostic test for prediabetes (Table 2.5) and previously un- Disclosure information for each author is
available at https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-SDIS.
diagnosed type 2 diabetes (Table 2.2) is appropriate (see Section 2, “Classification
and Diagnosis of Diabetes”). Testing high-risk adults for prediabetes is warranted be- Suggested citation: ElSayed NA, Aleppo G,
Aroda VR, et al., American Diabetes Association.
cause the laboratory assessment is safe and reasonable in cost, substantial time ex- 3. Prevention or delay of type 2 diabetes and
ists before the development of type 2 diabetes and its complications during which associated comorbidities: Standards of Care in
one can intervene, and there is an effective means of preventing or delaying type 2 Diabetes—2023. Diabetes Care 2023;46(Suppl. 1):
diabetes in those determined to have prediabetes with an A1C 5.7–6.4% S41–S48
(39–47 mmol/mol), impaired glucose tolerance, or impaired fasting glucose. The util- © 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.
ity of A1C screening for prediabetes and diabetes may be limited in the presence of Readers may use this article as long as the
work is properly cited, the use is educational
hemoglobinopathies and conditions that affect red blood cell turnover. See Section 2,
and not for profit, and the work is not altered.
“Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes,” and Section 6, “Glycemic Targets,” for More information is available at https://www.
additional details on the appropriate use and limitations of A1C testing. diabetesjournals.org/journals/pages/license.
S42 Prevention or Delay of Type 2 Diabetes and Associated Comorbidities Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
LIFESTYLE BEHAVIOR CHANGE to type 2 diabetes: 39% reduction at To implement the weight loss and
FOR DIABETES PREVENTION 30 years in the Da Qing study (5), 43% physical activity goals, the DPP used an
reduction at 7 years in the Finnish DPS individual model of treatment rather than
Recommendations
(2), and 34% reduction at 10 years (6) a group-based approach. This choice was
3.2 Refer adults with overweight/
and 27% reduction at 15 years (7) in the based on a desire to intervene before
obesity at high risk of type 2 di-
U.S. Diabetes Prevention Program Out- participants had the possibility of devel-
abetes, as typified by the Diabetes
comes Study (DPPOS). oping diabetes or losing interest in the
Prevention Program (DPP), to an The two major goals of the DPP inten- program. The individual approach also al-
intensive lifestyle behavior change sive lifestyle intervention were to achieve lowed for the tailoring of interventions to
program to achieve and maintain and maintain a minimum of 7% weight reflect the diversity of the population (8).
a weight reduction of at least 7% loss and 150 min moderate-intensity phys- The DPP intervention was adminis-
of initial body weight through ical activity per week, such as brisk walk- tered as a structured core curriculum fol-
healthy reduced-calorie diet and
the case for those with diabetes, individ- locations of CDC-recognized diabetes pre- by third-party payers remains problem-
ualized medical nutrition therapy (see vention lifestyle change programs (cdc. atic. Counseling by a registered dietitian
Section 5, “Facilitating Positive Health gov/diabetes/prevention/find-a-program. nutritionist (RDN) has been shown to
Behaviors and Well-being to Improve html). To be eligible for this program, in- help individuals with prediabetes im-
Health Outcomes,” for more detailed in- dividuals must have a BMI in the over- prove eating habits, increase physical
formation) is effective in lowering A1C weight range and be at risk for diabetes activity, and achieve 7–10% weight loss
in individuals diagnosed with prediabe- based on laboratory testing, a previous (10,46–48). Individualized medical nutri-
tes (23). diagnosis of GDM, or a positive risk test tion therapy (see Section 5, “Facilitating
(cdc.gov/prediabetes/takethetest/). Dur- Positive Health Behaviors and Well-being
Physical Activity ing the first 4 years of implementation of to Improve Health Outcomes,” for more
Just as 150 min/week of moderate- the CDC’s National DPP, 35.5% achieved detailed information) is also effective in
intensity physical activity, such as brisk the 5% weight loss goal (41). The CDC improving glycemia in individuals diag-
nosed with prediabetes (23,46). Further-
Program, especially those aged 25– analyses and meta-analyses suggest a notable that the lowering effect of met-
59 years with BMI $35 kg/m2, potential benefit in specific populations formin on vitamin B12 increases with
higher fasting plasma glucose (77–80). Further research is needed to time (88), with a significantly higher risk
(e.g., $110 mg/dL), and higher define characteristics and clinical indica- for vitamin B12 deficiency (<150 pmol/L)
tors where vitamin D supplementation noted at 4.3 years in the HOME (Hyperin-
A1C (e.g., $6.0%), and in individ-
may be of benefit (61). sulinaemia: the Outcome of its Metabolic
uals with prior gestational diabe-
No pharmacologic agent has been ap- Effects) study (88) and significantly greater
tes mellitus. A
proved by the U.S. Food and Drug Ad- risk of low B12 levels (#203 pg/mL) at
3.7 Long-term use of metformin
ministration for a specific indication of 5 years in the DPP (87). It has been sug-
may be associated with bio-
type 2 diabetes prevention. The risk ver- gested that a person who has been on
chemical vitamin B12 deficiency;
sus benefit of each medication in sup- metformin for more than 4 years or is at
consider periodic measurement port of person-centered goals must be
of vitamin B12 levels in metfor- risk for vitamin B12 deficiency should be
can be difficult to maintain long term (6), though group differences declined over 3.8 Prediabetes is associated with
time in the DPPOS (7), and metformin heightened cardiovascular risk;
people at high risk of diabetes may bene-
may be cost-saving over a 10-year pe- therefore, screening for and
fit from support and additional pharma-
riod (33). In the DPP, metformin was as treatment of modifiable risk fac-
cotherapeutic options, if needed. Various
effective as lifestyle modification in par- tors for cardiovascular disease
pharmacologic agents used to treat dia-
ticipants with BMI $35 kg/m2 and in are suggested. B
betes have been evaluated for diabetes
younger participants aged 25–44 years
prevention. Metformin, a-glucosidase in- 3.9 Statin therapy may increase the
(1). In individuals with a history of GDM risk of type 2 diabetes in peo-
hibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor
in the DPP, metformin and intensive life- ple at high risk of developing
agonists (liraglutide, semaglutide), thia-
style modification led to an equivalent
zolidinediones, testosterone (61), and in- type 2 diabetes. In such individ-
50% reduction in diabetes risk (82).
sulin have been shown to lower the uals, glucose status should be
Both interventions remained highly effec-
incidence of diabetes in specific popula- monitored regularly and diabe-
tive during a 10-year follow-up period
tions (62–67), whereas diabetes preven- tes prevention approaches rein-
(83). By the time of the 15-year follow-
tion was not seen with nateglinide (68). up (DPPOS), exploratory analyses demon- forced. It is not recommended
In the DPP, weight loss was an impor- strated that participants with a higher that statins be discontinued. B
tant factor in reducing the risk of pro- baseline fasting glucose ($110 mg/dL 3.10 In people with a history of
gression, with every kilogram of weight vs. 95–109 mg/dL), those with a higher stroke and evidence of insulin
loss conferring a 16% reduction in risk A1C (6.0–6.4% vs. <6.0%), and individuals resistance and prediabetes, pio-
of progression over 3.2 years (9). In with a history of GDM (vs. individuals with- glitazone may be considered to
postpartum individuals with GDM, the risk out a history of GDM) experienced higher lower the risk of stroke or myo-
of type 2 diabetes increased by 18% for risk reductions with metformin, identifying cardial infarction. However, this
every 1 unit BMI above the preconception subgroups of participants that benefitted benefit needs to be balanced
baseline (69). Several medications evalu- the most from metformin (84). In the In- with the increased risk of weight
ated for weight loss (e.g., orlistat, phenter- dian Diabetes Prevention Program (IDPP-1), gain, edema, and fracture. A
mine topiramate, liraglutide, semaglutide, metformin and lifestyle intervention re- Lower doses may mitigate the
and tirzepatide) have been shown to de- duced diabetes risk similarly at 30 months; risk of adverse effects. C
crease the incidence of diabetes to various of note, the lifestyle intervention in IDPP-1
degrees in those with prediabetes (67, was less intensive than that in the DPP
70–72). (85). Based on findings from the DPP, met- People with prediabetes often have
Studies of other pharmacologic agents formin should be recommended as an op- other cardiovascular risk factors, includ-
have shown some efficacy in diabetes tion for high-risk individuals (e.g., those ing hypertension and dyslipidemia (90),
prevention with valsartan but no effi- with a history of GDM or those with BMI and are at increased risk for cardiovas-
cacy in preventing diabetes with ramipril $35 kg/m2). Consider periodic monitoring cular disease (91,92). If indicated, evalu-
or anti-inflammatory drugs (73–76). Al- of vitamin B12 levels in those taking ation for tobacco use and referral for
though the Vitamin D and Type 2 Dia- metformin chronically to check for pos- tobacco cessation should be part of rou-
betes (D2d) prospective randomized sible deficiency (86,87) (see Section 9, tine care for those at risk for diabetes.
controlled trial showed no significant “Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Of note, the years immediately follow-
benefit of vitamin D versus placebo on Treatment,” for more details). While ing smoking cessation may represent
the progression to type 2 diabetes in there is not a universally accepted rec- a time of increased risk for diabetes
individuals at high risk (77), post hoc ommended periodicity of monitoring, it is (93–95), a time when individuals should
diabetesjournals.org/care Prevention or Delay of Type 2 Diabetes and Associated Comorbidities S45
be monitored for diabetes development (target dose of 45 mg daily) compared Characteristics of individuals in the DPP/
and receive concurrent evidence-based with placebo. At 4.8 years, the risk of DPPOS who were at particularly high risk
lifestyle behavior change for diabetes stroke or myocardial infarction, as well as of progression to diabetes (crude inci-
prevention described in this section. See the risk of diabetes, was lower within the dence of diabetes 14–22 cases/100 person-
Section 5, “Facilitating Positive Health pioglitazone group than with placebo, years) included BMI $35 kg/m2, those at
Behaviors and Well-being to Improve though risks of weight gain, edema, and higher glucose levels (e.g., fasting plasma
Health Outcomes,” for more detailed in- fracture were higher in the pioglitazone glucose 110–125 mg/dL, 2-h postchallenge
formation. The lifestyle interventions for treatment group (107–109). Lower doses glucose 173–199 mg/dL, and A1C $6.0%),
weight loss in study populations at risk may mitigate the adverse effects, though and individuals with a history of gestational
for type 2 diabetes have shown a reduc- further study is needed to confirm the diabetes (1,82,83). In contrast, in the
tion in cardiovascular risk factors and benefit at lower doses (110). community-based Atherosclerosis Risk
the need for medications used to treat in Communities (ARIC) study, observa-
Pharmacotherapy for weight manage- 11. Department of Health and Human Services randomized clinical trial. JAMA Pediatr 2014;168:
ment (see Section 8, “Obesity and and Department of Agriculture. Dietary Guidelines 1006–1014
for Americans 2015–2020, Eighth Edition. Accessed 27. Dai X, Zhai L, Chen Q, et al. Two-year-
Weight Management for the Prevention 12 October 2022. Available from https://www. supervised resistance training prevented diabetes
and Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes,” for health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines incidence in people with prediabetes: a ran-
more details), minimizing the progres- 12. Salas-Salvad o J, Guasch-Ferre M, Lee C-H, domised control trial. Diabetes Metab Res Rev
sion of hyperglycemia (see Section 9, Estruch R, Clish CB, Ros E. Protective effects of 2019;35:e3143
the Mediterranean diet on type 2 diabetes and 28. Thorp AA, Kingwell BA, Sethi P, Hammond L,
“Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic
metabolic syndrome. J Nutr 2016;146:920S–927S Owen N, Dunstan DW. Alternating bouts of sitting
Treatment,” for more details), and car- 13. Bloomfield HE, Koeller E, Greer N, MacDonald and standing attenuate postprandial glucose res-
diovascular risk reduction (see Section R, Kane R, Wilt TJ. Effects on health outcomes of a ponses. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2014;46:2053–2061
10, “Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Mediterranean diet with no restriction on fat 29. Healy GN, Dunstan DW, Salmon J, et al.
Management,” for more details) are im- intake: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Breaks in sedentary time: beneficial associations
Intern Med 2016;165:491–500 with metabolic risk. Diabetes Care 2008;31:
portant tools that can be considered to 14. Estruch R, Ros E, Salas-Salvad o J, et al.; 661–666
implementation of the Diabetes Prevention social network: validation against CDC standards. 69. Dennison RA, Chen ES, Green ME, et al. The
Program as a health insurance benefit. Diabetes Diabetes Educ 2014;40:435–443 absolute and relative risk of type 2 diabetes after
Care 2019;42:1776–1783 54. Bian RR, Piatt GA, Sen A, et al. The effect of gestational diabetes: a systematic review and
41. Ely EK, Gruss SM, Luman ET, et al. A national technology-mediated diabetes prevention inter- meta-analysis of 129 studies. Diabetes Res Clin
effort to prevent type 2 diabetes: participant- ventions on weight: a meta-analysis. J Med Pract 2021;171:108625
level evaluation of CDC’s National Diabetes Internet Res 2017;19:e76 70. Torgerson JS, Hauptman J, Boldrin MN,
Prevention Program. Diabetes Care 2017;40: 55. Sepah SC, Jiang L, Peters AL. Long-term Sj€ostr€
om L. XENical in the prevention of diabetes
1331–1341 outcomes of a web-based diabetes prevention in obese subjects (XENDOS) study: a randomized
42. Lanza A, Soler R, Smith B, Hoerger T, program: 2-year results of a single-arm longi- study of orlistat as an adjunct to lifestyle changes
Neuwahl S, Zhang P. The Diabetes Prevention tudinal study. J Med Internet Res 2015;17:e92 for the prevention of type 2 diabetes in obese
Impact Tool Kit: an online tool kit to assess the 56. Moin T, Damschroder LJ, AuYoung M, et al. patients. Diabetes Care 2004;27:155–161
cost-effectiveness of preventing type 2 diabetes. Results from a trial of an online Diabetes 71. Garvey WT, Ryan DH, Henry R, et al.
J Public Health Manag Pract 2019;25:E1–E5 Prevention Program intervention. Am J Prev Med Prevention of type 2 diabetes in subjects with
43. Cannon MJ, Masalovich S, Ng BP, et al. 2018;55:583–591 prediabetes and metabolic syndrome treated
Retention among participants in the National 57. Michaelides A, Major J, Pienkosz E Jr, Wood M, with phentermine and topiramate extended
83. Aroda VR, Christophi CA, Edelstein SL, et al.; for type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cohort study. Ann retrospective matched-cohort study. JAMA Intern
Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Intern Med 2010;152:10–17 Med 2021;181:1562–1574
The effect of lifestyle intervention and metformin 94. Oba S, Noda M, Waki K, et al.; Japan Public 105. Ridker PM, Pradhan A, MacFadyen JG,
on preventing or delaying diabetes among Health Center-Based Prospective Study Group. Libby P, Glynn RJ. Cardiovascular benefits and
women with and without gestational diabetes: Smoking cessation increases short-term risk of diabetes risks of statin therapy in primary
the Diabetes Prevention Program outcomes type 2 diabetes irrespective of weight gain: the prevention: an analysis from the JUPITER trial.
study 10-year follow-up. J Clin Endocrinol Metab Japan Public Health Center-Based Prospective Lancet 2012;380:565–571
2015;100:1646–1653 Study. PLoS One 2012;7:e17061 106. Cai T, Abel L, Langford O, et al. Associations
84. Diabetes Prevention Program Research 95. Hu Y, Zong G, Liu G, Wang M, Rosner B, Pan between statins and adverse events in primary
Group. Long-term effects of metformin on diabetes A, et al. Smoking cessation, weight change, type 2 prevention of cardiovascular disease: systematic
prevention: identification of subgroups that diabetes, and mortality. N Engl J Med 2018;379: review with pairwise, network, and dose-
benefited most in the Diabetes Prevention Pro- 623–632 response meta-analyses. BMJ 2021;374:n1537
gram and Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes 96. Orchard TJ, Temprosa M, Barrett-Connor E, 107. Kernan WN, Viscoli CM, Furie KL, et al.; IRIS
Study. Diabetes Care 2019;42:601–608 et al.; Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Trial Investigators. Pioglitazone after ischemic
85. Ramachandran A, Snehalatha C, Mary S, Study Research Group. Long-term effects of the stroke or transient ischemic attack. N Engl J Med
Recommendations
4.1 A person-centered communication style that uses person-centered, cul-
turally sensitive, and strength-based language and active listening; elic-
its individual preferences and beliefs; and assesses literacy, numeracy,
and potential barriers to care should be used to optimize health out-
comes and health-related quality of life. B
4.2 People with diabetes can benefit from a coordinated multidisciplinary
team that may include and is not limited to diabetes care and educa-
tion specialists, primary care and subspecialty clinicians, nurses, regis-
tered dietitian nutritionists, exercise specialists, pharmacists, dentists,
podiatrists, and mental health professionals. E Disclosure information for each author is
available at https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-SDIS.
Suggested citation: ElSayed NA, Aleppo G, Aroda
A successful medical evaluation depends on beneficial interactions between the VR, et al., American Diabetes Association. 4.
person with diabetes and the care team. The Chronic Care Model (1–3) (see Section Comprehensive medical evaluation and assess-
1, “Improving Care and Promoting Health in Populations”) is a person-centered ap- ment of comorbidities: Standards of Care in
proach to care that requires a close working relationship between the person with Diabetes—2023. Diabetes Care 2023;46(Suppl. 1):
S49–S67
diabetes and clinicians involved in treatment planning. People with diabetes should
receive health care from a coordinated interdisciplinary team that may include but © 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.
is not limited to diabetes care and education specialists, primary care and subspeci- Readers may use this article as long as the
work is properly cited, the use is educational
alty clinicians, nurses, registered dietitian nutritionists, exercise specialists, pharma- and not for profit, and the work is not altered.
cists, dentists, podiatrists, and mental health professionals. Individuals with dia- More information is available at https://www.
betes must assume an active role in their care. Based on the preferences of the diabetesjournals.org/journals/pages/license.
S50 Comprehensive Medical Evaluation and Assessment of Comorbidities Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
person with diabetes, the family or sup- niques should be used to support the diabetes take in directing the day-to-day
port group and health care team to- person’s self-management efforts, includ- decision-making, planning, monitoring,
gether formulate the management plan, ing providing education on problem- evaluation, and problem-solving involved
which includes lifestyle management (see solving skills for all aspects of diabetes in diabetes self-management. Using a
Section 5, “Facilitating Positive Health management. nonjudgmental approach that normalizes
Behaviors and Well-being to Improve Health care professional communica- periodic lapses in management may help
Health Outcomes”). tion with people with diabetes and fami- minimize the person’s resistance to re-
The goals of treatment for diabetes lies should acknowledge that multiple porting problems with self-management.
are to prevent or delay complications factors impact glycemic management but Empathizing and using active listening
and optimize quality of life (Fig. 4.1). also emphasize that collaboratively devel- techniques, such as open-ended ques-
Treatment goals and plans should be cre- oped treatment plans and a healthy life- tions, reflective statements, and summa-
ated with people with diabetes based on style can significantly improve disease rizing what the person said, can help
Figure 4.1—Decision cycle for person-centered glycemic management in type 2 diabetes. Adapted from Davies et al. (211). BGM, blood glucose
monitoring; BP, blood pressure; CGM, continuous glucose monitoring; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease;
DSMES, diabetes self-management education and support; HF, heart failure.
diabetesjournals.org/care Comprehensive Medical Evaluation and Assessment of Comorbidities S51
and judges may undermine this effort. comprehensive medical evalua- treatment planning are key components
The American Diabetes Association tion (Table 4.1). A of initial and follow-up visits (Table 4.2).
(ADA) and the Association of Diabetes 4.5 Ongoing management should The risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascu-
Care & Education Specialists (formerly be guided by the assessment lar disease and heart failure (see Sec-
called the American Association of Dia- of overall health status, diabe- tion 10, “Cardiovascular Disease and Risk
betes Educators) joint consensus report, tes complications, cardiovascu- Management”), chronic kidney disease
“The Use of Language in Diabetes Care lar risk, hypoglycemia risk, and staging (see Section 11, “Chronic Kidney
and Education,” provides the authors’ shared decision-making to set Disease and Risk Management”), pres-
expert opinion regarding the use of lan- therapeutic goals. B ence of retinopathy (see Section 12,
guage by health care professionals “Retinopathy, Neuropathy, and Foot
when speaking or writing about dia- Care”), and risk of treatment-associated
betes for people with diabetes or for The comprehensive medical evaluation hypoglycemia (Table 4.3) should be used
Continued on p. S53
diabetesjournals.org/care Comprehensive Medical Evaluation and Assessment of Comorbidities S53
A1C, if the results are not available within the past 3 months
ABI, ankle-brachial pressure index; ARBs, angiotensin receptor blockers; CGM, continuous glucose monitors; MDI, multiple daily injections; NAFLD,
nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; OSA, obstructive sleep apnea; PAD, peripheral arterial disease.
+May be needed more frequently in people with diabetes with known chronic kidney disease or with changes in medications that affect kidney
function and serum potassium (see Table 11.1).
#May also need to be checked after initiation or dose changes of medications that affect these laboratory values (i.e., diabetes medications,
blood pressure medications, cholesterol medications, or thyroid medications).
^In people without dyslipidemia and not on cholesterol-lowering therapy, testing may be less frequent.
**Should be performed at every visit in people with diabetes with sensory loss, previous foot ulcers, or amputations.
review has evolved over time with the and morbidity in vulnerable populations, influenza vaccination, it is recommended
adoption of Grading of Recommendations including youth, older adults, and peo- for all individuals $6 months of age
Assessment, Development and Evaluation ple with chronic diseases. Influenza vac- who do not have a contraindication. In-
(GRADE) in 2010 and then the Evidence cination in people with diabetes has fluenza vaccination is critically important
to Decision or Evidence to Recommenda- been found to significantly reduce influ- as the severe acute respiratory syn-
tion frameworks in 2018 (17). Here we enza and diabetes-related hospital ad- drome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and
discuss the particular importance of spe- missions (18). In people with diabetes influenza viruses will both be active in
cific vaccines. and cardiovascular disease, influenza the U.S. during the 2022–2023 season
vaccine has been associated with lower (20). The live attenuated influenza vac-
Influenza risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular cine, which is delivered by nasal spray, is
Influenza is a common, preventable infec- mortality, and cardiovascular events an option for people who are age 2
tious disease associated with high mortality (19). Given the benefits of the annual years through age 49 years and who are
S54 Comprehensive Medical Evaluation and Assessment of Comorbidities Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
Table 4.5—Highly recommended immunizations for adults with diabetes (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices,
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)
Vaccination Age-group recommendations Frequency GRADE evidence type* Reference
Hepatitis B <60 years of age; $60 years Two- or three-dose series 2 Centers for Disease Control and
of age discuss with health Prevention, Use of Hepatitis B
care professionals Vaccination for Adults With
Diabetes Mellitus: Recommendations
of the Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practices (ACIP) (204)
Human papilloma #26 years of age; 27–45 years Three doses over 2 for female individuals, Meites et al., Human Papillomavirus
virus (HPV) of age may also be 6 months 3 for male individuals Vaccination for Adults: Updated
vaccinated against HPV Recommendations of the Advisory
Influenza All people with diabetes advised Annual — Demicheli et al., Vaccines for Preventing
not to receive live attenuated Influenza in the Elderly (206)
influenza vaccine
Pneumonia (PPSV23 19–64 years of age, vaccinate One dose is recommended for those that 2 Centers for Disease Control and
[Pneumovax]) with Pneumovax previously received PCV13. If PCV15 Prevention, Updated Recommendations
used, follow with PPSV23 $1 year for Prevention of Invasive
later. PPSV23 is not indicated after Pneumococcal Disease
PCV20. Adults who received only Among Adults Using the
PPSV23 may receive PCV15 or PCV20 23-Valent Pneumococcal Polysaccaride
$1 year after their last dose. Vaccine (PPSV23) (207)
$65 years of age One dose is recommended for those that 2 Falkenhorst et al., Effectiveness
previously received PCV13. If PCV15 of the 23-Valent Pneumococcal
was used, follow with PPSV23 $1 year Polysaccharide Vaccine (PPV23)
later. PPSV23 is not indicated after Against Pneumococcal Disease
PCV20. Adults who received only in the Elderly: Systematic Review
PPSV23 may receive PCV15 or PCV20 and Meta-analysis (208)
$1 year after their last dose.
PCV20 or PCV15 Adults 19–64 years One dose of PCV15 or PCV20 is 3 Kobayashi et al., Use of 15-Valent
of age, with an recommended by the CDC. Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine and
immunocompromising 20-Valent Pneumococcal Conjugate
condition (e.g., chronic Vaccine Among U.S. Adults: Updated
renal failure), cochlear Recommendations of the Advisory
implant, or cerebrospinal Committee on Immunization
fluid leak Practices—United States, 2022 (22)
19–64 years of age, For those who have never received any
immunocompetent pneumococcal vaccine, the CDC
recommends one dose of PCV15 or
PCV20.
$65 years of age, One dose of PCV15 or PCV20. PCSV23
immunocompetent, have may be given $8 weeks after PCV15.
shared decision-making PPSV23 is not indicated after PCV20.
discussion with health
care professionals
Tetanus, diphtheria, All adults; pregnant Booster every 10 years 2 for effectiveness, Havers et al., Use of Tetanus Toxoid,
pertussis (TDAP) individuals should have 3 for safety Reduced Diphtheria Toxoid, and
an extra dose Acellular Pertussis Vaccines: Updated
Recommendations of the Advisory
Committee on Immunization
Practices—United States, 2019 (209)
Zoster $50 years of age Two-dose Shingrix, even if 1 Dooling et al., Recommendations
previously vaccinated of the Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practices for Use
of Herpes Zoster Vaccines (210)
GRADE, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation; PCV13, 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine; PCV15, 15-valent pneumo-
coccal conjugate vaccine; PCV 20, 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine; PPSV23, 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine. *Evidence type: 1, ran-
domized controlled trials (RCTs) or overwhelming evidence from observational studies; 2, RCTs with important limitations or exceptionally strong evidence from
observational studies; 3, observational studies or RCTs with notable limitations; 4, clinical experience and observations, observational studies with important limi-
tations, or RCTs with several major limitations. For a comprehensive list, refer to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) at cdc.gov/vaccines/.
S56 Comprehensive Medical Evaluation and Assessment of Comorbidities Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
based on the person’s likelihood of ac- compromised, doses 1 and 2 should be discusses many of the common comor-
quiring hepatitis B infection. at least 3 weeks apart and doses 2 and 3 bidities observed in people with diabetes
at least 4 weeks apart. but is not necessarily inclusive of all the
COVID-19 For most people aged $18 years re- conditions that have been reported.
As of September 2022, the COVID-19 ceiving Novavax vaccine, doses 1 and
vaccines are recommended for all adults 2 should be at least 3–8 weeks apart. Autoimmune Diseases
and some children, including people with For those who are moderately to se- Recommendations
diabetes, under approval from the U.S. verely compromised, doses 1 and 2 4.7 People with type 1 diabetes should
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (24). should be at least 3 weeks apart. The
be screened for autoimmune
The bivalent booster protecting against the Janssen monovalent vaccine is currently
thyroid disease soon after diagno-
omicron variant and original strain has authorized for use in certain limited sit-
sis and periodically thereafter. B
now replaced the monovalent booster uations due to safety considerations.
4.8 Adults with type 1 diabetes
or diabetes treatments, although evi- diabetes (43). The Action to Control people with diabetes and a high risk for
dence for these links is scarce. People Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) cardiovascular disease.
with diabetes should be encouraged to study found that each 1% higher A1C
undergo recommended age- and sex- level was associated with lower cogni- Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease
appropriate cancer screenings and to re- tive function in individuals with type 2 Recommendation
duce their modifiable cancer risk factors diabetes (45). However, the ACCORD 4.10 People with type 2 diabetes
(obesity, physical inactivity, and smok- study found no difference in cognitive or prediabetes with cardio-
ing). New onset of atypical diabetes outcomes in participants randomly as- metabolic risk factors, who
(lean body habitus, negative family his- signed to intensive and standard glycemic have either elevated liver en-
tory) in a middle-aged or older person management, supporting the recommen- zymes (ALT) or fatty liver on
may precede the diagnosis of pancreatic dation that intensive glucose manage- imaging or ultrasound, should
adenocarcinoma (40). However, in the ment should not be advised for the be evaluated for presence of
with transplant waiting lists being over- low prevalence of obesity was only 8.8% of identifiable risk factors. The FIB-4 esti-
represented by people with type 2 dia- compared with 68% in people with type 2 mates the risk of hepatic cirrhosis and is
betes (62). Still, clinicians underestimate diabetes (81). The prevalence of fibrosis calculated from the computation of age,
its prevalence and do not consistently was not established. Therefore, screening plasma aminotransferases (AST and ALT),
implement appropriate screening strate- for fibrosis in people with type 1 diabe- and platelet count (mdcalc.com/calc/
gies, thus missing the diagnosis of NAFLD tes should only be considered in the 2200/fibrosis-4-fib-4-index-liver-fibrosis).
in high-risk groups, such as those having presence of additional risk factors for A value of <1.3 is considered lower risk,
obesity or type 2 diabetes. This pattern NAFLD, such as obesity, incidental he- while >2.67 is considered as having a
of underdiagnosis is compounded by patic steatosis on imaging, or elevated high probability of advanced fibrosis
sparse referral to specialists and inade- plasma aminotransferases. (F3–F4). It also predicts changes over
quate prescription of medications with There is consensus that the fibrosis-4 time in hepatic fibrosis (88,89) and al-
proven efficacy in NASH (63,64). index (FIB-4) is the most cost-effective lows risk stratification of individuals in
well validated in pediatric populations LSM and/or patented biomarkers for the 50–75% in inflammation and hepato-
and does not perform as well in those noninvasive fibrosis risk stratification of cyte ballooning (necrosis), and 30–40%
aged <35 years. In people with diabe- individuals with NAFLD in primary care in fibrosis (126,127). It may also reduce
tes $65 years of age, higher cutoffs and diabetes clinics (58,64–66,82–84). the risk of HCC (127). Bariatric surgery
for FIB-4 have been recommended After initial risk stratification (i.e., FIB-4, should be used with caution in individu-
(1.9–2.0 rather than >1.3) (96,97). LSM, and/or patented biomarkers), peo- als with compensated cirrhosis, but in
In people with an indeterminate or ple with diabetes at indeterminate or experienced hands the risk of hepatic
high FIB-4, additional risk stratification is high risk of fibrosis should be referred, decompensation is similar to that for
required with a liver stiffness measure- based on practice setting, to a gastroen- those with less advanced liver disease.
ment (LSM) by transient elastography terologist or hepatologist for further Because of the paucity of safety and
(Fig. 4.2) or, if unavailable, by commer- workup within the framework of a mul- outcome data, bariatric surgery is
cial blood fibrosis biomarkers such as tidisciplinary team (64,105,106). not recommended in individuals with
treatment in a small randomized con- should be considered for screening (152). during the COVID-19 pan-
trolled trial (RCT) was largely negative as Sleep apnea treatment (lifestyle modifica- demic. C
monotherapy (134), and when added to tion, continuous positive airway pressure, 4.16 People with diabetes and their
pioglitazone, it did not seem to enhance oral appliances, and surgery) significantly families/caregivers should be
pioglitazone’s efficacy, as reported in an improves quality of life and blood pres- monitored for psychological
earlier trial in this population (137). sure management. The evidence for a well-being and offered support
Pioglitazone causes dose-dependent treatment effect on glycemic control is or referrals as needed, includ-
weight gain (15 mg/day, mean of 1–2%; mixed (153). ing mental/behavioral health
45 mg/day, 3–5%), increases fracture care, self-management education
risk, may promote heart failure if used Periodontal Disease and support, and resources to
in individuals with preexisting conges- Periodontal disease is more severe, and address related risk factors. E
tive heart failure, and may increase may be more prevalent, in people with 4.17 Health care systems need to en-
conditions have experienced some of treatment (e.g., health insurance status, (44.7% vs. 24.5%, adjusted risk ratio
the worst COVID-19 outcomes, includ- specialist services, and medications), which 1.84) and 2018 (vs. 24.1%, adjusted
ing hospital admission and mortality all relate to long-standing structural in- risk ratio 1.85) as well as the propor-
(163). In people with diabetes, higher equities that vary by ethnicity (167). tion with severe DKA (173). A larger
blood glucose levels both prior to and There is now overwhelming evidence study using national data in England
during COVID-19 admission have been that approximately 30–40% of people during the first two waves found that
associated with poor outcomes, includ- who are infected with COVID-19 get per- rates of DKA were higher than those for
ing mortality (164). Type 1 diabetes has sistent and sometimes relapsing and re- preceding years across all pandemic pe-
been associated with higher risk of mitting symptoms 4 weeks after infection, riods studied (174). The study reported
COVID-19 mortality than type 2 diabe- which has been termed post-acute lower DKA hospital admissions in people
tes (165). One whole-population-level sequelae of COVID-19, post-COVID-19 with type 1 diabetes but higher rates of
study of over 61 million people in England condition, post-acute COVID-19 syn- DKA in people with type 1 diabetes and
in the first wave of the pandemic re-
type 2 diabetes and reductions in new such technological interventions may fur- 3. Gabbay RA, Bailit MH, Mauger DT, Wagner
prescriptions of metformin during the ther widen disparities in vulnerable popu- EH, Siminerio L. Multipayer patient-centered
medical home implementation guided by the
pandemic (186). Due to unemployment lations such as the elderly, ethnic minority chronic care model. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf
or lost income during the pandemic, groups, frail populations, and those 2011;37:265–273
people living with diabetes have expe- from deprived communities (194). 4. UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group.
rienced financial hardships that may Several pharmacoepidemiological stud- Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas
have reduced their affordability for medi- ies have examined the association be- or insulin compared with conventional treatment
and risk of complications in patients with type 2
cations in countries where costs for medi- tween glucose-lowering medications and diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet 1998;352:837–853
cations are out of pocket (184). Many risk of COVID-19 and have reported con- 5. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial
individuals with diabetes have avoided flicting findings, although most studies Research Group; Nathan DM, Genuth S, Lachin J,
or delayed seeking medical attention showed a lower risk of mortality with et al. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes
for routine non-COVID-19–related prob- on the development and progression of long-
metformin and a higher risk in people
term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes
tions by the Advisory Committee on Immuniza- diseases in children and adults with type 1 50. Scarmeas N, Stern Y, Mayeux R, Manly JJ, Schupf
tion Practices. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep diabetes from the T1D Exchange clinic registry. J N, Luchsinger JA. Mediterranean diet and mild
2018;67:1271–1272 Clin Endocrinol Metab 2016;101:4931–4937 cognitive impairment. Arch Neurol 2009;66:216–225
18. Goeijenbier M, van Sloten TT, Slobbe L, et al. 34. Kahaly GJ, Hansen MP. Type 1 diabetes 51. Ooi CP, Loke SC, Yassin Z, Hamid TA. Carbo-
Benefits of flu vaccination for persons with diabetes associated autoimmunity. Autoimmun Rev 2016; hydrates for improving the cognitive performance
mellitus: a review. Vaccine 2017;35:5095–5101 15:644–648 of independent-living older adults with normal
19. Yedlapati SH, Khan SU, Talluri S, et al. Effects of 35. Eisenbarth GS, Gottlieb PA. Autoimmune cognition or mild cognitive impairment. Cochrane
influenza vaccine on mortality and cardiovascular polyendocrine syndromes. N Engl J Med 2004; Database Syst Rev 2011;4:CD007220
outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease: a 350:2068–2079 52. Richardson K, Schoen M, French B, et al.
systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Heart 36. Rubio-Tapia A, Hill ID, Kelly CP, Calderwood AH; Statins and cognitive function: a systematic review.
Assoc 2021;10:e019636 American College of Gastroenterology. ACG clinical Ann Intern Med 2013;159:688–697
20. Grohskopf LA, Alyanak E, Broder KR, Blanton LH, guidelines: diagnosis and management of celiac 53. Younossi ZM, Golabi P, de Avila L, et al. The
Fry AM, Jernigan DB, et al. Prevention and control of disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2013;108:656–676 global epidemiology of NAFLD and NASH in patients
seasonal influenza with vaccines: recommendations 37. Husby S, Murray JA, Katzka DA. AGA clinical with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and
of the Advisory Committee on Immunization practice update on diagnosis and monitoring of celiac meta-analysis. J Hepatol 2019;71:793–801
ment of patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. diabetes: pathophysiology, clinical impact, and invasive diagnosis of advanced NAFLD fibrosis.
Gastroenterology 2021;161:1657–1669 mechanisms. Endocr Rev 2018;39:629–663 Am J Gastroenterol 2017;112:740–751
67. Gellert-Kristensen H, Richardson TG, Davey 81. Cusi K, Sanyal AJ, Zhang S, et al. Non- 97. Ishiba H, Sumida Y, Tanaka S, et al.; Japan
Smith G, Nordestgaard BG, Tybjaerg-Hansen A, alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) prevalence Study Group of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease
Stender S. Combined effect of PNPLA3, TM6SF2, and its metabolic associations in patients with (JSG-NAFLD). The novel cutoff points for the FIB4
and HSD17B13 variants on risk of cirrhosis and type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes. Diabetes index categorized by age increase the diagnostic
hepatocellular carcinoma in the general population. Obes Metab 2017;19:1630–1634 accuracy in NAFLD: a multi-center study. J
Hepatology 2020;72:845–856
82. Arab JP, Dirchwolf M, Alvares-da-Silva MR, Gastroenterol 2018;53:1216–1224
68. Stender S, Kozlitina J, Nordestgaard BG, et al. Latin American Association for the Study 98. Vali Y, Lee J, Boursier J, et al.; LITMUS
Tybjærg-Hansen A, Hobbs HH, Cohen JC. Adiposity of the Liver (ALEH) practice guidance for the Systematic Review Team. Enhanced liver fibrosis
amplifies the genetic risk of fatty liver disease diagnosis and treatment of non-alcoholic fatty test for the non-invasive diagnosis of fibrosis in
conferred by multiple loci. Nat Genet 2017;49: liver disease. Ann Hepatol 2020;19:674–690 patients with NAFLD: a systematic review and
842–847 83. Eslam M, Sarin SK, Wong VWS, et al. The meta-analysis. J Hepatol 2020;73:252–262
69. Angulo P, Kleiner DE, Dam-Larsen S, et al. Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the 99. Castera L, Friedrich-Rust M, Loomba R.
Liver fibrosis, but no other histologic features, is Liver clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis Noninvasive assessment of liver disease in
113. Akbulut UE, Isik IA, Atalay A, et al. The 128. Kanwal F, Kramer JR, Li L, et al. Effect of content and abdominal adipose tissue in people
effect of a Mediterranean diet vs. a low-fat diet metabolic traits on the risk of cirrhosis and with type 2 diabetes (SURPASS-3 MRI): a
on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in children: a hepatocellular cancer in nonalcoholic fatty liver substudy of the randomised, open-label, parallel-
randomized trial. Int J Food Sci Nutr 2022;73: disease. Hepatology 2020;71:808–819 group, phase 3 SURPASS-3 trial. Lancet Diabetes
357–366 129. Younossi Z, Stepanova M, Sanyal AJ, et al. Endocrinol 2022;10:393–406
114. Koutoukidis DA, Koshiaris C, Henry JA, et al. The conundrum of cryptogenic cirrhosis: Adverse 145. Cusi K, Bril F, Barb D, et al. Effect of
The effect of the magnitude of weight loss on non- outcomes without treatment options. J Hepatol canagliflozin treatment on hepatic triglyceride
alcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review 2018;69:1365–1370 content and glucose metabolism in patients with
and meta-analysis. Metabolism 2021;115:154455 130. Patel Chavez C, Cusi K, Kadiyala S. The type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab 2019;21:
115. Promrat K, Kleiner DE, Niemeier HM, et al. emerging role of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor 812–821
Randomized controlled trial testing the effects agonists for the management of NAFLD. J Clin 146. Kahl S, Gancheva S, Straßburger K, et al.
of weight loss on nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Endocrinol Metab 2022;107:29–38 Empagliflozin effectively lowers liver fat content
Hepatology 2010;51:121–129 131. Gastaldelli A, Cusi K. From NASH to diabetes in well-controlled type 2 diabetes: a randomized,
116. Vilar-Gomez E, Martinez-Perez Y, Calzadilla- and from diabetes to NASH: mechanisms and double-blind, phase 4, placebo-controlled trial.
Bertot L, et al. Weight loss through lifestyle treatment options. JHEP Rep 2019;1:312–328 Diabetes Care 2020;43:298–305
159. Roberts CM, Levi M, McKee M, Schilling R, 175. Violant-Holz V, Gallego-Jimenez MG, delivery and non-COVID-19-related mortality in
Lim WS, Grocott MPW. COVID-19: a complex multi- Gonzalez-Gonzalez CS, et al. Psychological health people with diabetes in England during the COVID-19
system disorder. Br J Anaesth 2020;125:238–242 and physical activity levels during the COVID-19 pandemic: a population-based parallel cohort study.
160. Chudasama YV, Zaccardi F, Gillies CL, et al. pandemic: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2022;10:561–570
Patterns of multimorbidity and risk of severe Public Health 2020;17:E9419 189. DiabetesontheNet. How to undertake a remote
SARS-CoV-2 infection: an observational study in 176. Alessi J, Scherer GDLG, Erthal IN, et al. One diabetes review. Accessed 29 August 2022. Available
the U.K. BMC Infect Dis 2021;21:908 in ten patients with diabetes have suicidal from https://diabetesonthenet.com/diabetes-primary-
161. Holman N, Knighton P, Kar P, et al. Risk thoughts after 1 year of the COVID-19 pandemic: care/how-undertake-remote-diabetes-review/
factors for COVID-19-related mortality in people we need to talk about diabetes and mental health 190. Nagi D, Wilmot E, Owen K, et al. ABCD
with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in England: a not only during Suicide Prevention Awareness position statement on risk stratification of adult
population-based cohort study. Lancet Diabetes Month. Acta Diabetol 2022;59:143–145 patients with diabetes during COVID-19 pandemic.
Endocrinol 2020;8:823–833 177. Chao AM, Wadden TA, Clark JM, et al. British Journal of Diabetes. 2021;21:123–131
162. Martin CA, Jenkins DR, Minhas JS, et al.; Changes in the prevalence of symptoms of 191. Alessi J, de Oliveira GB, Franco DW, et al.
Leicester COVID-19 consortium. Socio-demographic depression, loneliness, and insomnia in U.S. Telehealth strategy to mitigate the negative
heterogeneity in the prevalence of COVID-19 older adults with type 2 diabetes during the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic
204. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 207. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis vaccines:
(CDC). Use of hepatitis B vaccination for adults (CDC); Advisory Committee on Immunization updated recommendations of the Advisory
with diabetes mellitus: recommendations of the Practices. Updated recommendations for prevention Committee on Immunization Practices—United
Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of invasive pneumococcal disease among adults States, 2019. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
(ACIP). MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2011;60: using the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide 2020;69:77–83
1709–1711 vaccine (PPSV23). MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 210. Dooling KL, Guo A, Patel M, et al. Re-
205. Meites E, Szilagyi PG, Chesson HW, Unger ER, 2010;59:1102–1106. commendations of the Advisory Committee on
Romero JR, Markowitz LE. Human papillomavirus 208. Falkenhorst G, Remschmidt C, Harder T, Immunization Practices for use of herpes zoster
vaccination for adults: updated recommendations Hummers-Pradier E, Wichmann O, Bogdan C. vaccines. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Effectiveness of the 23-valent pneumococcal 2018;67:103–108
Practices. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2019;68: polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23) against pneu- 211. Davies MJ, Aroda VR, Collins BS, et al.
698–702 mococcal disease in the elderly: systematic Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes,
206. Demicheli V, Jefferson T, Di Pietrantonj C, review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2017; 2022. A consensus report by the American
et al. Vaccines for preventing influenza in the 12:e0169368 Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European
elderly. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018;2: 209. Havers FP, Moro PL, Hunter P, Hariri S, Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD).
and/or when not meeting treat- needs, goals, and life experiences of the 4. When transitions in life and care
ment targets, when complicating person with diabetes. Health care profes- occur
factors develop (medical, physi- sionals are encouraged to consider the
cal, psychosocial), and when tran- burden of treatment (9) and the person’s DSMES focuses on empowering indi-
sitions in life and care occur. E level of confidence and self-efficacy for viduals with diabetes by providing people
5.3 Clinical outcomes, health status, management behaviors as well as the with diabetes the tools to make informed
level of social and family support when self-management decisions (15). DSMES
and well-being are key goals of
providing DSMES. An individual’s engage- should be person-centered. This is an
diabetes self-management edu-
ment in self-management behaviors and approach that places the person with dia-
cation and support that should
the effects on clinical outcomes, health betes and their family and/or support
be measured as part of routine
status, and quality of life, as well as the system at the center of the care model,
care. C
psychosocial factors impacting the per- working in collaboration with health care
5.4 Diabetes self-management educa-
increased patient engagement (62), al- to include social determinants of health to be instrumental for improving out-
though data from trials are consider- (SDOH) of the target population in guid- comes when it is implemented after the
ably heterogeneous. ing design and delivery of DSMES. The completion of education services. DSMES
Technology-enabled diabetes self- DSMES team should take into account is frequently reimbursed when performed
management solutions improve A1C demographic characteristics such as race, in person. However, although DSMES can
most effectively when there is two-way ethnic/cultural background, sex/gender, also be provided via phone calls and tele-
communication between the person with age, geographic location, technology ac- health, these remote versions may not
diabetes and the health care team, cess, education, literacy, and numeracy always be reimbursed (13). Medicare re-
individualized feedback, use of person- (43,79). imburses remote physiologic monitoring
generated health data, and education Despite the benefits of DSMES, reports for glucose and other cardiometabolic
(46). Continuous glucose monitoring, indicate that only 5–7% of individuals eli- data if certain conditions are met (83).
when combined with individualized diabe- gible for DSMES through Medicare or a Changes in reimbursement policies that
with type 1 diabetes (97) and 0.3–2.0% weight and improve clinical indicators. (105,116) but has long-term benefits;
for people with type 2 diabetes (97). There is strong and consistent evidence maintaining weight loss for 5 years is
See Table 5.1 for specific nutrition rec- that modest, sustained weight loss can associated with sustained improvements
ommendations. Because of the progres- delay the progression from prediabetes in A1C and lipid levels (117). MNT guid-
sive nature of type 2 diabetes, behavior to type 2 diabetes (97–99) (see Section 3, ance from an RDN with expertise in
modification alone may not be adequate “Prevention or Delay of Type 2 Diabetes diabetes and weight management through-
to maintain euglycemia over time. How- and Associated Comorbidities”) and is out the course of a structured weight
ever, after medication is initiated, nutrition beneficial for the management of type 2 loss plan is strongly recommended.
therapy continues to be an important diabetes (see Section 8, “Obesity and Along with routine medical manage-
component, and RDNs providing MNT in Weight Management for the Prevention ment visits, people with diabetes and
diabetes care should assess and monitor and Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes”). prediabetes should be screened during
medication changes in relation to the In prediabetes, the weight loss goal is DSMES and MNT encounters for a history
desired energy deficit (126–129). Any ap- Referral to an RDN is essential to as- carbohydrate counting) were effective
proach to meal planning should be indi- sess the overall nutrition status of, and in helping achieve improved A1C (145).
vidualized, considering the health status, to work collaboratively with, the person The diabetes plate method is a com-
personal preferences, and ability of the with diabetes to create a personalized monly used visual approach for provid-
person with diabetes to sustain the rec- meal plan that coordinates and aligns ing basic meal planning guidance. This
ommendations in the plan. with the overall treatment plan, includ- simple graphic (featuring a 9-inch plate)
ing physical activity and medication use. shows how to portion foods (1/2 of the
Eating Patterns and Meal Planning The Mediterranean (130,134–136), low- plate for nonstarchy vegetables, 1/4 of
Evidence suggests that there is not an carbohydrate (137–139), and vegetarian the plate for protein, and 1/4 of the
ideal percentage of calories from carbo- or plant-based (135,136,140,141) eating plate for carbohydrates). Carbohydrate
hydrate, protein, and fat for people patterns are all examples of healthful eat- counting is a more advanced skill that
with diabetes. Therefore, macronutrient ing patterns that have shown positive re- helps plan for and track how much carbo-
(156,157). The literature concerning gly- studies, which further complicates evalu- minimize intake of refined carbohydrates
cemic index and glycemic load in indi- ating the distinct contribution of the eat- with added sugars, fat, and sodium and
viduals with diabetes is complex, often ing pattern (47,121,125,167). instead focus on carbohydrates from veg-
with varying definitions of low- and high- The quality of carbohydrate and/or etables, legumes, fruits, dairy (milk and
glycemic-index foods (158,159). The gly- what is absent from the diet may contrib- yogurt), and whole grains. People with di-
cemic index ranks carbohydrate foods on ute to confounding results. However, abetes and those at risk for diabetes are
their postprandial glycemic response, and when core dimensions of the comparative encouraged to consume a minimum of
glycemic load takes into account both diets are similar, there is little difference 14 g of fiber/1,000 kcal, with at least half
the glycemic index of foods and the in outcome measures. When Gardner et of grain consumption being whole, intact
amount of carbohydrate eaten. Studies al. (168) tested a low-carbohydrate keto- grains, according to the Dietary Guidelines
have found mixed results regarding the genic diet and a low-carbohydrate Medi- for Americans (172). Regular intake of suf-
effect of glycemic index and glycemic terranean diet, in a randomized crossover ficient dietary fiber is associated with
better insulin coverage for high-fat and/or In individuals with type 2 diabetes, compared with placebo, supplementation
high-protein mixed meals (185,192). protein intake may enhance or increase with n-3 fatty acids at the dose of
The effectiveness of insulin dosing the insulin response to dietary carbohy- 1 g/day did not lead to cardiovascular
decisions should be confirmed with a drates (199). Therefore, use of carbohy- benefit in people with diabetes without
structured approach to blood glucose drate sources high in protein (e.g., nuts) evidence of CVD (212). However, results
monitoring or continuous glucose moni- to treat or prevent hypoglycemia should from the Reduction of Cardiovascular
toring to evaluate individual responses be avoided due to the potential concur- Events With Icosapent Ethyl–Interven-
and guide insulin dose adjustments. rent rise in endogenous insulin. Health tion Trial (REDUCE-IT) found that supple-
Checking glucose 3 h after eating may care professionals should counsel pa- mentation with 4 g/day of pure EPA
help to determine if additional insulin tients to treat hypoglycemia with pure significantly lowered the risk of adverse
adjustments are required (i.e., increas- glucose (i.e., glucose tablets) or carbo- cardiovascular events. This trial of 8,179
ing or stopping bolus) (185,192,193). hydrate-containing foods at the hypogly- participants, in which over 50% had dia-
concern related to long-term safety. Based public, including people with diabetes over at least 3 days/week, with
on the recent U.S. Preventative Services (70,227). For some people with diabetes no more than 2 consecutive
Task Force statement, the harms of who are accustomed to regularly consum- days without activity. Shorter du-
b-carotene outweigh the benefits for the ing sugar-sweetened products, nonnutri- rations (minimum 75 min/week)
prevention of CVD or cancer. b-Carotene tive sweeteners (containing few or no
of vigorous-intensity or interval
was significantly associated with increased calories) may be an acceptable substitute
training may be sufficient for
lung cancer and cardiovascular mortality for nutritive sweeteners (those containing
younger and more physically fit
risk (219). calories, such as sugar, honey, and agave
individuals.
In addition, there is insufficient evidence syrup) when consumed in moderation
5.30 Adults with type 1 diabetes C
to support the routine use of herbal sup- (228,229). Nonnutritive sweeteners do
and type 2 diabetes B should
plements and micronutrients, such as cin- not appear to have a significant effect on
glycemic management (97,230,231), and engage in 2–3 sessions/week of
namon (220), curcumin, vitamin D (221), resistance exercise on noncon-
they can reduce overall calorie and carbo-
Objective measurement by accelerome- with diabetes (251). The ADA position ketoacidosis, retinopathy, and microalbu-
ter in 871 individuals with type 2 diabe- statement “Physical Activity/Exercise and minuria (260). Over time, activities should
tes showed that 44.2%, 42.6%, and Diabetes” reviews the evidence for the progress in intensity, frequency, and/
65.1% of White, African American, and benefits of exercise in people with type 1 or duration to at least 150 min/week
Hispanic individuals, respectively, met and type 2 diabetes and offers specific rec- of moderate-intensity exercise. Adults
the recommended threshold of exercise ommendations (252). Increased physical able to run at 6 miles/h (9.7 km/h) for at
(241). An RCT in 1,366 individuals with activity (soccer training) has also been least 25 min can benefit sufficiently from
prediabetes combined a physical activity shown to be beneficial for improving shorter-intensity activity (75 min/week)
intervention with text messaging and tele- overall fitness in Latino men with obe- (252). Many adults, including most with
phone support, which showed improve- sity, demonstrating feasible methods to type 2 diabetes, may be unable or un-
ment in daily step count at 12 months increase physical activity in an often willing to participate in such intense ex-
compared with the control group. Un- hard-to-engage population (253). Physical ercise and should engage in moderate
Physical Activity and Glycemic injury, such as uncontrolled hyperten- contraindicated because of the risk of
Management sion, untreated proliferative retinopathy, triggering vitreous hemorrhage or reti-
Clinical trials have provided strong evi- autonomic neuropathy, peripheral neu- nal detachment (274). Consultation
dence for the A1C-lowering value of resis- ropathy, and a history of foot ulcers or with an ophthalmologist prior to engag-
tance training in older adults with type 2 Charcot foot. Age and previous physical ing in an intense exercise plan may be
diabetes (252) and for an additive benefit activity level should be considered when appropriate.
of combined aerobic and resistance exer- customizing the exercise plan to the indi-
cise in adults with type 2 diabetes (271). vidual’s needs. Those with complications Peripheral Neuropathy
If not contraindicated, people with type 2 may need a more thorough evaluation Decreased pain sensation and a higher
diabetes should be encouraged to do at prior to starting an exercise program pain threshold in the extremities can
least two weekly sessions of resistance (247). result in an increased risk of skin break-
exercise (exercise with free weights or down, infection, and Charcot joint de-
weight machines), with each session con-
SMOKING CESSATION: TOBACCO was associated with amelioration of meta- planning (305,307–309), problem-solving
AND E-CIGARETTES bolic parameters and reduced blood pres- (308,310), tracking or self-monitoring
sure and albuminuria at 1 year (293). health behaviors with or without feedback
Recommendations
In recent years, e-cigarettes have from a health care professional (305,307–
5.34 Advise all individuals not to use
gained public awareness and popularity 309), and facilitating opportunities for so-
cigarettes and other tobacco
because of perceptions that e-cigarette cial support (305,308,309). Multicompo-
products or e-cigarettes. A nent intervention packages have the
use is less harmful than regular cigarette
5.35 After identification of tobacco or highest efficacy for behavioral and glyce-
smoking (294,295). However, in light of
e-cigarette use, include smoking mic outcomes (300,309,311). For youth
recent Centers for Disease Control and
cessation counseling and other with diabetes, family-based behavioral
Prevention evidence (296) of deaths re-
forms of treatment as a routine intervention packages and multisystem
lated to e-cigarette use, no individuals
component of diabetes care. A interventions that facilitate health be-
should be advised to use e-cigarettes, ei-
5.36 Address smoking cessation as havior change demonstrate benefit for
treatment for symptoms of dia- referral to appropriate services (324,325). problems with achieving A1C goals, quality
betes distress, depression, suici- Various health care professionals working of life, or self-management are identified.
dality, anxiety, treatment-related with people with diabetes may contrib- People with diabetes are likely to exhibit
fear of hypoglycemia, disordered ute to psychosocial care in different ways psychological vulnerability at diagnosis,
based on training, experience, need, and when their medical status changes (e.g.,
eating, and/or cognitive capaci-
availability (313,326,327). Ideally, quali- end of the honeymoon period), when the
ties. Such specialized psycho-
social care should use age- fied mental health professionals with need for intensified treatment is evident,
specialized training and experience in and when complications are discovered.
appropriate standardized and
diabetes should be integrated with or Significant changes in life circumstances
validated tools and treatment
provide collaborative care as part of dia- and SDOH are known to considerably af-
approaches. B
betes care teams (328–331), or referrals fect a person’s ability to self-manage their
5.41 Consider screening older adults
for in-depth assessment and treatment condition. Thus, screening for SDOH (e.g.,
(aged $65 years) with diabetes
Table 5.2—Situations that warrant referral of a person with diabetes to a qualified behavioral or mental health professional
for evaluation and treatment
A positive screen on a validated screening tool for depressive symptoms, diabetes distress, anxiety, fear of hypoglycemia, or cognitive
impairment
The presence of symptoms or suspicions of disordered eating behavior, an eating disorder, or disrupted patterns of eating
Intentional omission of insulin or oral medication to cause weight loss is identified
A serious mental illness is suspected
In youth and families with behavioral self-care difficulties, repeated hospitalizations for diabetic ketoacidosis, failure to achieve expected
developmental milestones, or significant distress
Declining or impaired ability to perform diabetes self-care behaviors
Before undergoing bariatric or metabolic surgery and after surgery, if assessment reveals an ongoing need for adjustment support
distress is identified, it should be ac- compared with diabetes education (353) diabetes-specific concern is fears related
knowledged and addressed. If indicated, in teens with type 1 diabetes showed to hypoglycemia (375,376), which may
the person should be referred for follow- that diabetes distress and depressive explain avoidance of behaviors associ-
up care (333). This may include specific symptoms were significantly reduced for ated with lowering glucose, such as in-
diabetes education to address areas of up to 3 years post-intervention, though creasing insulin doses or frequency of
diabetes self-care causing distress and neither A1C nor self-management behav- monitoring. Other common sources of
impacting clinical management and/or iors improved over time. These recent diabetes-related anxiety include not meet-
behavioral intervention from a qualified studies support that a combination of ed- ing blood glucose targets (373), insulin in-
mental health professional, ideally with ucational, behavioral, and psychological jections or infusion (377), and onset of
expertise in diabetes, or from another intervention approaches is needed to ad- complications (1). People with diabetes
trained health care professional. Several dress distress, depression, and A1C. who exhibit excessive diabetes self-man-
educational and behavioral intervention As with treatment of other diabetes- agement behaviors well beyond what is
prescribed or needed to achieve glyce-
all people with diabetes, espe- have been shown to improve both de- disease physiology, treatments for
cially those with a self-reported pression and medical outcomes (392). diabetes and disordered eating
history of depression. Use age- Depressive symptoms may also be a man- behaviors, and weight-related
appropriate, validated depression ifestation of reduced quality of life sec- and psychological risk factors for
ondary to disease burden (also see DIABETES disordered eating behaviors. B
screening measures, recognizing
DISTRESS, above) and resultant changes in
that further evaluation will be
resource allocation impacting the person
necessary for individuals who
and their family. When depressive symp- Estimated prevalence of disordered eat-
have a positive screen. B
toms are identified, it is important to ing behavior and diagnosable eating dis-
5.46 Beginning at diagnosis of compli-
query origins, both diabetes-specific and orders in people with diabetes varies
cations or when there are signif-
due to other life circumstances (363,393). (399–401). For people with type 1 dia-
icant changes in medical status, Trials have shown consistent evidence betes, insulin omission causing glycos-
consider assessment for depres-
needed (410). Health care teams may 5.51 In people who are prescribed Serious mental illness is often associated
consider the appropriateness of technol- atypical antipsychotic medica- with the inability to evaluate and utilize
ogy use among people with diabetes and information to make judgments about
tions, screen for prediabetes
disordered eating behaviors, although treatment options. When a person has
and diabetes 4 months after an established diagnosis of a mental ill-
more research on the risks and benefits is medication initiation and sooner ness that impacts judgment, activities of
needed (411). Caution should be taken in if clinically indicated, at least daily living, and ability to establish a col-
labeling individuals with diabetes as hav- annually. B laborative relationship with care profes-
ing a diagnosable psychiatric disorder, 5.52 If a second-generation antipsy- sionals, it is wise to include a nonmedical
i.e., an eating disorder, when disordered chotic medication is prescribed caretaker in decision-making regarding
or disrupted eating patterns are found to for adolescents or adults with the medical treatment plan. This person
be associated with the disease and its diabetes, changes in weight, can help improve the patient’s ability to
treatment. In other words, patterns of glycemia, and cholesterol levels follow the agreed-upon treatment plan
Figure 5.1—Importance of 24-h physical behaviors for type 2 diabetes. Reprinted from Davies et al. (88).
whether the person can collaborate with When this ability is shown to be altered, day-to-day monitoring as well as a liaison
the care team to achieve optimal meta- declining, or absent, a lay care profes- with the rest of the care team (1). Cogni-
bolic outcomes and prevent complica- sional should be introduced into the care tive capacity also contributes to ability
tions, both short and long term (416). team who serves in the capacities of to benefit from diabetes education and
S86 Facilitating Positive Health Behaviors and Well-being Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
may indicate the need for alternative type 2 diabetes (430,431) and possibly 3. Rutten GEHM, Alzaid A. Person-centred type 2
teaching approaches as well as remote gestational diabetes mellitus (432,433). diabetes care: time for a paradigm shift. Lancet
Diabetes Endocrinol 2018;6:264–266
monitoring. Youth will need second-party Moreover, sleep disturbances are asso- 4. Dickinson JK, Guzman SJ, Maryniuk MD, et al.
monitoring (e.g., parents and adult care- ciated with less engagement in diabetes The use of language in diabetes care and
givers) until they are developmentally self-management and may interfere education. Diabetes Care 2017;40:1790–1799
able to evaluate necessary information with the achievement of glycemic tar- 5. Fisher L, Hessler D, Glasgow RE, et al.
for self-management decisions and to in- gets among people with type 1 and REDEEM: a pragmatic trial to reduce diabetes
distress. Diabetes Care 2013;36:2551–2558
form resultant behavior changes. type 2 diabetes (434–439). Disrupted 6. Huang Y, Wei X, Wu T, Chen R, Guo A.
Episodes of severe hypoglycemia are sleep and sleep disorders, including ob- Collaborative care for patients with depression
independently associated with decline, structive sleep apnea (440), insomnia, and diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and
as well as the more immediate symp- and sleep disturbances (435), are com- meta-analysis. BMC Psychiatry 2013;13:260
toms of mental confusion (428). Early- mon among people with diabetes. In 7. Hill-Briggs F. Problem solving in diabetes self-
management: a model of chronic illness self-
on glycemic control and diabetes-specific quality diabetes care in socially disadvantaged populations. 51. Dening J, Islam SMS, George E, Maddison R.
of life. Diabetes Care 2013;36:270–272 Diabetes Care 2006;29:1675–1688 Web-based interventions for dietary behavior in
20. Chrvala CA, Sherr D, Lipman RD. Diabetes 35. Hawthorne K, Robles Y, Cannings-John R, adults with type 2 diabetes: systematic review of
self-management education for adults with type 2 Edwards AGK. Culturally appropriate health randomized controlled trials. J Med Internet Res
diabetes mellitus: a systematic review of the education for type 2 diabetes mellitus in ethnic 2020;22:e16437
effect on glycemic control. Patient Educ Couns minority groups. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 52. Anderson A, O’Connell SS, Thomas C,
2016;99:926–943 1996;3:CD006424 Chimmanamada R. Telehealth interventions to
21. Marincic PZ, Salazar MV, Hardin A, et al. 36. Chodosh J, Morton SC, Mojica W, et al. improve diabetes management among Black and
Diabetes self-management education and medical Meta-analysis: chronic disease self-management Hispanic patients: a systematic review and meta-
nutrition therapy: a multisite study documenting programs for older adults. Ann Intern Med analysis. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities 2022;
the efficacy of registered dietitian nutritionist 2005;143:427–438 9:2375–2386
interventions in the management of glycemic 37. Sarkisian CA, Brown AF, Norris KC, Wintz RL, 53. Sherifali D, Brozic A, Agema P, et al. Effect of
control and diabetic dyslipidemia through retro- Mangione CM. A systematic review of diabetes diabetes health coaching on glycemic control and
spective chart review. J Acad Nutr Diet 2019;119: self-care interventions for older, African American, quality of life in adults living with type 2 diabetes:
449–463 or Latino adults. Diabetes Educ 2003;29:467–479 a community-based, randomized, controlled trial.
toring in very young children with type 1 diabetes. management training benefit. Health Educ Behav Health; Council on Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis and
Diabetes Care 2021;44:464–472 2015;42:530–538 Vascular Biology; Council on Clinical Cardiology;
65. Isaacs D, Cox C, Schwab K, et al. Technology 81. Horigan G, Davies M, Findlay-White F, and Council on Hypertension. Comprehensive
integration: the role of the diabetes care and Chaney D, Coates V. Reasons why patients management of cardiovascular risk factors for
education specialist in practice. Diabetes Educ referred to diabetes education programmes adults with type 2 diabetes: a scientific statement
2020;46:323–334 choose not to attend: a systematic review. Diabet from the American Heart Association. Circulation
66. Scalzo P. From the Association of Diabetes Med 2016 2022;145:e722–e759
Care & Education Specialists: the role of the 82. Carey ME, Agarwal S, Horne R, Davies M, 94. Davies MJ, D’Alessio DA, Fradkin J, et al.
diabetes care and education specialist as a Slevin M, Coates V. Exploring organizational Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes,
champion of technology integration. Sci Diabetes support for the provision of structured self- 2018. A consensus report by the American
Self Manag Care 2021;47:120–123 management education for people with type 2 Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European
67. Greenwood DA, Litchman ML, Isaacs D, et al. diabetes: findings from a qualitative study. Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD).
A new taxonomy for technology-enabled diabetes Diabet Med 2019;36:761–770 Diabetes Care 2018;41:2669–2701
self-management interventions: results of an 83. Department of Health and Human Services. 95. Briggs Early K, Stanley K. Position of the
umbrella review. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2021;16: Telehealth.HHS.gov. Telehealth and remote Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: the role of
106. Lean ME, Leslie WS, Barnes AC, et al. Primary Investigators. Primary prevention of cardiovascular of prospective studies. Am J Clin Nutr 2017;105:
care-led weight management for remission of disease with a Mediterranean diet supplemented 1462–1473
type 2 diabetes (DiRECT): an open-label, cluster- with extra-virgin olive oil or nuts. N Engl J Med 132. Benson G, Hayes J. An update on the
randomised trial. Lancet 2018;391:541–551 2018;378:e34 Mediterranean, vegetarian, and DASH eating
107. Wing RR, Lang W, Wadden TA, et al.; Look 121. Saslow LR, Daubenmier JJ, Moskowitz JT, patterns in people with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes
AHEAD Research Group. Benefits of modest et al. Twelve-month outcomes of a randomized Spectr 2020;33:125–132
weight loss in improving cardiovascular risk factors trial of a moderate-carbohydrate versus very low- 133. Hager ER, Quigg AM, Black MM, et al.
in overweight and obese individuals with type 2 carbohydrate diet in overweight adults with type 2 Development and validity of a 2-item screen to
diabetes. Diabetes Care 2011;34:1481–1486 diabetes mellitus or prediabetes. Nutr Diabetes identify families at risk for food insecurity.
108. Look AHEAD Research Group. Does lifestyle 2017;7:304 Pediatrics 2010;126:e26–e32
intervention improve health of adults with 122. Yancy WS, Crowley MJ, Dar MS, et al. 134. Esposito K, Maiorino MI, Ciotola M, et al.
overweight/obesity and type 2 diabetes? Findings Comparison of group medical visits combined Effects of a Mediterranean-style diet on the need
from the Look AHEAD randomized trial. Obesity with intensive weight management vs group for antihyperglycemic drug therapy in patients with
(Silver Spring) 2021;29:1246–1258 medical visits alone for glycemia in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: a randomized
109. Garvey WT. Long-term health benefits of type 2 diabetes: a noninferiority randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:306–314
in-adults-with-diabetes-a-guide-for-health-care- 159. Wheeler ML, Dunbar SA, Jaacks LM, et al. sites/default/files/2020-12/Dietary_Guidelines_
providers Macronutrients, food groups, and eating patterns for_Americans_2020-2025.pdf
145. Bowen ME, Cavanaugh KL, Wolff K, et al. The in the management of diabetes: a systematic 173. He M, van Dam RM, Rimm E, Hu FB, Qi L.
diabetes nutrition education study randomized review of the literature, 2010. Diabetes Care Whole-grain, cereal fiber, bran, and germ intake
controlled trial: a comparative effectiveness study 2012;35:434–445 and the risks of all-cause and cardiovascular
of approaches to nutrition in diabetes self- 160. Vega-L opez S, Venn BJ, Slavin JL. Relevance disease-specific mortality among women with
management education. Patient Educ Couns 2016; of the glycemic index and glycemic load for body type 2 diabetes mellitus. Circulation 2010;121:
99:1368–1376 weight, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. 2162–2168
146. Truman E, Lane D, Elliott C. Defining food Nutrients 2018;10:E1361 174. Burger KNJ, Beulens JWJ, van der Schouw
literacy: a scoping review. Appetite 2017;116: 161. Thomas D, Elliott EJ. Low glycaemic index, or YT, et al. Dietary fiber, carbohydrate quality and
365–371 low glycaemic load, diets for diabetes mellitus. quantity, and mortality risk of individuals with
147. Food Literacy Center. What is food literacy? Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;2009:CD006296 diabetes mellitus. PLoS One 2012;7:e43127
Accessed 31 August 2021. Available from https:// 162. Chiavaroli L, Lee D, Ahmed A, Cheung A, 175. Partula V, Deschasaux M, Druesne-Pecollo
www.foodliteracycenter.org/about Khan TA, Blanco S, et al. Effect of low glycaemic N, Latino-Martel P, Desmetz E, Chazelas E, et al.
148. Jamshed H, Steger FL, Bryan DR, et al. index or load dietary patterns on glycaemic Associations between consumption of dietary
open-loop diabetes management. Diabetes Care 200. Ros E. Dietary cis-monounsaturated fatty 215. Ekinci EI, Clarke S, Thomas MC, et al.
2016;39:1631–1634 acids and metabolic control in type 2 diabetes. Dietary salt intake and mortality in patients with
186. Smart CEM, Evans M, O’Connell SM, et al. Am J Clin Nutr 2003;78(Suppl.):617S–625S type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2011;34:703–709
Both dietary protein and fat increase postprandial 201. Forouhi NG, Imamura F, Sharp SJ, et al. 216. Lennon SL, DellaValle DM, Rodder SG, et al.
glucose excursions in children with type 1 Association of plasma phospholipid n-3 and n-6 2015 Evidence analysis library evidence-based
diabetes, and the effect is additive. Diabetes Care polyunsaturated fatty acids with type 2 diabetes: nutrition practice guideline for the management
2013;36:3897–3902 the EPIC-InterAct case-cohort study. PLoS Med of hypertension in adults. J Acad Nutr Diet 2017;
187. Smith TA, Smart CE, Howley PP, Lopez PE, 2016;13:e1002094 117:1445–1458.e17
King BR. For a high fat, high protein breakfast, 202. Wang DD, Li Y, Chiuve SE, et al. Association 217. Maillot M, Drewnowski A. A conflict
preprandial administration of 125% of the insulin of specific dietary fats with total and cause- between nutritionally adequate diets and meet-
dose improves postprandial glycaemic excursions specific mortality. JAMA Intern Med 2016;176: ing the 2010 dietary guidelines for sodium. Am J
in people with type 1 diabetes using multiple 1134–1145 Prev Med 2012;42:174–179
daily injections: a cross-over trial. Diabet Med 203. Brehm BJ, Lattin BL, Summer SS, et al. One- 218. Aroda VR, Edelstein SL, Goldberg RB, et al.;
2021;38:e14512 year comparison of a high-monounsaturated fat Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group.
188. Paterson MA, Smart CEM, Lopez PE, et al. diet with a high-carbohydrate diet in type 2 Long-term metformin use and vitamin B12
beverages and cardiometabolic health: a science prediabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Telemed 259. Little JP, Gillen JB, Percival ME, et al. Low-
advisory from the American Heart Association. J E Health 2022;28:896–903 volume high-intensity interval training reduces
Circulation 2018;138:e126–e140 244. Sluik D, Buijsse B, Muckelbauer R, et al. hyperglycemia and increases muscle mitochondrial
230. Grotz VL, Pi-Sunyer X, Porte D Jr, Roberts A, Physical activity and mortality in individuals with capacity in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Appl
Richard Trout J. A 12-week randomized clinical trial diabetes mellitus: a prospective study and meta- Physiol 2011;111:1554–1560
investigating the potential for sucralose to affect analysis. Arch Intern Med 2012;172:1285–1295 260. Bohn B, Herbst A, Pfeifer M, et al.; DPV
glucose homeostasis. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 245. Tikkanen-Dolenc H, Waden J, Forsblom C, Initiative. Impact of physical activity on glycemic
2017;88:22–33 et al.; FinnDiane Study Group. Physical activity control and prevalence of cardiovascular risk
231. Lohner S, Kuellenberg de Gaudry D, Toews I, reduces risk of premature mortality in patients factors in adults with type 1 diabetes: a cross-
Ferenci T, Meerpohl JJ. Non-nutritive sweeteners with type 1 diabetes with and without kidney sectional multicenter study of 18,028 patients.
for diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev disease. Diabetes Care 2017;40:1727–1732 Diabetes Care 2015;38:1536–1543
2020;5:CD012885 246. Boule NG, Haddad E, Kenny GP, Wells GA, 261. U.S. Department of Health and Human
232. Sylvetsky AC, Chandran A, Talegawkar SA, Sigal RJ. Effects of exercise on glycemic control Services. Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans,
Welsh JA, Drews K, El Ghormli L. Consumption of and body mass in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a 2nd ed. Accessed 19 October 2022. Available from
beverages containing low-calorie sweeteners, meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials. JAMA https://health.gov/sites/default/files/2019-09/
275. Lemaster JW, Reiber GE, Smith DG, 291. Tian J, Venn A, Otahal P, Gall S. The on type 2 diabetes mellitus glycemic control and
Heagerty PJ, Wallace C. Daily weight-bearing association between quitting smoking and weight self-management behaviors: a systematic review
activity does not increase the risk of diabetic foot gain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of of RCTs. Prim Care Diabetes 2020;14:12–20
ulcers. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003;35:1093–1099 prospective cohort studies. Obes Rev 2015;16: 307. Rosales CB, Denman CA, Bell ML, et al.
276. Smith AG, Russell J, Feldman EL, et al. 883–901 Meta Salud Diabetes for cardiovascular disease
Lifestyle intervention for pre-diabetic neuropathy. 292. Clair C, Rigotti NA, Porneala B, et al. prevention in Mexico: a cluster-randomized
Diabetes Care 2006;29:1294–1299 Association of smoking cessation and weight behavioural clinical trial. Int J Epidemiol 2021;50:
277. Spallone V, Ziegler D, Freeman R, et al.; change with cardiovascular disease among adults 1272–1282
Toronto Consensus Panel on Diabetic Neuropathy. with and without diabetes. JAMA 2013;309: 308. Gray KE, Hoerster KD, Taylor L, Krieger J,
Cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy in diabetes: 1014–1021 Nelson KM. Improvements in physical activity
clinical impact, assessment, diagnosis, and 293. Voulgari C, Katsilambros N, Tentolouris N. and some dietary behaviors in a community
management. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2011;27: Smoking cessation predicts amelioration of health worker-led diabetes self-management
639–653 microalbuminuria in newly diagnosed type 2 intervention for adults with low incomes: results
278. Pop-Busui R, Evans GW, Gerstein HC, et al.; diabetes mellitus: a 1-year prospective study. from a randomized controlled trial. Transl Behav
Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Metabolism 2011;60:1456–1464 Med 2021;11:2144–2154
pression in adults with diabetes: a meta-analysis. intervention to prevent or delay type 2 diabetes in 350. Nikkhah Ravari O, Mousavi SZ, Babak A.
Diabetes Care 2001;24:1069–1078 rural areas. J Acad Nutr Diet 2020;120:1163–1171 Evaluation of the effects of 12 weeks mindfulness-
321. Nicolucci A, Kovacs Burns K, Holt RIG, et al.; 336. T1D Exchange. Depression screening change based stress reduction on glycemic control and
DAWN2 Study Group. Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes package. Accessed 10 September 2022. Available mental health indices in women with diabetes
and Needs second study (DAWN2): cross- from https://t1dexchange.org/depression-screening- mellitus type 2. Adv Biomed Res 2020;9:61
national benchmarking of diabetes-related psy- change-package/ 351. Ni YX, Ma L, Li JP. Effects of mindfulness-
chosocial outcomes for people with diabetes. 337. Mulvaney SA, Mara CA, Kichler JC, et al. A based intervention on glycemic control and
Diabet Med 2013;30:767–777 retrospective multisite examination of depression psychological outcomes in people with diabetes:
322. Ducat L, Philipson LH, Anderson BJ. The screening practices, scores, and correlates in a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Diabetes
mental health comorbidities of diabetes. JAMA pediatric diabetes care. Transl Behav Med 2021; Investig 2021;12:1092–1103
2014;312:691–692 11:122–131 352. Hood KK, Iturralde E, Rausch J, Weissberg-
323. Guerrero Fernandez de Alba I, Gimeno- 338. Monaghan M, Mara CA, Kichler JC, et al. Benchell J. Preventing diabetes distress in
Miguel A, Poblador-Plou B, et al. Association Multisite examination of depression screening adolescents with type 1 diabetes: results 1 year
between mental health comorbidity and health scores and correlates among adolescents and after participation in the STePS Program. Diabetes
outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients. Sci young adults with type 2 diabetes. Can J Diabetes Care 2018;41:1623–1630
365. Sturt J, Dennick K, Hessler D, Hunter BM, symptoms among patients with depression and 396. Lu X, Yang D, Liang J, et al. Effectiveness of
Oliver J, Fisher L. Effective interventions for diabetes in India: the INDEPENDENT randomized intervention program on the change of glycaemic
reducing diabetes distress: systematic review and clinical trial. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2022;74:39–45 control in diabetes with depression patients: a
meta-analysis. International Diabetes Nursing. 381. Yeoh E, Choudhary P, Nwokolo M, Ayis S, meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies.
2015;12:40–55 Amiel SA. Interventions that restore awareness Prim Care Diabetes 2021;15:428–434
366. Ngan HY, Chong YY, Chien WT. Effects of of hypoglycemia in adults with type 1 diabetes: a 397. Varela-Moreno E, Carreira Soler M,
mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Guzman-Parra J, J odar-Sanchez F, Mayoral-
on diabetes distress and glycaemic level in people Care 2015;38:1592–1609 Cleries F, Anarte-Ortız MT. Effectiveness of
with type 2 diabetes: systematic review and meta- 382. Cox DJ, Gonder-Frederick L, Polonsky W, eHealth-based psychological interventions for
analysis. Diabet Med 2021;38:e14525 Schlundt D, Kovatchev B, Clarke W. Blood glucose depression treatment in patients with type 1 or
367. Presley C, Agne A, Shelton T, Oster R, awareness training (BGAT-2): long-term benefits. type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review.
Cherrington A. Mobile-enhanced peer support Diabetes Care 2001;24:637–642 Front Psychol 2022;12:746217
for African Americans with type 2 diabetes: a 383. Gonder-Frederick LA, Schmidt KM, Vajda 398. Mohammad Rahimi GR, Aminzadeh R,
randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med KA, et al. Psychometric properties of the Azimkhani A, Saatchian V. The effect of exercise
2020;35:2889–2896 hypoglycemia fear survey-ii for adults with type 1 interventions to improve psychosocial aspects and
411. Priesterroth L, Grammes J, Clauter M, association between diabetes and mental women: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Kubiak T. Diabetes technologies in people with disorders in a community sample: results Sleep Med 2020;67:47–55
type 1 diabetes mellitus and disordered eating: A from the German National Health Interview 433. Zhang X, Zhang R, Cheng L, et al. The effect
systematic review on continuous subcutaneous and Examination Survey. Diabetes Care 2003; of sleep impairment on gestational diabetes
insulin infusion, continuous glucose monitoring 26:1841–1846 mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis
and automated insulin delivery. Diabet Med 422. Biessels GJ, Whitmer RA. Cognitive of cohort studies. Sleep Med 2020;74:267–277
2021;38:e14581 dysfunction in diabetes: how to implement 434. Lee SWH, Ng KY, Chin WK. The impact of
412. Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG, emerging guidelines. Diabetologia 2020;63:3–9 sleep amount and sleep quality on glycemic
et al.; HOT Study Group. Effects of intensive 423. Brands AMA, Biessels GJ, de Haan EHF, control in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and
blood-pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in Kappelle LJ, Kessels RPC. The effects of type 1 meta-analysis. Sleep Med Rev 2017;31:91–101
patients with hypertension: principal results of diabetes on cognitive performance: a meta- 435. Barone MTU, Menna-Barreto L. Diabetes and
the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) analysis. Diabetes Care 2005;28:726–735 sleep: a complex cause-and-effect relationship.
randomised trial. Lancet 1998;351:1755–1762 424. Carmichael OT, Neiberg RH, Dutton GR, Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2011;91:129–137
413. van Bloemendaal L, IJzerman RG, Ten Kulve et al. Long-term change in physiological markers 436. Reutrakul S, Thakkinstian A, Anothaisintawee
JS, et al. GLP-1 receptor activation modulates and cognitive performance in type 2 diabetes: T, et al. Sleep characteristics in type 1 diabetes and
6. GLYCEMIC TARGETS
cludes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to
provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guide-
lines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional
Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for up-
dating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a de-
tailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the
evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full
list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction
and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are
invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.
Glycemic Assessment
Recommendations
6.1 Assess glycemic status (A1C or other glycemic measurement such as time Disclosure information for each author is
in range or glucose management indicator) at least two times a year in available at https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-SDIS.
patients who are meeting treatment goals (and who have stable glycemic Suggested citation: ElSayed NA, Aleppo G, Aroda
control). E VR, et al., American Diabetes Association. 6.
6.2 Assess glycemic status at least quarterly and as needed in patients whose Glycemic targets: Standards of Care in Diabetes—
2023. Diabetes Care 2023;46(Suppl. 1):S97–S110
therapy has recently changed and/or who are not meeting glycemic
goals. E © 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.
Readers may use this article as long as the
work is properly cited, the use is educational
and not for profit, and the work is not altered.
A1C reflects average glycemia over approximately 3 months. The performance of the More information is available at https://www.
test is generally excellent for National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program diabetesjournals.org/journals/pages/license.
S98 Glycemic Targets Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
(NGSP)-certified assays (ngsp.org). The most assays in use in the U.S. are accu-
Table 6.1—Estimated average glucose
test is the primary tool for assessing gly- rate in individuals who are heterozygous (eAG)
cemic control and has a strong predictive for the most common variants (ngsp.
A1C (%) mg/dL* mmol/L
value for diabetes complications (2–4). org/interf.asp). Other measures of aver-
5 97 (76–120) 5.4 (4.2–6.7)
Thus, A1C testing should be performed age glycemia such as fructosamine and
routinely in all people with diabetes at 1,5-anhydroglucitol are available, but 6 126 (100–152) 7.0 (5.5–8.5)
initial assessment and as part of continu- their translation into average glucose 7 154 (123–185) 8.6 (6.8–10.3)
ing care. Measurement approximately levels and their prognostic significance 8 183 (147–217) 10.2 (8.1–12.1)
every 3 months determines whether pa- are not as clear as for A1C and CGM.
tients’ glycemic targets have been reached Though some variability in the relation- 9 212 (170–249) 11.8 (9.4–13.9)
and maintained. A 14-day CGM assess- ship between average glucose levels 10 240 (193–282) 13.4 (10.7–15.7)
ment of TIR and GMI can serve as a and A1C exists among different individ- 11 269 (217–314) 14.9 (12.0–17.5)
70 Low 5%
54
10% Goal: <4% Glucose Variability ............................................ 45.5%
Very Low 5%
Goal: <36%
Goal: <1% Each 1% time in range = ~15 minutes
AGP is a summary of glucose values from the report period, with median (50%) and other percentiles shown as if they occurred in a single day.
350
mg/dL
95%
75%
250
50%
25%
180
Target
Range
70 5%
54
0
12am 3am 6am 9am 12pm 3pm 6pm 9pm 12am
180
70
180
70
Figure 6.1—Key points included in standard ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) report. Reprinted from Holt et al. (34).
diabetesjournals.org/care Glycemic Targets S101
assess hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, and parallel goal for many nonpreg- glycemic separation between the treat-
glycemic variability. As discussed in a re- nant adults is time in range of ment groups diminished and disap-
cent consensus document, a report for- peared during follow-up.
>70% with time below range
matted as shown in Fig. 6.1 can be The Kumamoto Study (44) and UK
<4% and time <54 mg/dL
generated (35). Published data from two Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS)
<1%. For those with frailty or
retrospective studies suggest a strong cor- (45,46) confirmed that intensive gly-
at high risk of hypoglycemia, a
relation between TIR and A1C, with a cemic control significantly decreased
target of >50% time in range
goal of 70% TIR aligning with an A1C of rates of microvascular complications
with <1% time below range
7% (8,26). Note the goals of therapy in people with short-duration type 2
is recommended. (See Fig. 6.1
next to each metric in Fig. 6.1 (e.g., low, diabetes. Long-term follow-up of the
and Table 6.2.) B
<4%; very low, <1%) as values to guide UKPDS cohorts showed enduring ef-
changes in therapy. 6.6 On the basis of health care
fects of early glycemic control on most
professional judgment and pa- microvascular complications (47).
Potentially modifiable
Patient preference betes being diagnosed at <40 years of
highly motivated, excellent preference for less
self-care capabilities burdensome therapy
age and a demonstrably increased bur-
den of heart disease and years of life
Resources and support
system
lost in people diagnosed at a younger
readily available limited age (57–60). Thus, to prevent both mi-
crovascular and macrovascular compli-
Figure 6.2—Patient and disease factors used to determine optimal glycemic targets. Character- cations of diabetes, there is a major call
istics and predicaments toward the left justify more stringent efforts to lower A1C; those to-
ward the right suggest less stringent efforts. A1C 7% = 53 mmol/mol. Adapted with permission to overcome therapeutic inertia and
from Inzucchi et al. (71). treat to target for an individual patient
(60,61). During the UKPDS, there was a
16% reduction in CVD events (combined
risk. These trials showed that lower higher versus lower A1C; therefore, fatal or nonfatal MI and sudden death)
A1C levels were associated with reduced beyond post hoc analysis of these tri- in the intensive glycemic control arm
onset or progression of some micro- als, we do not have evidence that it is that did not reach statistical significance
vascular complications (50–52). the glucose lowering by these agents that (P = 0.052), and there was no sugges-
The concerning mortality findings confers the CVD and renal benefit (53). tion of benefit on other CVD outcomes
in the ACCORD trial discussed below As such, based on clinician judgment and (e.g., stroke). Similar to the DCCT/EDIC,
and the relatively intense efforts re- patient preferences, select patients, espe- after 10 years of observational follow-
quired to achieve near euglycemia should cially those with little comorbidity and a up, those originally randomized to in-
also be considered when setting gly- long life expectancy, may benefit from tensive glycemic control had significant
cemic targets for individuals with long- adopting more intensive glycemic targets long-term reductions in MI (15% with
standing diabetes, such as those popula- if they can achieve them safely and with- sulfonylurea or insulin as initial pharma-
tions studied in ACCORD, ADVANCE, and out hypoglycemia or significant thera- cotherapy, 33% with metformin as ini-
VADT. Findings from these studies sug- peutic burden. tial pharmacotherapy) and in all-cause
gest caution is needed in treating diabe- mortality (13% and 27%, respectively)
tes to near-normal A1C goals in people A1C and Cardiovascular Disease (47).
with long-standing type 2 diabetes with Outcomes ACCORD, ADVANCE, and VADT sug-
or at significant risk of CVD. Cardiovascular Disease and Type 1 Diabetes gested no significant reduction in CVD
These landmark studies need to be CVD is a more common cause of death outcomes with intensive glycemic control
considered with an important caveat; than microvascular complications in pop- in participants followed for shorter dura-
glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor ulations with diabetes. There is evidence tions (3.5–5.6 years) and who had more
agonists and sodium–glucose cotrans- for a cardiovascular benefit of intensive advanced type 2 diabetes and CVD risk
porter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors were not ap- glycemic control after long-term follow- than the UKPDS participants. All three tri-
proved at the time of these trials. As up of cohorts treated early in the course als were conducted in relatively older par-
such, these agents with established car- of type 1 diabetes. In the DCCT, there ticipants with a longer known duration
diovascular and renal benefits appear to was a trend toward lower risk of CVD of diabetes (mean duration 8–11 years)
be safe and beneficial in this group of events with intensive control. In the and either CVD or multiple cardio-
individuals at high risk for cardiorenal 9-year post-DCCT follow-up of the vascular risk factors. The target A1C
complications. Randomized clinical trials EDIC cohort, participants previously among intensive-control participants
examining these agents for cardiovas- randomized to the intensive arm had was <6% (42 mmol/mol) in ACCORD,
cular safety were not designed to test a significant 57% reduction in the risk <6.5% (48 mmol/mol) in ADVANCE,
diabetesjournals.org/care Glycemic Targets S103
and a 1.5% reduction in A1C compared and mortality (69). Therefore, health engage people with type 1 and type 2 di-
with control participants in VADT, care professionals should be vigilant abetes in shared decision-making. More
with achieved A1C of 6.4% vs. 7.5% in preventing hypoglycemia and should aggressive targets may be recommended
(46 mmol/mol vs. 58 mmol/mol) in not aggressively attempt to achieve if they can be achieved safely and
ACCORD, 6.5% vs. 7.3% (48 mmol/mol near-normal A1C levels in people in with an acceptable burden of therapy
vs. 56 mmol/mol) in ADVANCE, and 6.9% whom such targets cannot be safely and if life expectancy is sufficient to
vs. 8.4% (52 mmol/mol vs. 68 mmol/mol) and reasonably achieved. As discussed reap the benefits of stringent targets.
in VADT. Details of these studies are in Section 9, “Pharmacologic Approaches Less stringent targets (A1C up to 8%
reviewed extensively in the joint ADA to Glycemic Treatment,” addition of spe- [64 mmol/mol]) may be recommended
position statement “Intensive Glycemic cific SGLT2 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor if the patient’s life expectancy is such
Control and the Prevention of Cardio- agonists that have demonstrated CVD that the benefits of an intensive goal
vascular Events: Implications of the benefit is recommended in patients may not be realized, or if the risks and
Table 6.3—Summary of glycemic recommendations for many nonpregnant hypoglycemia avoidance educa-
adults with diabetes tion and reevaluation and ad-
A1C <7.0% (53 mmol/mol)*# justment of the treatment plan
Preprandial capillary plasma glucose 80–130 mg/dL* (4.4–7.2 mmol/L) to decrease hypoglycemia. E
6.14 Insulin-treated patients with hy-
Peak postprandial capillary plasma glucose† <180 mg/dL* (10.0 mmol/L)
poglycemia unawareness, one
*More or less stringent glycemic goals may be appropriate for individual patients. #CGM level 3 hypoglycemic event, or a
may be used to assess glycemic target as noted in Recommendation 6.5b and Fig. 6.1. pattern of unexplained level 2
Goals should be individualized based on duration of diabetes, age/life expectancy, comorbid
hypoglycemia should be advised
conditions, known CVD or advanced microvascular complications, hypoglycemia unaware-
ness, and individual patient considerations (as per Fig. 6.2). †Postprandial glucose may be to raise their glycemic targets
targeted if A1C goals are not met despite reaching preprandial glucose goals. Postprandial to strictly avoid hypoglycemia
glucose measurements should be made 1–2 h after the beginning of the meal, generally for at least several weeks in or-
administer glucagon. In addition to tra- diabetes (106). Hence, individuals with insulin dosing can improve A1C with
ditional glucagon injection powder that one or more episodes of clinically signifi- minimal hypoglycemia (133,134).
requires reconstitution prior to injec- cant hypoglycemia may benefit from at
tion, intranasal glucagon and ready-to- least short-term relaxation of glycemic INTERCURRENT ILLNESS
inject glucagon preparations for sub- targets and availability of glucagon (107).
For further information on management
cutaneous injection are available and Any person with recurrent hypoglycemia
may be beneficial in view of safety, ef- or hypoglycemia unawareness should of individuals with hyperglycemia in the
ficacy, and ease of use. Care should be have their glucose management treat- hospital, see Section 16, “Diabetes Care
taken to ensure that glucagon products ment plan adjusted. in the Hospital.”
are not expired (102). Stressful events (e.g., illness, trauma,
Use of CGM Technology in Hypoglycemia surgery) may worsen glycemic control and
Hypoglycemia Prevention Prevention precipitate diabetic ketoacidosis or nonke-
Hypoglycemia prevention is a critical With the advent of sensor-augmented totic hyperglycemic hyperosmolar state,
for improvement: from chaos to order for improving Cohort Study. Impact of common genetic for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care
diabetes care. Clin Chem 2011;57:205–214 determinants of hemoglobin A1c on type 2 2021;44:2589–2625
5. Valenzano M, Cibrario Bertolotti I, Valenzano diabetes risk and diagnosis in ancestrally diverse 35. Battelino T, Danne T, Bergenstal RM, et al.
A, Grassi G. Time in range-A1c hemoglobin populations: a transethnic genome-wide meta- Clinical targets for continuous glucose monitoring
relationship in continuous glucose monitoring of analysis. PLoS Med 2017;14:e1002383 data interpretation: recommendations from the
type 1 diabetes: a real-world study. BMJ Open 21. Diabetes Research in Children Network International Consensus on Time in Range. Diabetes
Diabetes Res Care 2021;9:e001045 (DirecNet) Study Group. Relationship of A1C to Care 2019;42:1593–1603
6. Fabris C, Heinemann L, Beck R, Cobelli C, glucose concentrations in children with type 1 36. Tchero H, Kangambega P, Briatte C, Brunet-
Kovatchev B. Estimation of hemoglobin A1c from diabetes: assessments by high-frequency glucose Houdard S, Retali GR, Rusch E. Clinical effec-
continuous glucose monitoring data in individuals determinations by sensors. Diabetes Care 2008; tiveness of telemedicine in diabetes mellitus: a
with type 1 diabetes: is time in range all we need? 31:381–385 meta-analysis of 42 randomized controlled trials.
Diabetes Technol Ther 2020;22:501–508 22. Buse JB, Kaufman FR, Linder B, Hirst K, El Telemed J E Health 2019;25:569–583
7. Ranjan AG, Rosenlund SV, Hansen TW, Rossing Ghormli L; HEALTHY Study Group. Diabetes 37. Salabelle C, Ly Sall K, Eroukhmanoff J,
P, Andersen S, Nørgaard K. Improved time in range screening with hemoglobin A(1c) versus fasting et al. COVID-19 pandemic lockdown in young
over 1 year is associated with reduced albuminuria plasma glucose in a multiethnic middle-school people with type 1 diabetes: positive results of
48. Lind M, Pivodic A, Svensson AM, Olafsd ottir 61. Skyler JS, Bergenstal R, Bonow RO, et al.; Association, the Endocrine Society, JDRF Interna-
AF, Wedel H, Ludvigsson J. HbA1c level as a risk American Diabetes Association; American College tional, The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley
factor for retinopathy and nephropathy in of Cardiology Foundation; American Heart Charitable Trust, the Pediatric Endocrine Society, and
children and adults with type 1 diabetes: Swedish Association. Intensive glycemic control and the the T1D Exchange. Diabetes Care 2017;40:1622–1630
population based cohort study. BMJ 2019;366: prevention of cardiovascular events: implications of 75. Polonsky WH, Fortmann AL, Price D, Fisher
l4894 the ACCORD, ADVANCE, and VA diabetes trials: a L. “Hyperglycemia aversiveness”: investigating an
49. Adler AI, Stratton IM, Neil HAW, et al. position statement of the American Diabetes overlooked problem among adults with type 1
Association of systolic blood pressure with Association and a scientific statement of the diabetes. J Diabetes Complications 2021;35:
macrovascular and microvascular complications American College of Cardiology Foundation and 107925
of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 36): prospective the American Heart Association. Diabetes Care 76. Ghandi K, Pieri B, Dornhorst A, Hussain S. A
observational study. BMJ 2000;321:412–419 2009;32:187–192 comparison of validated methods used to assess
50. Duckworth W, Abraira C, Moritz T, et al.; 62. Gerstein HC, Miller ME, Byington RP, et al.; impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia in type 1
VADT Investigators. Glucose control and vascular Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes diabetes: an observational study. Diabetes Ther
complications in veterans with type 2 diabetes. N Study Group. Effects of intensive glucose lowering 2021;12:441–451
Engl J Med 2009;360:129–139 in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2008;358: 77. Li P, Geng Z, Ladage VP, Wu J, Lorincz I, Doshi
black and white adults with diabetes: the 104. Farrell CM, McCrimmon RJ. Clinical randomised, open-label, crossover trial. Lancet
Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. approaches to treat impaired awareness of Diabetes Endocrinol 2016;4:893–902
Diabetes Care 2017;40:1661–1667 hypoglycaemia. Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab 118. Battelino T, Conget I, Olsen B, et al.; SWITCH
89. Karter AJ, Lipska KJ, O’Connor PJ, et al.; 2021;12:20420188211000248 Study Group. The use and efficacy of continuous
SUPREME-DM Study Group. High rates of severe 105. Cox DJ, Gonder-Frederick L, Julian DM, glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes treated with
hypoglycemia among African American patients Clarke W. Long-term follow-up evaluation of insulin pump therapy: a randomised controlled
with diabetes: the surveillance, prevention, and blood glucose awareness training. Diabetes Care trial. Diabetologia 2012;55:3155–3162
Management of Diabetes Mellitus (SUPREME- 1994;17:1–5 119. Deiss D, Bolinder J, Riveline JP, et al.
DM) network. J Diabetes Complications 2017;31: 106. Cryer PE. Diverse causes of hypoglycemia- Improved glycemic control in poorly controlled
869–873 associated autonomic failure in diabetes. N Engl J patients with type 1 diabetes using real-time
90. Zoungas S, Patel A, Chalmers J, et al.; ADVANCE Med 2004;350:2272–2279 continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care
Collaborative Group. Severe hypoglycemia and risks 107. Mitchell BD, He X, Sturdy IM, Cagle AP, Settles 2006;29:2730–2732
of vascular events and death. N Engl J Med JA. Glucagon prescription patterns in patients with 120. Tamborlane WV, Beck RW, Bode BW,
2010;363:1410–1418 either type 1 or 2 diabetes with newly prescribed et al.; Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation
91. McCoy RG, Van Houten HK, Ziegenfuss JY, insulin. Endocr Pract 2016;22:123–135 Continuous Glucose Monitoring Study Group.
sensor: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Level Awareness in Diabetes Study (GLADIS). diabetes: a multicentre, randomised controlled
Care 2006;29:44–50 Diabet Med 2015;32:609–617 trial. Lancet 2019;393:1138–1148
132. New JP, Ajjan R, Pfeiffer AFH, Freckmann G. 133. Bergenstal RM, Johnson M, Passi R, et al. 134. Kitabchi AE, Umpierrez GE, Miles JM, Fisher
Continuous glucose monitoring in people with Automated insulin dosing guidance to optimise JN. Hyperglycemic crises in adult patients with
diabetes: the randomized controlled Glucose insulin management in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009;32:1335–1343
7. DIABETES TECHNOLOGY
cludes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to
provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guide-
lines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional
Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for up-
dating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a de-
tailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the
evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full
list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction
and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are
invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.
Diabetes technology is the term used to describe the hardware, devices, and soft-
ware that people with diabetes use to assist with self-management, ranging from
lifestyle modifications to glucose monitoring and therapy adjustments. Historically,
diabetes technology has been divided into two main categories: insulin adminis-
tered by syringe, pen, or pump (also called continuous subcutaneous insulin infu-
sion), and glucose as assessed by blood glucose monitoring (BGM) or continuous
glucose monitoring (CGM). Diabetes technology has expanded to include automated
insulin delivery (AID) systems, where CGM-informed algorithms modulate insulin de-
livery, as well as diabetes self-management support software serving as medical devi-
ces. Diabetes technology, when coupled with education, follow-up, and support, can
improve the lives and health of people with diabetes; however, the complexity and
rapid evolution of the diabetes technology landscape can also be a barrier to imple-
mentation for both people with diabetes and the health care team.
Recommendations
7.1 The type(s) and selection of devices should be individualized based on a Disclosure information for each author is
available at https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-SDIS.
person’s specific needs, preferences, and skill level. In the setting of an
individual whose diabetes is partially or wholly managed by someone else Suggested citation: ElSayed NA, Aleppo G,
Aroda VR, et al., American Diabetes Association.
(e.g., a young child or a person with cognitive impairment or dexterity, psy- 7. Diabetes technology: Standards of Care in
chosocial, and/or physical limitations), the caregiver’s skills and preferences Diabetes—2023. Diabetes Care 2023;46(Suppl. 1):
are integral to the decision-making process. E S111–S127
7.2 When prescribing a device, ensure that people with diabetes/caregivers © 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.
receive initial and ongoing education and training, either in-person or Readers may use this article as long as the
remotely, and ongoing evaluation of technique, results, and their ability work is properly cited, the use is educational
to utilize data, including uploading/sharing data (if applicable), to moni- and not for profit, and the work is not altered.
tor and adjust therapy. C More information is available at https://www.
diabetesjournals.org/journals/pages/license.
S112 Diabetes Technology Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
7.3 People with diabetes who have assessed, particularly if outcomes are not snacks, after meals, at bedtime,
been using continuous glucose being met. prior to exercise, when hypo-
monitoring, continuous sub- glycemia is suspected, after
cutaneous insulin infusion, and/ Use in Schools treating low blood glucose
or automated insulin delivery Instructions for device use should be levels until they are normo-
for diabetes management should outlined in the student’s diabetes medi- glycemic, when hyperglycemia
have continued access across cal management plan (DMMP). A backup
is suspected, and prior to and
plan should be included in the DMMP
third-party payers, regardless while performing critical tasks
for potential device failure (e.g., BGM,
of age or A1C levels. E such as driving. B
CGM, and/or insulin delivery devices).
7.4 Students should be supported 7.8 Health care professionals should
School nurses and designees should
at school in the use of diabetes be aware of the differences in
complete training to stay up to date on
technology, such as continuous accuracy among blood glucose
prandial insulin doses). The specific needs Surveillance Program provides information platforms (19). People with diabetes
and goals of the person with diabetes on the performance of devices used for should be taught how to use BGM data
should dictate BGM frequency and timing BGM (diabetestechnology.org/surveillance/). to adjust food intake, physical activity,
or the consideration of CGM use. As rec- In one analysis, 6 of the top 18 glucose or pharmacologic therapy to achieve
ommended by the device manufacturers meters met the accuracy standard (12). specific goals. The ongoing need for and
and the U.S. Food and Drug Administra- In a subsequent analysis with updated frequency of BGM should be reevaluated
tion (FDA), people with diabetes using glucose meters, 14 of 18 glucose meters at each routine visit to ensure its effec-
CGM must have access to BGM for mul- met the minimum accuracy requirements tive use (17,20,21).
tiple reasons, including whenever there (13). There are single-meter studies in
is suspicion that the CGM is inaccurate, which benefits have been found with People With Diabetes on Intensive Insulin
while waiting for warm-up, for calibration individual meter systems, but few studies Therapies
(some sensors) or if a warning mes- have compared meters head-to-head. BGM is especially important for people
Table 7.1—Comparison of ISO 15197:2013 and FDA blood glucose meter accuracy standards
Setting FDA (248,254) ISO 15197:2013 (255)
Home use 95% within 15% for all BG in the usable BG range† 95% within 15% for BG $100 mg/dL
99% within 20% for all BG in the usable BG range† 95% within 15 mg/dL for BG <100 mg/dL
Hospital use 95% within 12% for BG $75 mg/dL 99% in A or B region of consensus error grid‡
95% within 12 mg/dL for BG <75 mg/dL
98% within 15% for BG $75 mg/dL
98% within 15 mg/dL for BG <75 mg/dL
BG, blood glucose; FDA, U.S. Food and Drug Administration; ISO, International Organization for Standardization. To convert mg/dL to mmol/L,
see endmemo.com/medical/unitconvert/Glucose.php. †The range of blood glucose values for which the meter has been proven accurate and
will provide readings (other than low, high, or error). ‡Values outside of the “clinically acceptable” A and B regions are considered “outlier”
readings and may be dangerous to use for therapeutic decisions (256).
S114 Diabetes Technology Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
with type 2 diabetes taking basal insulin care professionals in intensive care unit
Table 7.2—Interfering substances for
with or without oral agents and/or non- settings need to be particularly aware of glucose meter readings
insulin injectables. However, for those the potential for abnormal meter readings Glucose oxidase monitors
taking basal insulin, assessing fasting glu- during critical illness, and laboratory-based Uric acid
cose with BGM to inform dose adjust- values should be used if there is any Galactose
ments to achieve blood glucose targets doubt. Xylose
results in lower A1C (23,24). Some meters give error messages if Acetaminophen
L-DOPA
In people with type 2 diabetes not meter readings are likely to be false (33).
taking insulin, routine glucose monitor- Ascorbic acid
ing may be of limited additional clinical Oxygen. Currently available glucose mon- Glucose dehydrogenase monitors
benefit. By itself, even when combined itors utilize an enzymatic reaction linked Icodextrin (used in peritoneal dialysis)
with education, it has shown limited im- to an electrochemical reaction, either
See Table 7.3 for definitions of types of
7.15 In people with diabetes on levels are rising or falling rapidly). There with iCGM designation and FDA approval
multiple daily injections or are two basic types of CGM devices: for use with AID systems.
continuous subcutaneous insulin those that are owned by the user, un-
infusion, real-time continuous blinded, and intended for frequent/con- Benefits of Continuous Glucose
tinuous use, including real-time CGM Monitoring
glucose monitoring devices
should be used as close to (rtCGM) and intermittently scanned CGM Data From Randomized Controlled Trials
daily as possible for maximal (isCGM), and professional CGM devices Multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs)
benefit. A Intermittently scanned that are owned and applied in the clinic, have been performed using rtCGM devices,
which provide data that are blinded or and the results have largely been positive
continuous glucose monitor-
unblinded for a discrete period of time. in terms of reducing A1C levels and/or
ing devices should be scanned
The types of sensors currently available episodes of hypoglycemia as long as
frequently, at a minimum once
are either disposable (rtCGM and isCGM) participants regularly wore the devices
every 8 h. A People with dia-
CGM, continuous glucose monitoring; isCGM, intermittently scanned CGM; rtCGM, real-time CGM.
S116 Diabetes Technology Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
type 1 diabetes and met its primary In an observational study in youth with births, length of stay, and neonatal hypo-
outcome of a reduction in rates of hy- type 1 diabetes, a slight increase in A1C glycemia (97). An observational cohort
poglycemia (49). In adults with type 2 di- and weight was seen, but the device was study that evaluated the glycemic vari-
abetes on insulin, two studies were associated with a high user satisfaction ables reported using rtCGM and isCGM
done; one study did not meet its pri- rate (82). found that lower mean glucose, lower
mary end point of A1C reduction (76) Retrospective data from rtCGM use in standard deviation, and a higher percentage
but achieved a secondary end point of a Veterans Affairs population (90) with of time in target range were associated
a reduction in hypoglycemia, and the type 1 and type 2 diabetes treated with with lower risk of large-for-gestational-age
other study met its primary end point insulin showed that the use of rtCGM births and other adverse neonatal out-
of an improvement in Diabetes Treat- significantly lowered A1C and reduced comes (98). Use of the rtCGM-reported
ment Satisfaction Questionnaire score rates of emergency department visits or mean glucose is superior to use of glu-
as well as a secondary end point of hospitalizations for hypoglycemia but did cose management indicator (GMI) and
pens and assist with calculating insulin 7.25 Insulin pump therapy alone with and adults (155). There is no consensus
doses. Some connected insulin pens and or without sensor-augmented to guide choosing which form of insulin
pen caps can be programmed to calculate pump low glucose suspend administration is best for a given individ-
insulin doses and provide downloadable feature and/or automated insu- ual, and research to guide this decision-
data reports. These pens and pen caps lin delivery systems should be making process is needed (155). Thus, the
are useful to people with diabetes for choice of MDI or an insulin pump is often
offered for diabetes manage-
real-time insulin dosing and allow clini- based upon the characteristics of the per-
ment to youth and adults on
cians to retrospectively review the insu- son with diabetes and which method is
multiple daily injections with
lin delivery times and in some cases most likely to benefit them. DiabetesWise
type 1 diabetes A or other
doses and glucose data in order to (DiabetesWise.org) and the PANTHER
types of insulin-deficient dia-
make informed insulin dose adjustments Program (pantherprogram.org) have help-
betes E who are capable of
(148). ful websites to assist health care profes-
using the device safely (either
Complications of the pump can be quality of life, and preventing long-term systems eventually may be truly auto-
caused by issues with infusion sets (dis- complications. Based on shared decision- mated, currently used hybrid closed-
lodgement, occlusion), which place indi- making by people with diabetes and loop systems require the manual entry
viduals at risk for ketosis and DKA and health care professionals, insulin pumps of carbohydrates consumed to calcu-
thus must be recognized and managed may be considered in all children and late prandial doses, and adjustments for
early (165). Other pump skin issues adolescents with type 1 diabetes. In partic- physical activity must be announced. Mul-
included lipohypertrophy or, less fre- ular, pump therapy may be the preferred tiple studies using various systems with
quently, lipoatrophy (166,167) and pump mode of insulin delivery for children under varying algorithms, pumps, and sensors
site infection (168). Discontinuation of 7 years of age (185). Because of a paucity have been performed in adults and chil-
pump therapy is relatively uncommon of data in adolescents and youth with dren (191–200). Evidence suggests AID sys-
today; the frequency has decreased over type 2 diabetes, there is insufficient ev- tems may reduce A1C levels and improve
the past few decades, and its causes idence to make recommendations. TIR (201–205). They may also lower the
Do-It-Yourself Closed-Loop Systems diabetes clinic have been published (224). programs, which vary in terms of their
Recommendation The FDA approves and monitors clinically effectiveness (236,237). There are lim-
7.28 Individuals with diabetes may validated, digital, and usually online ited RCT data for many of these inter-
be using systems not approved health technologies intended to treat a ventions, and long-term follow-up is
by the U.S. Food and Drug medical or psychological condition; these lacking. However, for an individual with
Administration, such as do-it- are known as digital therapeutics or diabetes, opting into one of these pro-
“digiceuticals” (fda.gov/medical-devices/ grams can be helpful in providing support
yourself closed-loop systems
digital-health-center-excellence/device- and, for many, is an attractive option.
and others; health care profes-
software-functions-including-mobile-medical-
sionals cannot prescribe these
applications) (225). Other applications, Inpatient Care
systems but should assist in
such as those that assist in displaying or
diabetes management to en- Recommendation
storing data, encourage a healthy life-
sure the safety of people with 7.30 People with diabetes who are
are underway to assess the effectiveness glycemic outcomes: 7-year follow-up study. unused testing results. Am J Manag Care 2015;
of this approach, which may ultimately Diabetes Care 2022;45:750–753 21:e119–e129
4. Patton SR, Noser AE, Youngkin EM, Majidi S, 18. Katz LB, Stewart L, Guthrie B, Cameron H.
lead to the approved use of CGM for Clements MA. Early initiation of diabetes devices Patient satisfaction with a new, high accuracy
monitoring hospitalized individuals (247– relates to improved glycemic control in children blood glucose meter that provides personalized
253). with recent-onset type 1 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes guidance, insight, and encouragement. J Diabetes
When used in the setting of a clinical Technol Ther 2019;21:379–384 Sci Technol 2020;14:318–323
5. Prahalad P, Ding VY, Zaharieva DP, et al. 19. Shaw RJ, Yang Q, Barnes A, et al. Self-
trial or when clinical circumstances (such Teamwork, targets, technology, and tight monitoring diabetes with multiple mobile health
as during a shortage of personal protec- control in newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes: the devices. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2020;27:667–
tive equipment) require it, CGM can be Pilot 4T study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2022; 676
used to manage hospitalized individuals 107:998–1008 20. Gellad WF, Zhao X, Thorpe CT, Mor MK,
6. Tanenbaum ML, Zaharieva DP, Addala A, et al. Good CB, Fine MJ. Dual use of Department of
in conjunction with BGM. Point-of-care ‘I was ready for it at the beginning’: parent Veterans Affairs and Medicare benefits and use
BGM remains the approved method for experiences with early introduction of continuous of test strips in veterans with type 2 diabetes
32. Mannucci E, Antenore A, Giorgino F, Scavini 45. Beck RW, Riddlesworth T, Ruedy K, et al.; Monitoring Study Group. The effect of continuous
M. Effects of structured versus unstructured self- DIAMOND Study Group. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring in well-controlled type 1
monitoring of blood glucose on glucose control in glucose monitoring on glycemic control in adults diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009;32:1378–1383
patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: with type 1 diabetes using insulin injections: the 59. Laffel LM, Kanapka LG, Beck RW, et al.; CGM
a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J DIAMOND randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2017; Intervention in Teens and Young Adults with T1D
Diabetes Sci Technol 2018;12:183–189 317:371–378 (CITY) Study Group; CDE10. Effect of continuous
33. Sai S, Urata M, Ogawa I. Evaluation of 46. Lind M, Polonsky W, Hirsch IB, et al. glucose monitoring on glycemic control in
linearity and interference effect on SMBG and Continuous glucose monitoring vs conventional adolescents and young adults with type 1
POCT devices, showing drastic high values, low therapy for glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA
values, or error messages. J Diabetes Sci Technol diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin 2020;323:2388–2396
2019;13:734–743 injections: the GOLD randomized clinical trial. 60. Strategies to Enhance New CGM Use in Early
34. Ginsberg BH. Factors affecting blood glucose JAMA 2017;317:379–387 Childhood (SENCE) Study Group. A randomized
monitoring: sources of errors in measurement. J 47. Riddlesworth T, Price D, Cohen N, Beck RW. clinical trial assessing continuous glucose monitoring
Diabetes Sci Technol 2009;3:903–913 Hypoglycemic event frequency and the effect of (CGM) use with standardized education with or
35. Tamborlane WV, Beck RW, Bode BW, et al.; continuous glucose monitoring in adults with without a family behavioral intervention compared
Sci Technol. 25 April 2022 [Epub ahead of print]. cations in people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes study of 186 pregnancies. Diabetologia 2019;62:
DOI: 10.1177/19322968221091816 after initiation of flash glucose monitoring in 1143–1153
72. Miller KM, Kanapka LG, Rickels MR, et al. France: the RELIEF study. Diabetes Care 2021;44: 99. Law GR, Gilthorpe MS, Secher AL, et al.
Benefit of continuous glucose monitoring in 1368–1376 Translating HbA1c measurements into estimated
reducing hypoglycemia is sustained through 86. Wright EE Jr, Kerr MSD, Reyes IJ, Nabutovsky Y, average glucose values in pregnant women with
12 months of use among older adults with type 1 Miller E. Use of flash continuous glucose moni- diabetes. Diabetologia 2017;60:618–624
diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther 2022;24:424–434 toring is associated with A1C reduction in people 100. Secher AL, Ringholm L, Andersen HU, Damm
73. Bao S, Bailey R, Calhoun P, Beck RW. Effective- with type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin P, Mathiesen ER. The effect of real-time continuous
ness of continuous glucose monitoring in older or noninsulin therapy. Diabetes Spectr 2021;34: glucose monitoring in pregnant women with
adults with type 2 diabetes treated with basal 184–189 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes
insulin. Diabetes Technol Ther 2022;24:299–306 87. Charleer S, De Block C, Van Huffel L, et al. Care 2013;36:1877–1883
74. Van Name MA, Kanapka LG, DiMeglio LA, Quality of life and glucose control after 1 year 101. Wei Q, Sun Z, Yang Y, Yu H, Ding H, Wang S.
et al. Long-term continuous glucose monitor use of nationwide reimbursement of intermittently Effect of a CGMS and SMBG on maternal and
in very young children with type 1 diabetes: one- scanned continuous glucose monitoring in adults neonatal outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus:
year results from the SENCE study. J Diabetes Sci living with type 1 diabetes (FUTURE): a pros- a randomized controlled trial. Sci Rep 2016;6:19920
113. Herman A, Aerts O, Baeck M, et al. Allergic elderly patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized pen devices? J Diabetes Sci Technol 2011;5:
contact dermatitis caused by isobornyl acrylate controlled clinical trial. Diabetol Metab Syndr 1563–1571
in Freestyle Libre, a newly introduced glucose 2021;13:64 143. Luijf YM, DeVries JH. Dosing accuracy of
sensor. Contact Dermat 2017;77:367–373 129. Ignaut DA, Schwartz SL, Sarwat S, Murphy insulin pens versus conventional syringes and vials.
114. Hyry HSI, Liippo JP, Virtanen HM. Allergic HL. Comparative device assessments: Humalog Diabetes Technol Ther 2010;12(Suppl. 1):S73–S77
contact dermatitis caused by glucose sensors in KwikPen compared with vial and syringe and 144. Hanas R, de Beaufort C, Hoey H, Anderson B.
type 1 diabetes patients. Contact Dermat 2019; FlexPen. Diabetes Educ 2009;35:789–798 Insulin delivery by injection in children and
81:161–166 130. Korytkowski M, Bell D, Jacobsen C; FlexPen adolescents with diabetes. Pediatr Diabetes
115. Asarani NAM, Reynolds AN, Boucher SE, de Study Team. A multicenter, randomized, open-label, 2011;12:518–526
Bock M, Wheeler BJ. Cutaneous complications comparative, two-period crossover trial of pre- 145. Pf€ utzner A, Schipper C, Niemeyer M, et al.
with continuous or flash glucose monitoring use: ference, efficacy, and safety profiles of a prefilled, Comparison of patient preference for two insulin
systematic review of trials and observational disposable pen and conventional vial/syringe for injection pen devices in relation to patient dexterity
studies. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2020;14:328–337 insulin injection in patients with type 1 or 2 skills. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2012;6:910–916
116. Lombardo F, Salzano G, Crisafulli G, et al. diabetes mellitus. Clin Ther 2003;25:2836–2848 146. Reinauer KM, Joksch G, Renn W, Eggstein M.
Allergic contact dermatitis in pediatric patients 131. Asche CV, Shane-McWhorter L, Raparla S. Insulin pens in elderly diabetic patients. Diabetes
have poor prognostic factors. Diabetes Care 173. Doyle EA, Weinzimer SA, Steffen AT, Ahern 185. Sundberg F, Barnard K, Cato A, et al. ISPAD
2018;41:1017–1024 JAH, Vincent M, Tamborlane WVA. A randomized, Guidelines. Managing diabetes in preschool children.
160. Ramchandani N, Ten S, Anhalt H, et al. prospective trial comparing the efficacy of Pediatr Diabetes 2017;18:499–517
Insulin pump therapy from the time of diagnosis continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion with 186. Commissariat PV, Boyle CT, Miller KM, et al.
of type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther 2006; multiple daily injections using insulin glargine. Insulin pump use in young children with type 1
8:663–670 Diabetes Care 2004;27:1554–1558 diabetes: sociodemographic factors and parent-
161. Berghaeuser MA, Kapellen T, Heidtmann B, 174. Alemzadeh R, Ellis JN, Holzum MK, Parton reported barriers. Diabetes Technol Ther 2017;19:
Haberland H, Klinkert C; German working group EA, Wyatt DT. Beneficial effects of continuous 363–369
for insulin pump treatment in paediatric patients. subcutaneous insulin infusion and flexible multiple 187. Forlenza GP, Li Z, Buckingham BA, et al.
Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion in daily insulin regimen using insulin glargine in Predictive low-glucose suspend reduces hypo-
toddlers starting at diagnosis of type 1 diabetes type 1 diabetes. Pediatrics 2004;114:e91–e95 glycemia in adults, adolescents, and children
mellitus. A multicenter analysis of 104 patients 175. Sherr JL, Hermann JM, Campbell F, et al.; with type 1 diabetes in an at-home randomized
from 63 centres in Germany and Austria. Pediatr T1D Exchange Clinic Network, the DPV Initiative, crossover study: results of the PROLOG trial.
Diabetes 2008;9:590–595 and the National Paediatric Diabetes Audit and Diabetes Care 2018;41:2155–2161
162. Peters AL, Ahmann AJ, Battelino T, et al. 188. Wood MA, Shulman DI, Forlenza GP, et al.
199. Forlenza GP, Pinhas-Hamiel O, Liljenquist 214. Raval AD, Nguyen MH, Zhou S, Grabner M, and mobile app service. JMIR Diabetes 2019;4:
DR, et al. Safety evaluation of the MiniMed 670G Barron J, Quimbo R. Effect of V-Go versus multiple e11017
system in children 7-13 years of age with type 1 daily injections on glycemic control, insulin use, and 228. Sepah SC, Jiang L, Peters AL. Translating the
diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther 2019;21:11–19 diabetes medication costs among individuals with Diabetes Prevention Program into an online
200. Karageorgiou V, Papaioannou TG, Bellos I, type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Manag Care Spec Pharm social network: validation against CDC standards.
et al. Effectiveness of artificial pancreas in the 2019;25:1111–1123 Diabetes Educ 2014;40:435–443
non-adult population: a systematic review and 215. Leahy JJL, Aleppo G, Fonseca VA, et al. 229. Kaufman N, Ferrin C, Sugrue D. Using
network meta-analysis. Metabolism 2019;90:20–30 Optimizing postprandial glucose management digital health technology to prevent and treat
201. Brown SA, Kovatchev BP, Raghinaru D, et al.; in adults with insulin-requiring diabetes: report diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther 2019;21(S1):S79–
iDCL Trial Research Group. Six-month randomized, and recommendations. J Endocr Soc 2019;3: S94
multicenter trial of closed-loop control in type 1 1942–1957 €
230. Oberg U, Isaksson U, Jutterstr€
om L, Orre CJ,
diabetes. N Engl J Med 2019;381:1707–1717 216. Reznik Y, Cohen O, Aronson R, et al.; H€ornsten Å. Perceptions of persons with type 2
202. Kaur H, Schneider N, Pyle L, Campbell K, OpT2mise Study Group. Insulin pump treatment diabetes treated in Swedish primary health care:
Akturk HK, Shah VN. Efficacy of hybrid closed- compared with multiple daily injections for qualitative study on using ehealth services for
loop system in adults with type 1 diabetes and treatment of type 2 diabetes (OpT2mise): a self-management support. JMIR Diabetes 2018;
243. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Enforce- in the hospital: emergent considerations for 253. Wright JJ, Williams AJ, Friedman SB, et al.
ment Policy for Non-Invasive Remote Monitoring remote glucose monitoring during the COVID-19 Accuracy of continuous glucose monitors for
Devices Used to Support Patient Monitoring pandemic. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2020;14:822– inpatient diabetes management. J Diabetes Sci
During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) 832 Technol. 7 February 2022 [Epub ahead of print].
Public Health Emergency (Revised), 2020. Accessed 249. Korytkowski MT, Muniyappa R, Antinori- DOI: 10.1177/19322968221076562
17 October 2022. Available from https://www.fda. Lent K, et al. Management of hyperglycemia in 254. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Self-
gov/media/136290/download hospitalized adult patients in non-critical care Monitoring Blood Glucose Test Systems for
244. Davis GM, Faulds E, Walker T, et al. Remote settings: an Endocrine Society clinical practice Over-the-Counter Use. Guidance for Industry and
continuous glucose monitoring with a computerized guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2022;107:2101– Food and Drug Administration Staff, September
insulin infusion protocol for critically ill patients in a 2128 2020. Accessed 17 October 2022. Available from
COVID-19 medical ICU: proof of concept. Diabetes 250. Longo RR, Elias H, Khan M, Seley JJ. Use https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-
Care 2021;44:1055–1058 fda-guidance-documents/self-monitoring-blood-
and accuracy of inpatient CGM during the
245. Sadhu AR, Serrano IA, Xu J, et al. Continuous glucose-test-systems-over-counter-use
COVID-19 pandemic: an observational study of
glucose monitoring in critically ill patients with 255. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Blood
general medicine and ICU patients. J Diabetes Sci
COVID-19: results of an emergent pilot study. J Glucose Monitoring Test Systems for Prescription
Obesity is a chronic and often progressive disease with numerous medical, physical,
and psychosocial complications, including a substantially increased risk for type 2
diabetes (1). There is strong and consistent evidence that obesity management can
delay the progression from prediabetes to type 2 diabetes (2–6) and is highly bene-
ficial in treating type 2 diabetes (7–18). In people with type 2 diabetes and over-
weight or obesity, modest weight loss improves glycemia and reduces the need for
glucose-lowering medications (7–9), and larger weight loss substantially reduces A1C
and fasting glucose and has been shown to promote sustained diabetes remission
through at least 2 years (11,19–23). Several modalities, including intensive behavioral
counseling, obesity pharmacotherapy, and bariatric surgery, may aid in achieving and Disclosure information for each author is
maintaining meaningful weight loss and reducing obesity-associated health risks. available at https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-SDIS.
Metabolic surgery strongly improves glycemia and often leads to remission of diabe- Suggested citation: ElSayed NA, Aleppo G, Aroda
VR, et al., American Diabetes Association. 8.
tes, improved quality of life, improved cardiovascular outcomes, and reduced mortal- Obesity and weight management for the pre-
ity. The importance of addressing obesity is further heightened by numerous studies vention and treatment of type 2 diabetes:
showing that both obesity and diabetes increase the risk for more severe coronavirus Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023. Diabetes
disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections (24–27). This section aims to provide evidence- Care 2023;46(Suppl. 1):S128–S139
based recommendations for obesity management, including behavioral, pharmaco- © 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.
logic, and surgical interventions, in people with type 2 diabetes and in those at risk. Readers may use this article as long as the
work is properly cited, the use is educational
This section focuses on obesity management in adults; further discussion on obesity
and not for profit, and the work is not altered.
in older individuals and children can be found in Section 13, “Older Adults,” and Sec- More information is available at https://www.
tion 14, “Children and Adolescents,” respectively. diabetesjournals.org/journals/pages/license.
diabetesjournals.org/care Obesity and Weight Management for Type 2 Diabetes S129
ASSESSMENT Height and weight should be measured counseling, pharmacologic therapy, medical
to calculate BMI annually or more fre- devices, and metabolic surgery (Table 8.1).
Recommendations
quently when appropriate (20). BMI, calcu- The latter three strategies may be consid-
8.1 Use person-centered, nonjudg- ered for carefully selected individuals as
lated as weight in kilograms divided by the
mental language that fosters
square of height in meters (kg/m2), is calcu- adjuncts to nutrition changes, physical ac-
collaboration between individ- lated automatically by most electronic med- tivity, and behavioral counseling.
uals and health care professio- ical records. Use BMI to document weight Among people with type 2 diabetes
nals, including person-first lan- status (overweight: BMI 25–29.9 kg/m2; and overweight or obesity who have in-
guage (e.g., “person with obesity” obesity class I: BMI 30–34.9 kg/m2; obesity adequate glycemic, blood pressure, and
rather than “obese person”). E class II: BMI 35–39.9 kg/m2; obesity class lipid control and/or other obesity-related
8.2 Measure height and weight III: BMI $40 kg/m2) but note that misclassi- medical conditions, modest and sustained
and calculate BMI at annual fication can occur, particularly in very mus- weight loss improves glycemia, blood
visits or more frequently. As-
*Recommended cut points for Asian American individuals (expert opinion). †Treatment may be indicated for select motivated individuals.
8.7 Such interventions should in- practitioners in medical set- sexual function, and health-related quality
by trained interventionists in either indi- little or no weight loss benefits. In contrast, discontinuation of the medi-
vidual or group sessions (51). Assessing vitamin/mineral (e.g., iron, vitamin B12, vi- cation and evaluate alterna-
an individual’s motivation level, life cir- tamin D) supplementation may be indicated tive medications or treatment
cumstances, and willingness to implement in cases of documented deficiency, and pro- approaches. A
behavioral changes to achieve weight loss tein supplements may be indicated as ad-
should be considered along with medical juncts to medically supervised weight loss
status when weight loss interventions are therapies. Glucose-Lowering Therapy
recommended and initiated (37,56). Health disparities adversely affect peo- A meta-analysis of 227 randomized con-
People with type 2 diabetes and over- ple who have systematically experienced trolled trials of glucose-lowering treat-
weight or obesity who have lost weight greater obstacles to health based on their ments in type 2 diabetes found that A1C
should be offered long-term ($1 year) race or ethnicity, socioeconomic status, changes were not associated with base-
comprehensive weight loss maintenance gender, disability, or other factors. Over- line BMI, indicating that people with obe-
FDA-approved obesity medications have continue the medication. When early use with BMI 30.0–34.9 kg/m2
been shown to improve glycemia in peo- appears ineffective (typically <5% weight (27.5–32.4 kg/m 2 in Asian
ple with type 2 diabetes and delay pro- loss after 3 months’ use), it is unlikely that American individuals) who do
gression to type 2 diabetes in at-risk continued use will improve weight out- not achieve durable weight loss
individuals (23). Phentermine and other comes; as such, it should be recom-
and improvement in comorbid-
older adrenergic agents are indicated for mended to discontinue the medication
ities (including hyperglycemia)
short-term (#12 weeks) treatment (68). and consider other treatment options.
with nonsurgical methods. A
Five medications are FDA approved for
8.20 Metabolic surgery should
long-term use (>12 weeks) in adults with MEDICAL DEVICES FOR WEIGHT LOSS
BMI $27 kg/m2 with one or more obe- be performed in high-volume
While gastric banding devices have fallen centers with multidisciplinary
sity-associated comorbid conditions (e.g.,
out of favor in recent years, since 2015, teams knowledgeable about
type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and/or
several minimally invasive medical devices and experienced in managing
dyslipidemia) who are motivated to lose
Table 8.2—Continued
1-Year (52- or 56-week)
mean weight loss (% loss from baseline)
National Average
Typical adult Average wholesale Drug Acquisition Weight loss
maintenance price (30-day Cost (30-day (% loss from Common side effects Possible safety concerns/
Medication name dose supply) (128) supply) (129) Treatment arms baseline) (130–134) considerations (130–134)
Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist
Liraglutide (17)** 3 mg q.d. $1,619 $1,295 3.0 mg q.d. 6.0 Gastrointestinal side effects Pancreatitis has been reported in
1.8 mg q.d. 4.7 (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, clinical trials, but causality has not
PBO 2.0 esophageal reflux), injection been established. Discontinue if
site reactions, elevated heart pancreatitis is suspected.
rate, hypoglycemia Use caution in people with kidney
Obesity and Weight Management for Type 2 Diabetes
Postbariatric hypoglycemia (PBH) can mental health conditions until these condi- phentermine and topiramate extended release.
Diabetes Care 2014;37:3309–3316
occur with RYGB, VSG, and other gastro- tions have been sufficiently addressed. In-
15. O’Neil PM, Smith SR, Weissman NJ, et al.
intestinal procedures and may severely dividuals with preoperative or new-onset Randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial of
impact quality of life (116–118). PBH is psychopathology should be assessed regu- lorcaserin for weight loss in type 2 diabetes
driven in part by altered gastric empty- larly following surgery to optimize mental mellitus: the BLOOM-DM study. Obesity (Silver
Spring) 2012;20:1426–1436
ing of ingested nutrients, leading to rapid health and postsurgical outcomes. 16. Hollander P, Gupta AK, Plodkowski R, et al.;
intestinal glucose absorption and exces- COR-Diabetes Study Group. Effects of naltrexone
sive postprandial secretion of glucagon- References sustained-release/bupropion sustained-release
1. Narayan KMV, Boyle JP, Thompson TJ, Gregg combination therapy on body weight and glycemic
like peptide 1 and other gastrointestinal EW, Williamson DF. Effect of BMI on lifetime risk parameters in overweight and obese patients with
peptides. As a result, overstimulation of in- for diabetes in the U.S. Diabetes Care 2007;30: type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2013;36:4022–
sulin release and a sharp drop in plasma 1562–1566 4029
2. Knowler WC, Barrett-Connor E, Fowler SE, et al.; 17. Davies MJ, Bergenstal R, Bode B, et al.;
29. American Medical Association. Person- intervention and medical management in achieving 59. Bloom B, Mehta AK, Clark JM, Gudzune KA.
First Language for Obesity H-440.821. Accessed primary treatment goals for uncontrolled type 2 Guideline-concordant weight-loss programs in an
12 October 2022. Available from https:// diabetes in mild to moderate obesity: a randomized urban area are uncommon and difficult to identify
policysearch.ama-assn.org/policyfinder/detail/ control trial. Diabetes Care 2016;39:1510–1518 through the internet. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2016;
obesity?uri=%2FAMADoc%2FHOD.xml-H-440. 45. Gadde KM, Allison DB, Ryan DH, et al. Effects 24:583–588
821.xml of low-dose, controlled-release, phentermine plus 60. Tsai AG, Wadden TA. The evolution of very-
30. WHO Expert Consultation. Appropriate body- topiramate combination on weight and associated low-calorie diets: an update and meta-analysis.
mass index for Asian populations and its comorbidities in overweight and obese adults Obesity (Silver Spring) 2006;14:1283–1293
implications for policy and intervention strategies. (CONQUER): a randomised, placebo-controlled, 61. Johansson K, Neovius M, Hemmingsson E.
Lancet 2004;363:157–163 phase 3 trial. Lancet 2011;377:1341–1352 Effects of anti-obesity drugs, diet, and exercise on
31. Araneta MRG, Kanaya A, Hsu WC, et al. 46. Davies M, Færch L, Jeppesen OK, et al.; STEP weight-loss maintenance after a very-low-calorie
Optimum BMI cutpoints to screen Asian Americans 2 Study Group. Semaglutide 2.4 mg once a week diet or low-calorie diet: a systematic review and
for type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2015;38:814–820 in adults with overweight or obesity, and type 2 meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J
32. Yancy CW, Jessup M, Bozkurt B, et al. 2017 diabetes (STEP 2): a randomised, double-blind, Clin Nutr 2014;99:14–23
ACC/AHA/HFSA focused update of the 2013 double-dummy, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. 62. Batsis JA, Apolzan JW, Bagley PJ, et al. A
after bariatric surgery versus usual care: a matched long-term survival in adults with and without 106. Arterburn DE, Courcoulas AP. Bariatric
cohort study. Ann Intern Med 2018;169:300–310 diabetes: a one-stage meta-analysis of matched surgery for obesity and metabolic conditions in
76. Mingrone G, Panunzi S, De Gaetano A, et al. cohort and prospective controlled studies with adults. BMJ 2014;349:g3961
Bariatric-metabolic surgery versus conventional 174,772 participants. Lancet 2021;397:1830–1841 107. Young MT, Gebhart A, Phelan MJ, Nguyen
medical treatment in obese patients with type 2 92. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive NT. Use and outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve
diabetes: 5 year follow-up of an open-label, and Kidney Diseases. Diabetes for Health gastrectomy vs laparoscopic gastric bypass:
single-centre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Professionals. Accessed 17 October 2022. Available analysis of the American College of Surgeons
2015;386:964–973 from https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/ NSQIP. J Am Coll Surg 2015;220:880–885
77. Halperin F, Ding SA, Simonson DC, et al. professionals/clinical-tools-patient-management/ 108. Aminian A, Brethauer SA, Kirwan JP, Kashyap
Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery or lifestyle with diabetes SR, Burguera B, Schauer PR. How safe is metabolic/
intensive medical management in patients with 93. Isaman DJM, Rothberg AE, Herman WH. diabetes surgery? Diabetes Obes Metab 2015;17:
type 2 diabetes: feasibility and 1-year results of a Reconciliation of type 2 diabetes remission rates 198–201
randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg 2014;149: in studies of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Diabetes 109. Birkmeyer NJO, Dimick JB, Share D, et al.;
716–726 Care 2016;39:2247–2253 Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative. Hospital
78. Sj€ ostr€
om L, Lindroos AK, Peltonen M, et al.; 94. Sj€oholm K, Pajunen P, Jacobson P, et al. complication rates with bariatric surgery in
emergencies after bariatric surgery: a population- best practice update. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2009; 131. Nalpropion Pharmaceuticals. Contrave
based cohort study. JAMA Surg 2016;151:226–232 17:880–884 (naltrexone HCl/bupropion HCl) extended-release
122. Peterh€ansel C, Petroff D, Klinitzke G, 127. Evert AB, Dennison M, Gardner CD, et al. tablets. Accessed 17 October 2022. Available at
Kersting A, Wagner B. Risk of completed suicide Nutrition therapy for adults with diabetes or https://contrave.com
after bariatric surgery: a systematic review. Obes prediabetes: a consensus report. Diabetes Care 132. CHEPLAPHARM and H2-Pharma. Xenical
Rev 2013;14:369–382 2019;42:731–754 (orlistat). Accessed 17 October 2022. Available
123. Jakobsen GS, Småstuen MC, Sandbu R, et al. 128. IBM. Micromedex Red Book. Accessed 9 from https://xenical.com
Association of bariatric surgery vs medical obesity November 2022. Available from https://www. 133. Vivus. Qsymia (phentermine and topiramate
treatment with long-term medical complications and ibm.com/products/micromedex-red-book extended-release) capsules. Accessed 17 October
obesity-related comorbidities. JAMA 2018;319:291–301 129. Data.Medicaid.gov. NADAC (National Average 2022. Available from https://qsymia.com
124. King WC, Chen JY, Mitchell JE, et al. Prevalence Drug Acquisition Cost). Accessed 4 October 2022. 134. Novo Nordisk. Saxenda (liraglutide injection
of alcohol use disorders before and after bariatric Available from https://data.medicaid.gov/dataset/ 3 mg). Accessed 17 October 2022. Available from
surgery. JAMA 2012;307:2516–2525 dfa2ab14-06c2-457a-9e36-5cb6d80f8d93 https://www.saxenda.com
125. Young-Hyman D, Peyrot M. Psychosocial 130. U.S. National Library of Medicine. 135. Aronne LJ, Wadden TA, Peterson C, Winslow
Care for People with Diabetes. 1st ed. Alexandria, Phentermine–phentermine hydrochloride capsule. D, Odeh S, Gadde KM. Evaluation of phentermine
Recommendations
9.1 Most individuals with type 1 diabetes should be treated with multiple daily
injections of prandial and basal insulin, or continuous subcutaneous insulin
infusion. A
9.2 Most individuals with type 1 diabetes should use rapid-acting insulin analogs
to reduce hypoglycemia risk. A
9.3 Individuals with type 1 diabetes should receive education on how to match
mealtime insulin doses to carbohydrate intake, fat and protein content, and
anticipated physical activity. B
Insulin Therapy
Because the hallmark of type 1 diabetes is absent or near-absent b-cell function,
insulin treatment is essential for individuals with type 1 diabetes. In addition to hy- Disclosure information for each author is
perglycemia, insulinopenia can contribute to other metabolic disturbances like hy- available at https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-SDIS.
pertriglyceridemia and ketoacidosis as well as tissue catabolism that can be life Suggested citation: ElSayed NA, Aleppo G,
threatening. Severe metabolic decompensation can be, and was, mostly prevented Aroda VR, et al., American Diabetes Association.
with once- or twice-daily injections for the six or seven decades after the discovery 9. Pharmacologic approaches to glycemic treat-
of insulin. However, over the past three decades, evidence has accumulated sup- ment: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2023.
Diabetes Care 2023;46(Suppl. 1):S140–S157
porting more intensive insulin replacement, using multiple daily injections of insulin
or continuous subcutaneous administration through an insulin pump, as providing © 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.
the best combination of effectiveness and safety for people with type 1 diabetes. Readers may use this article as long as the
work is properly cited, the use is educational
The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) demonstrated that intensive and not for profit, and the work is not altered.
therapy with multiple daily injections or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion More information is available at https://www.
(CSII) reduced A1C and was associated with improved long-term outcomes (1–3). diabetesjournals.org/journals/pages/license.
diabetesjournals.org/care Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment S141
The study was carried out with short- to the individual to keep them safe and monitoring should be considered in most
acting (regular) and intermediate-acting out of diabetic ketoacidosis and to avoid individuals with type 1 diabetes. AID sys-
(NPH) human insulins. In this landmark significant hypoglycemia, with every ef- tems may be considered in individuals
trial, lower A1C with intensive control fort made to reach the individual’s gly- with type 1 diabetes who are capable of
(7%) led to 50% reductions in micro- cemic targets. using the device safely (either by them-
vascular complications over 6 years of Most studies comparing multiple daily selves or with a caregiver) in order to
treatment. However, intensive therapy injections with CSII have been relatively improve time in range and reduce A1C
was associated with a higher rate of se- small and of short duration. However, a and hypoglycemia (22). See Section 7,
vere hypoglycemia than conventional systematic review and meta-analysis con- “Diabetes Technology,” for a full discus-
treatment (62 compared with 19 epi- cluded that CSII via pump therapy has sion of insulin delivery devices.
sodes per 100 patient-years of therapy). modest advantages for lowering A1C In general, individuals with type 1 dia-
Follow-up of subjects from the DCCT ( 0.30% [95% CI 0.58 to 0.02]) and betes require 50% of their daily insulin
adjust prandial insulin to account for car- the adipogenic actions of insulin at a site SURGICAL TREATMENT FOR TYPE 1
bohydrate intake, premeal glucose levels, of multiple injections. Lipohypertrophy ap- DIABETES
and anticipated activity can be effective pears as soft, smooth raised areas several Pancreas and Islet Transplantation
and should be offered to most individuals centimeters in breadth and can contribute Successful pancreas and islet transplan-
(25,26). For individuals in whom carbohy- to erratic insulin absorption, increased tation can normalize glucose levels and
drate counting is effective, estimates of glycemic variability, and unexplained mitigate microvascular complications of
the fat and protein content of meals can hypoglycemic episodes. People treated type 1 diabetes. However, people receiving
be incorporated into their prandial dos- with insulin and/or caregivers should these treatments require lifelong immuno-
ing for added benefit (27) (see Section 5, receive education about proper injec- suppression to prevent graft rejection and/
“Facilitating Positive Health Behaviors and tion site rotation and how to recognize or recurrence of autoimmune islet destruc-
Well-being to Improve Health Outcomes”). and avoid areas of lipohypertrophy. As tion. Given the potential adverse effects
of immunosuppressive therapy, pancreas
The 2021 ADA/European Association noted in Table 4.1, examination of insu-
TIR % highest and TBR % lowest numeracy or literacy skills). glucose outside of activity of
with: hybrid closed-loop > low- URAA/RAA bolus.
glucose suspend > CGM-
augmented open-loop > BGM-
augmented open-loop.
MDI: LAA 1 flexible doses of URAA LAA once daily (insulin detemir or Can use pens for all components. At least four daily injections. Mealtime insulin: if carbohydrate
or RAA at meals insulin glargine may require twice- Flexibility in meal timing and Most costly insulins. counting is accurate, change ICR if
daily dosing); generally 50% of content. Smallest increment of insulin is glucose after meal consistently out
TDD. Insulin analogs cause less 1 unit (0.5 unit with some pens). of target.
Mealtime and correction: URAA or hypoglycemia than human insulins. LAAs may not cover strong dawn Correction insulin: adjust ISF and/or
RAA based on ICR and/or ISF and phenomenon (rise in glucose in target glucose if correction does
target glucose. early morning hours) as well as not consistently bring glucose into
pump therapy. range.
LAA: based on overnight or fasting
glucose or daytime glucose
outside of activity time course, or
URAA or RAA injections.
MDI regimens with less flexibility
Four injections daily with fixed Pre-breakfast: RAA 20% of TDD. May be feasible if unable to Shorter duration RAA may lead to Pre-breakfast RAA: based on BGM
doses of N and RAA Pre-lunch: RAA 10% of TDD. carbohydrate count. basal deficit during day; may need after breakfast or before lunch.
Pre-dinner: RAA 10% of TDD. All meals have RAA coverage. twice-daily N. Pre-lunch RAA: based on BGM after
Bedtime: N 50% of TDD. N is less expensive than LAAs. Greater risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia lunch or before dinner.
with N. Pre-dinner RAA: based on BGM after
Requires relatively consistent mealtimes dinner or at bedtime.
and carbohydrate intake. Evening N: based on fasting or
overnight BGM.
Continued on p. S145
Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
BGM, blood glucose monitoring; CGM, continuous glucose monitoring; ICR, insulin-to-carbohydrate ratio; ISF, insulin sensitivity factor; LAA, long-acting analog; MDI, multiple daily injections; N, NPH
insulin; R, short-acting (regular) insulin; RAA, rapid-acting analog; TDD, total daily insulin dose; URAA, ultra-rapid-acting analog. Reprinted from Holt et al. (5).
Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment
S145
modifications and health behaviors that cologic approaches that provide the ef- Weight management is an impactful com-
improve health (see Section 5, “Facilitating ficacy to achieve treatment goals should ponent of glucose-lowering management
Positive Health Behaviors and Well-being be considered, such as metformin or other in type 2 diabetes (45,46). The glucose-
to Improve Health Outcomes”) should be agents, including combination therapy, that lowering treatment regimen should con-
emphasized along with any pharmacologic provide adequate efficacy to achieve and sider approaches that support weight
therapy. Section 13, “Older Adults,” and maintain treatment goals (45). In adults management goals, with very high ef-
Section 14, “Children and Adolescents,” with type 2 diabetes and established/high ficacy for weight loss seen with sema-
have recommendations specific for older risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease glutide and tirzepatide (Fig. 9.3 and
adults and for children and adolescents (ASCVD), heart failure (HF), and/or chronic Table 9.2) (45).
with type 2 diabetes, respectively. Sec- kidney disease (CKD), the treatment regi- Metformin is effective and safe, is inex-
tion 10, “Cardiovascular Disease and Risk men should include agents that reduce cardi- pensive, and may reduce risk of cardiovas-
Management,” and Section 11, “Chronic orenal risk (see Fig. 9.3, Table 9.2, Section cular events and death (47). Metformin is
Kidney Disease and Risk Management,” 10, “Cardiovascular Disease and Risk available in an immediate-release form for
have recommendations for the use of glucose- Management,” and Section 11, “Chronic twice-daily dosing or as an extended-
lowering drugs in the management of cardio- Kidney Disease and Risk Management”). release form that can be given once daily.
vascular and renal disease, respectively. Pharmacologic approaches that provide the Compared with sulfonylureas, metformin
efficacy to achieve treatment goals should as first-line therapy has beneficial effects
Choice of Glucose-Lowering Therapy be considered, specified as metformin or on A1C, weight, and cardiovascular mor-
Healthy lifestyle behaviors, diabetes self- agent(s), including combination therapy, tality (48).
management, education, and support, that provide adequate efficacy to achieve The principal side effects of metfor-
avoidance of clinical inertia, and social and maintain treatment goals (Fig. 9.3 and min are gastrointestinal intolerance due
determinants of health should be consid- Table 9.2). In general, higher-efficacy ap- to bloating, abdominal discomfort, and
ered in the glucose-lowering manage- proaches have greater likelihood of achiev- diarrhea; these can be mitigated by grad-
ment of type 2 diabetes. Pharmacologic ing glycemic goals, with the following ual dose titration. The drug is cleared by
therapy should be guided by person- considered to have very high efficacy for renal filtration, and very high circulating
centered treatment factors, including glucose lowering: the GLP-1 RAs dulaglutide levels (e.g., as a result of overdose or
comorbidities and treatment goals. Phar- (high dose) and semaglutide, the gastric in- acute renal failure) have been associated
macotherapy should be started at the hibitory peptide (GIP) and GLP-1 RA tirze- with lactic acidosis. However, the occur-
time type 2 diabetes is diagnosed unless patide, insulin, combination oral therapy, rence of this complication is now known
there are contraindications. Pharma- and combination injectable therapy. to be very rare, and metformin may be
diabetesjournals.org/care
Figure 9.3—Use of glucose-lowering medications in the management of type 2 diabetes. ACEi, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; ACR, albumin-to-creatinine ratio; ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardio-
vascular disease; CGM, continuous glucose monitoring; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; CVOT, cardiovascular outcomes trial; DPP-4i, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor; eGFR, estimated glomeru-
lar filtration rate; GLP-1 RA, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist; HF, heart failure; HFpEF, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; HFrEF, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; HHF, hospitalization for heart failure; MACE,
Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment
major adverse cardiovascular events; MI, myocardial infarction; SDOH, social determinants of health; SGLT2i, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor; T2D, type 2 diabetes; TZD, thiazolidinedione. Adapted from Davies et al. (45).
S147
CV, cardiovascular; CVOT, cardiovascular outcomes trial; DKA, diabetic ketoacidosis; DKD, diabetic kidney disease; DPP-4, dipeptidyl peptidase 4; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; FDA,
U.S. Food and Drug Administration; GI, gastrointestinal; GIP, gastric inhibitory polypeptide; GLP-1 RA, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist; HF, heart failure; NASH, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis;
MACE, major adverse cardiovascular events; SGLT2, sodium–glucose cotransporter 2; SQ, subcutaneous; T2DM, type 2 diabetes mellitus. *For agent-specific dosing recommendations, please refer
Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
to manufacturers’ prescribing information. 1Tsapas et al. (62). 2Tsapas et al. (114). Reprinted from Davies et al. (45).
safely used in people with reduced esti- durability of glycemic effect (57). The Table 10.3C, and Section 10, “Cardiovascular
mated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR); VERIFY (Vildagliptin Efficacy in combina- Disease and Risk Management”) is recom-
the FDA has revised the label for metfor- tion with metfoRmln For earlY treatment mended as part of the glucose-lowering
min to reflect its safety in people with of type 2 diabetes) trial demonstrated regimen independent of A1C, independent
eGFR $30 mL/min/1.73 m2 (49). A ran- that initial combination therapy is supe- of metformin use and in consideration of
domized trial confirmed previous obser- rior to sequential addition of medications person-specific factors (Fig. 9.3). For peo-
vations that metformin use is associated for extending primary and secondary fail- ple without established ASCVD, indica-
with vitamin B12 deficiency and worsen- ure (58). In the VERIFY trial, participants tors of high ASCVD risk, HF, or CKD,
ing of symptoms of neuropathy (50). This receiving the initial combination of met- medication choice is guided by efficacy
is compatible with a report from the Di- formin and the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 in support of individualized glycemic and
abetes Prevention Program Outcomes (DPP-4) inhibitor vildagliptin had a slower weight management goals, avoidance of
Study (DPPOS) suggesting periodic test- decline of glycemic control compared with side effects (particularly hypoglycemia
TO AVOID
THERAPEUTIC
Use principles in Figure 9.3, including reinforcement of behavioral INERTIA
REASSESS AND
interventions (weight management and physical activity) and provision MODIFY TREATMENT
of DSMES, to meet individualized treatment goals REGULARLY
(3–6 MONTHS)
Consider GLP-1 RA or GIP/GLP-1 RA in most individuals prior to insulin2 If already on GLP-1 RA or dual GIP
INITIATION: Initiate appropriate starting dose for agent selected (varies within class) and GLP-1 RA or if these are not
TITRATION: Titrate to maintenance dose (varies within class) appropriate OR insulin is preferred
If above A1C target and not already on a GLP-1 RA or dual GIP and GLP-1 RA,
consider these classes, either in free combination or fixed-ratio combination, with insulin.
If A1C remains above target:
1. Consider insulin as the first injectable if evidence of ongoing catabolism, symptoms of hyperglycemia are present, when A1C levels (>10% [86 mmol/mol]) or blood glucose levels
( 300 mg/dL [16.7 mmol/L]) are very high, or a diagnosis of type 1 diabetes is a possibility.
2. When selecting GLP-1 RA, consider individual preference, A1C lowering, weight-lowering effect, or fequency of injection. If CVD is present, consider GLP-1 RA with proven CVD benefit. Oral or
injectable GLP-1 RA are appropriate.
3. For people on GLP-1 RA and basal insulin combination, consider use of a fixed-ratio combination product (IDegLira or iGlarLixi).
4. Consider switching from evening NPH to a basal analog if the individual develops hypoglycemia and/or frequently forgets to administer NPH in the evening and would be better managed
with an A.M. dose of a long-acting basal insulin.
5. If adding prandial insulin to NPH, consider initiation of a self-mixed or premixed insulin regimen to decrease the number of injections required.
Figure 9.4—Intensifying to injectable therapies in type 2 diabetes. DSMES, diabetes self-management education and support; FPG, fasting plasma
glucose; GLP-1 RA, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist; max, maximum; PPG, postprandial glucose. Adapted from Davies et al. (43).
diabetesjournals.org/care Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment S151
who are intensified to insulin therapy, provide the complementary outcomes analogs (U-100 glargine or detemir) have
combination therapy with a GLP-1 RA benefits associated with these classes been demonstrated to reduce the risk of
has been shown to have greater efficacy of medication (76). In cardiovascular symptomatic and nocturnal hypoglycemia
and durability of glycemic treatment ef- outcomes trials, empagliflozin, canagli- compared with NPH insulin (80–85), al-
fect, as well as weight and hypoglycemia flozin, dapagliflozin, liraglutide, semaglu- though these advantages are modest and
benefit, than treatment intensification tide, and dulaglutide all had beneficial may not persist (86). Longer-acting basal
with insulin alone (45). However, cost effects on indices of CKD, while dedicated analogs (U-300 glargine or degludec) may
and tolerability issues are important renal outcomes studies have demonstrated convey a lower hypoglycemia risk com-
considerations in GLP-1 RA use. benefit of specific SGLT2 inhibitors. See pared with U-100 glargine when used in
Costs for diabetes medications have Section 11, “Chronic Kidney Disease and combination with oral agents (87–93).
increased dramatically over the past two Risk Management,” for discussion of how Clinicians should be aware of the poten-
decades, and an increasing proportion is tial for overbasalization with insulin ther-
CKD may impact treatment choices. Ad-
Table 9.3—Median monthly (30-day) AWP and NADAC of maximum approved daily dose of noninsulin glucose-lowering
agents in the U.S.
Dosage strength/ Median AWP Median NADAC Maximum approved
Class Compound(s) product (if applicable) (min, max)† (min, max)† daily dose*
Biguanides Metformin 850 mg (IR) $106 ($5, $189) $2 2,550 mg
1,000 mg (IR) $87 ($3, $144) $2 2,000 mg
1,000 mg (ER) $242 ($242, $7,214) $32 ($32, $160) 2,000 mg
Sulfonylureas (2nd Glimepiride 4 mg $74 ($71, $198) $3 8 mg
generation) Glipizide 10 mg (IR) $70 ($67, $91) $6 40 mg
10 mg (XL/ER) $48 ($46, $48) $11 20 mg
Glyburide 6 mg (micronized) $52 ($48, $71) $12 12 mg
5 mg $79 ($63, $93) $9 20 mg
AWP, average wholesale price; DPP-4, dipeptidyl peptidase 4; ER and XL, extended release; GIP, glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide; GLP-1 RA,
glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist; IR, immediate release; max, maximum; min, minimum; NA, data not available; NADAC, National Average Drug
Acquisition Cost; SGLT2, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2. †Calculated for 30-day supply (AWP [72] or NADAC [73] unit price × number of doses re-
quired to provide maximum approved daily dose × 30 days); median AWP or NADAC listed alone when only one product and/or price.
*Utilized to calculate median AWP and NADAC (min, max); generic prices used, if available commercially. **Administered once weekly. ††AWP and
NADAC calculated based on 120 mg three times daily.
address prandial control and to minimize with type 1 diabetes, require higher Concentrated Insulins
the risks of hypoglycemia and weight gain daily doses (1 unit/kg), and have lower Several concentrated insulin preparations
associated with insulin therapy (45). For rates of hypoglycemia (97). Titration can are currently available. U-500 regular
individuals who advance to prandial in- be based on home glucose monitoring or insulin is, by definition, five times more
sulin, a prandial insulin dose of 4 units or A1C. With significant additions to the pran- concentrated than U-100 regular insulin.
10% of the amount of basal insulin at the dial insulin dose, particularly with the eve- U-500 regular insulin has distinct phar-
largest meal or the meal with the great- ning meal, consideration should be macokinetics with delayed onset and
est postprandial excursion is a safe esti- given to decreasing basal insulin. Meta- longer duration of action, has charac-
mate for initiating therapy. The prandial analyses of trials comparing rapid-acting teristics more like an intermediate-acting
insulin regimen can then be intensified insulin analogs with human regular insu- (NPH) insulin, and can be used as two or
based on individual needs (Fig. 9.4). In- lin in type 2 diabetes have not reported three daily injections (100). U-300 glar-
dividuals with type 2 diabetes are gen- important differences in A1C or hypogly- gine and U-200 degludec are three and
erally more insulin resistant than those cemia (98,99). two times as concentrated as their U-100
diabetesjournals.org/care Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment S153
Table 9.4—Median cost of insulin products in the U.S. calculated as AWP (72) and NADAC (73) per 1,000 units of specified
dosage form/product
Median AWP Median
Insulins Compounds Dosage form/product (min, max)* NADAC*
Rapid-acting Lispro follow-on product U-100 vial $118 ($118, $157) $94
U-100 prefilled pen $151 $121
Lispro U-100 vial $99† $79†
U-100 cartridge $408 $326
U-100 prefilled pen $127† $102†
U-200 prefilled pen $424 $339
Lispro-aabc U-100 vial $330 $261
U-100 prefilled pen $424 $339
U-200 prefilled pen $424 NA
Glulisine U-100 vial $341 $272
formulations, respectively, and allow who require large doses of insulin. While pharmacokinetics (8). Studies comparing
higher doses of basal insulin adminis- U-500 regular insulin is available in both inhaled insulin with injectable insulin
tration per volume used. U-300 glargine prefilled pens and vials, other concen- have demonstrated its faster onset and
has a longer duration of action than trated insulins are available only in pre- shorter duration compared with rapid-
U-100 glargine but modestly lower efficacy filled pens to minimize the risk of dosing acting insulin lispro as well as clinically
per unit administered (101,102). The errors. meaningful A1C reductions and weight
FDA has also approved a concentrated reductions compared with insulin aspart
formulation of rapid-acting insulin lispro, Alternative Insulin Routes over 24 weeks (103–105). Use of in-
U-200 (200 units/mL), and insulin lispro- Insulins with different routes of admin- haled insulin may result in a decline in
aabc (U-200). These concentrated prepa- istration (inhaled, bolus-only insulin de- lung function (reduced forced expiratory
rations may be more convenient and livery patch pump) are also available volume in 1 s [FEV1]). Inhaled insulin is
comfortable for individuals to inject and (45). Inhaled insulin is available as a contraindicated in individuals with chronic
may improve treatment plan engage- rapid-acting insulin; studies in individu- lung disease, such as asthma and chronic
ment in those with insulin resistance als with type 1 diabetes suggest rapid obstructive pulmonary disease, and is not
S154 Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
recommended in individuals who smoke options as well as recommendations for fur- 7. Bartley PC, Bogoev M, Larsen J, Philotheou A.
or who recently stopped smoking. All ther intensification, if needed, to achieve Long-term efficacy and safety of insulin detemir
compared to neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin
individuals require spirometry (FEV1) glycemic goals. When initiating combination in patients with type 1 diabetes using a treat-
testing to identify potential lung disease injectable therapy, metformin therapy to-target basal-bolus regimen with insulin aspart
prior to and after starting inhaled insulin should be maintained, while sulfonylureas at meals: a 2-year, randomized, controlled trial.
therapy. and DPP-4 inhibitors are typically weaned Diabet Med 2008;25:442–449
8. DeWitt DE, Hirsch IB. Outpatient insulin
or discontinued. In individuals with sub- therapy in type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus:
Combination Injectable Therapy optimal blood glucose control, especially scientific review. JAMA 2003;289:2254–2264
If basal insulin has been titrated to an those requiring large insulin doses, ad- 9. Bode BW, McGill JB, Lorber DL, Gross JL, Chang
acceptable fasting blood glucose level junctive use of a thiazolidinedione or an PC; Affinity 1 Study Group. Inhaled technosphere
(or if the dose is >0.5 units/kg/day with SGLT2 inhibitor may help to improve con- insulin compared with injected prandial insulin
in type 1 diabetes: a randomized 24-week trial.
indications of need for other therapy) trol and reduce the amount of insulin Diabetes Care 2015;38:2266–2273
multicentre, 12-week randomised trial. Lancet controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-
2018;392:1321–1329 2017;5:597–609 drug-safety-communication-fda-revises-warnings-
22. Brown SA, Kovatchev BP, Raghinaru D, et al.; 36. Mathieu C, Zinman B, Hemmingsson JU, regarding-use-diabetes-medicine-metformin-certain
iDCL Trial Research Group. Six-month randomized, et al.; ADJUNCT ONE Investigators. Efficacy and 50. Out M, Kooy A, Lehert P, Schalkwijk CA,
multicenter trial of closed-loop control in type 1 safety of liraglutide added to insulin treatment in Stehouwer CDA. Long-term treatment with
diabetes. N Engl J Med 2019;381:1707–1717 type 1 diabetes: the ADJUNCT ONE treat-to-target metformin in type 2 diabetes and methylmalonic
23. Peters AL, Laffel L (Eds.). American Diabetes randomized trial. Diabetes Care 2016;39:1702– acid: post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled
Association/JDRF Type 1 Diabetes Sourcebook. 1710 4.3-year trial. J Diabetes Complications 2018;32:
Alexandria, VA, American Diabetes Association, 37. Ahren B, Hirsch IB, Pieber TR, et al.; ADJUNCT 171–178
2013 TWO Investigators. Efficacy and safety of liraglutide 51. Aroda VR, Edelstein SL, Goldberg RB, et al.;
24. Chiang JL, Kirkman MS, Laffel LMB; Type 1 added to capped insulin treatment in subjects with Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group.
Diabetes Sourcebook Authors. Type 1 diabetes type 1 diabetes: the ADJUNCT TWO randomized Long-term metformin use and vitamin B12 deficiency
through the life span: a position statement of the trial. Diabetes Care 2016;39:1693–1701 in the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study.
American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care 38. Dandona P, Mathieu C, Phillip M, et al.; DEPICT-1 J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2016;101:1754–1761
2014;37:2034–2054 Investigators. Efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in 52. Henry RR, Murray AV, Marmolejo MH,
and network meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 77. Blonde L, Merilainen M, Karwe V; TITRATE 90. Marso SP, McGuire DK, Zinman B, et al.;
2020;173:278–286 Study Group. Patient-directed titration for achieving DEVOTE Study Group. Efficacy and safety of
63. Pratley R, Amod A, Hoff ST, et al.; PIONEER 4 glycaemic goals using a once-daily basal insulin degludec versus glargine in type 2 diabetes. N
investigators. Oral semaglutide versus subcutaneous analogue: an assessment of two different fasting Engl J Med 2017;377:723–732
liraglutide and placebo in type 2 diabetes (PIONEER plasma glucose targets–the TITRATE study. Diabetes 91. Rodbard HW, Cariou B, Zinman B, et al.; BEGIN
4): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3a trial. Lancet Obes Metab 2009;11:623–631 Once Long Trial Investigators. Comparison of insulin
2019;394:39–50 78. Porcellati F, Lucidi P, Cioli P, et al. Pharma- degludec with insulin glargine in insulin-naive
64. Singh S, Wright EE Jr, Kwan AYM, et al. cokinetics and pharmacodynamics of insulin subjects with type 2 diabetes: a 2-year randomized,
Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists compared glargine given in the evening as compared with treat-to-target trial. Diabet Med 2013;30:1298–
with basal insulins for the treatment of type 2 in the morning in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 1304
diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta- 2015;38:503–512 92. Wysham C, Bhargava A, Chaykin L, et al. Effect
analysis. Diabetes Obes Metab 2017;19:228–238 79. Wang Z, Hedrington MS, Gogitidze Joy N, et al. of insulin degludec vs insulin glargine u100 on
65. Levin PA, Nguyen H, Wittbrodt ET, Kim SC. Dose-response effects of insulin glargine in type 2 hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes: the
Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: a diabetes. Diabetes Care 2010;33:1555–1560 SWITCH 2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2017;
systematic review of comparative effectiveness 80. Singh SR, Ahmad F, Lal A, Yu C, Bai Z, Bennett 318:45–56
injections: the STAT study. Diabetes Technol Ther 108. Maiorino MI, Chiodini P, Bellastella G, Capuano to titrated insulin glargine on glycemic control in
2018;20:639–647 A, Esposito K, Giugliano D. Insulin and glucagon-like patients with type 2 diabetes: the SURPASS-5
104. Hoogwerf BJ, Pantalone KM, Basina M, Jones peptide 1 receptor agonist combination therapy in randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2022;327:534–
MC, Grant M, Kendall DM. Results of a 24-week type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta- 545
trial of technosphere insulin versus insulin aspart in analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes 112. Taybani Z, B otyik B, Katk
o M, Gyimesi A,
type 2 diabetes. Endocr Pract 2021;27:38–43 Care 2017;40:614–624 Varkonyi T. Simplifying complex insulin regimens
105. Grant M, Heise T, Baughman R. Comparison 109. Aroda VR, Rosenstock J, Wysham C, et al.; while preserving good glycemic control in type 2
of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of LixiLan-L Trial Investigators. Efficacy and safety of diabetes. Diabetes Ther 2019;10:1869–1878
inhaled technosphere insulin and subcutaneous LixiLan, a titratable fixed-ratio combination of 113. Rodbard HW, Visco VE, Andersen H, Hiort LC,
insulin lispro in the treatment of type 1 diabetes insulin glargine plus lixisenatide in type 2 diabetes Shu DHW. Treatment intensification with
mellitus. Clin Pharmacokinet 2022;61:413–422 inadequately controlled on basal insulin and metformin: stepwise addition of prandial insulin aspart
106. Diamant M, Nauck MA, Shaginian R, et al.; the LixiLan-L randomized trial. Diabetes Care 2016; boluses compared with full basal-bolus therapy
4B Study Group. Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor 39:1972–1980 (FullSTEP Study): a randomised, treat-to-target
agonist or bolus insulin with optimized basal 110. Lingvay I, Perez Manghi F, Garcıa-Hernandez clinical trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2014;2:
insulin in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2014; P, et al.; DUAL V Investigators. Effect of insulin 30–37
A recent meta-analysis indicated that and are similar to those for people with such as albuminuria. Although some vari-
SGLT2 inhibitors reduce the risk of heart type 2 diabetes. ability in calibration exists in various sub-
failure hospitalization, cardiovascular mor- As depicted in Fig. 10.1, a comprehen- groups, including by sex, race, and diabetes,
tality, and all-cause mortality in people sive approach to the reduction in risk of the overall risk prediction does not differ
with (secondary prevention) and without diabetes-related complications is recom- in those with or without diabetes (13–16),
(primary prevention) cardiovascular dis- mended. Therapy that includes multiple, validating the use of risk calculators in
ease (12). concurrent evidence-based approaches to people with diabetes. The 10-year risk of
For prevention and management of care will provide complementary reduc- a first ASCVD event should be assessed to
both ASCVD and heart failure, cardio- tion in the risks of microvascular, kidney, better stratify ASCVD risk and help guide
vascular risk factors should be systemat- neurologic, and cardiovascular complica- therapy, as described below.
ically assessed at least annually in all tions. Management of glycemia, blood Recently, risk scores and other cardio-
people with diabetes. These risk factors pressure, and lipids and the incorpora- vascular biomarkers have been devel-
Recommendations
10.1 Blood pressure should be
measured at every routine
clinical visit. When possible,
individuals found to have ele-
vated blood pressure (systolic
blood pressure 120–129 mmHg
and diastolic <80 mmHg)
should have blood pressure
confirmed using multiple read-
Figure 10.1—Multifactorial approach to reduction in risk of diabetes complications. *Risk re- ings, including measurements
duction interventions to be applied as individually appropriate.
S160 Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
on a separate day, to diag- targets should be individual- of <130/80 mmHg derives primarily from
nose hypertension. A Hyper- ized through a shared decision- the collective evidence of the following
tension is defined as a systolic making process that addresses randomized controlled trials. The Systolic
blood pressure $130 mmHg cardiovascular risk, potential ad- Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT)
or a diastolic blood pressure verse effects of antihypertensive demonstrated that treatment to a target
$80 mmHg based on an medications, and patient prefer- systolic blood pressure of <120 mmHg
average of $2 measurements ences. B decreases cardiovascular event rates
obtained on $2 occasions. A 10.4 People with diabetes and by 25% in high-risk patients, although
Individuals with blood pres- hypertension qualify for anti- people with diabetes were excluded from
sure $180/110 mmHg and hypertensive drug therapy when this trial (33). The recently completed
cardiovascular disease could the blood pressure is persistently Strategy of Blood Pressure Intervention in
be diagnosed with hyperten- elevated $130/80 mmHg. The the Elderly Hypertensive Patients (STEP)
$130 mmHg and increased cardiovascu- hypertension to a systolic blood pres- significantly reduced the risk of stroke by
lar risk and treated to a systolic blood sure target of 110 to <130 mmHg (in- 31% but did not reduce the risk of MI
pressure target of <120 mmHg (in- tensive treatment) or a target of 130 to (38). Another meta-analysis of 19 trials in-
tensive treatment) versus a target of <150 mmHg (34). In this trial, the pri- cluding 44,989 patients showed that a
<140 mmHg (standard treatment). The mary composite outcome of stroke, mean blood pressure of 133/76 mmHg is
primary composite outcome of myocar- acute coronary syndrome, acute decom- associated with a 14% risk reduction for
dial infarction (MI), coronary syndromes, pensated heart failure, coronary revas- major cardiovascular events compared with
stroke, heart failure, or death from cardio- cularization, atrial fibrillation, or death a mean blood pressure of 140/81 mmHg
vascular causes was reduced by 25% in from cardiovascular causes was reduced (32). This benefit was greatest in people
the intensive treatment group. The by 26% in the intensive treatment with diabetes. An analysis of trials includ-
achieved systolic blood pressures in the group. In this trial, 18.9% of patients in ing people with type 2 diabetes and im-
trial were 121 mmHg and 136 mmHg in the intensive treatment arm and 19.4% paired glucose tolerance with achieved
systolic blood pressures of <135 mmHg
Table 10.1—Randomized controlled trials of intensive versus standard hypertension treatment strategies
Clinical trial Population Intensive Standard Outcomes
ACCORD BP (35) 4,733 participants with SBP target: SBP target: No benefit in primary end point:
T2D aged 40–79 <120 mmHg 130–140 mmHg composite of nonfatal MI, nonfatal
years with prior Achieved (mean) Achieved (mean) stroke, and CVD death
evidence of CVD or SBP/DBP: SBP/DBP: Stroke risk reduced 41% with
multiple 119.3/64.4 mmHg 135/70.5 mmHg intensive control, not sustained
cardiovascular risk through follow-up beyond the
factors period of active treatment
Adverse events more common in
intensive group, particularly
elevated serum creatinine and
electrolyte abnormalities
ACCORD BP, Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure trial; ACS, acute coronary syndrome; ADVANCE, Action in Diabe-
tes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation; AKI, acute kidney injury; CVD, cardiovascular disease; DBP, dia-
stolic blood pressure; HOT, Hypertension Optimal Treatment trial; MI, myocardial infarction; SBP, systolic blood pressure; SPRINT, Systolic
Blood Pressure Intervention Trial; STEP, Strategy of Blood Pressure Intervention in the Elderly Hypertensive Patients; T2D, type 2 diabetes.
pressure control when they have high ab- Potential adverse effects of antihyper- pressure control (43). In addition, individ-
solute cardiovascular risk. This approach is tensive therapy (e.g., hypotension, syn- uals with orthostatic hypotension, sub-
consistent with guidelines from the Ameri- cope, falls, acute kidney injury, and stantial comorbidity, functional limitations,
can College of Cardiology and Ameri- electrolyte abnormalities) should also or polypharmacy may be at high risk of
can Heart Association, which also advocate be taken into account (33,35,42,43). adverse effects, and some patients may
a blood pressure target of <130/80 mmHg Individuals with older age, CKD, and frailty prefer higher blood pressure targets
for all people, with or without diabetes have been shown to be at higher risk to enhance quality of life. However, in
(20). of adverse effects of intensive blood ACCORD BP, it was found that intensive
diabetesjournals.org/care Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management S163
blood pressure lowering decreased the medically indicated preterm birth at increasing potassium intake,
risk of cardiovascular events irrespective <35 weeks of gestation, placental abrup- moderation of alcohol in-
of baseline diastolic blood pressure in tion, or fetal/neonatal death, occurred in take, and increased physi-
patients who also received standard gly- 30.2% of female participants in the ac- cal activity. A
cemic control (44). Therefore, the pres- tive treatment group vs. 37.0% in the
ence of low diastolic blood pressure is control group (P < 0.001). The mean
not necessarily a contraindication to systolic blood pressure between ran- Lifestyle management is an important
more intensive blood pressure man- domization and delivery was 129.5 mmHg component of hypertension treatment
agement in the context of otherwise in the active treatment group and because it lowers blood pressure, enhan-
standard care. 132.6 mmHg in the control group. ces the effectiveness of some antihyper-
Current evidence supports controlling tensive medications, promotes other
Pregnancy and Antihypertensive Medications blood pressure to 110–135/85 mmHg to aspects of metabolic and vascular health,
No Yes No Yes
Figure 10.2—Recommendations for the treatment of confirmed hypertension in people with diabetes. *An ACE inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor
blocker (ARB) is suggested to treat hypertension for people with coronary artery disease (CAD) or urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio 30–299 mg/g creati-
nine and strongly recommended for individuals with urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio $300 mg/g creatinine. **Thiazide-like diuretic; long-acting agents
shown to reduce cardiovascular events, such as chlorthalidone and indapamide, are preferred. ***Dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker (CCB). BP,
blood pressure. Adapted from de Boer et al. (20).
the recommended blood pres- or a single-pill combination with diabetes. A ACE inhibi-
sure goal of <130/80 mmHg. A of drugs demonstrated to re- tors or angiotensin receptor
10.8 Individuals with confirmed duce cardiovascular events in blockers are recommended
office-based blood pressure people with diabetes. A first-line therapy for hyperten-
$160/100 mmHg should, in 10.9 Treatment for hypertension sion in people with diabetes
addition to lifestyle therapy, should include drug classes and coronary artery disease. A
have prompt initiation and demonstrated to reduce car- 10.10 Multiple-drug therapy is gener-
timely titration of two drugs diovascular events in people ally required to achieve blood
diabetesjournals.org/care Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management S165
pressure targets. However, reduce the risk of progressive kidney dis- among patients with reduced glomerular
combinations of ACE inhibi- ease (20) (Fig. 10.2). In patients receiving filtration who are at increased risk of hy-
tors and angiotensin receptor ACE inhibitor or ARB therapy, continua- perkalemia and AKI (77,78,80).
blockers and combinations of tion of those medications as kidney func-
tion declines to estimated glomerular Resistant Hypertension
ACE inhibitors or angiotensin
receptor blockers with direct filtration rate (eGFR) <30 mL/min/1.73 m2
Recommendation
renin inhibitors should not be may provide cardiovascular benefit with-
10.13 Individuals with hypertension
used. A out significantly increasing the risk of
who are not meeting blood
10.11 An ACE inhibitor or angiotensin end-stage kidney disease (67). In the ab-
sence of albuminuria, risk of progressive pressure targets on three clas-
receptor blocker, at the ses of antihypertensive medi-
maximum tolerated dose in- kidney disease is low, and ACE inhibitors
and ARBs have not been found to afford cations (including a diuretic)
dicated for blood pressure should be considered for min-
application of a Mediterranean 40 years, or more frequently 10.20 For people with diabetes aged
or Dietary Approaches to Stop if indicated. E 40–75 at higher cardiovascular
Hypertension (DASH) eating 10.17 Obtain a lipid profile at initia- risk, including those with one or
pattern; reduction of saturated tion of statins or other lipid- more atherosclerotic cardiovas-
fat and trans fat; increase of di- lowering therapy, 4–12 weeks cular disease risk factors, it is
etary n-3 fatty acids, viscous fi- after initiation or a change in recommended to use high-
ber, and plant stanols/sterols dose, and annually thereafter intensity statin therapy to reduce
intake; and increased physical as it may help to monitor the LDL cholesterol by $50% of
activity should be recom- response to therapy and in- baseline and to target an LDL
mended to improve the lipid form medication taking. E cholesterol goal of <70 mg/dL. B
profile and reduce the risk of 10.21 For people with diabetes aged
developing atherosclerotic car- 40–75 years at higher cardio-
established ASCVD, intensive therapy is therapy versus simvastatin alone (105). preference) versus placebo. Evolocumab
indicated and has been shown to be of Individuals were $50 years of age, had reduced LDL cholesterol by 59% from a
benefit in multiple large meta-analyses experienced a recent acute coronary syn- median of 92 to 30 mg/dL in the treat-
and randomized cardiovascular out- drome (ACS) and were treated for an av- ment arm.
comes trials (91,99,105,107,108). High- erage of 6 years. Overall, the addition of During the median follow-up of 2.2 years,
intensity statin therapy is recommended ezetimibe led to a 6.4% relative benefit the composite outcome of cardiovascu-
for all people with diabetes and ASCVD and a 2% absolute reduction in major ad- lar death, MI, stroke, hospitalization for
to target an LDL cholesterol reduction of verse cardiovascular events (atheroscle- angina, or revascularization occurred in
$50% from baseline and an LDL choles- rotic cardiovascular events), with the 11.3% vs. 9.8% of the placebo and evo-
terol goal of <55 mg/dL. Based on the degree of benefit being directly propor- locumab groups, respectively, represent-
evidence discussed below, addition of tional to the change in LDL cholesterol, ing a 15% relative risk reduction (P <
ezetimibe or a PCSK9 inhibitor is recom- which was 70 mg/dL in the statin group 0.001). The combined end point of car-
Participants With Atherosclerotic Cardio- Treatment of Other Lipoprotein factor (primary prevention cohort) (121).
vascular Disease and Elevated Low-density Fractions or Targets Patients were randomized to icosapent
Lipoprotein Cholesterol (ORION-10) and ethyl 4 g/day (2 g twice daily with food)
Recommendations
Inclisiran for Subjects With ASCVD or versus placebo. The trial met its primary
ASCVD-Risk Equivalents and Elevated 10.28 For individuals with fasting tri- end point, demonstrating a 25% relative
Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol glyceride levels $500 mg/dL, risk reduction (P < 0.001) for the primary
(ORION-11) trials (116), individuals with evaluate for secondary causes end point composite of cardiovascular
established cardiovascular disease or of hypertriglyceridemia and death, nonfatal MI, nonfatal stroke, coro-
ASCVD risk equivalent were random- consider medical therapy to re- nary revascularization, or unstable angina.
ized to receive inclisiran or placebo. Incli- duce the risk of pancreatitis. C This reduction in risk was seen in people
siran allows less frequent administration 10.29 In adults with moderate hyper- with or without diabetes at baseline. The
compared with monoclonal antibodies triglyceridemia (fasting or non- composite of cardiovascular death, nonfa-
fasting triglycerides 175–499
to provide additional cardio- therapy (128). A total of 25,673 individ- several lines of evidence point against
vascular benefit above statin uals with prior vascular disease were this association, as detailed in a 2018
therapy alone, may increase randomized to receive 2 g of extended- European Atherosclerosis Society Consensus
the risk of stroke with addi- release niacin and 40 mg of laropiprant Panel statement (132). First, there are three
tional side effects, and is gen- (an antagonist of the prostaglandin D2 large randomized trials of statin versus pla-
erally not recommended. A receptor DP1 that has been shown to cebo where specific cognitive tests were
improve participation in niacin therapy) performed, and no differences were seen
versus a matching placebo daily and fol- between statin and placebo (133–136). In
Statin and Fibrate Combination Therapy lowed for a median follow-up period of addition, no change in cognitive function
Combination therapy (statin and fibrate) 3.9 years. There was no significant dif- has been reported in studies with the addi-
is associated with an increased risk for ference in the rate of coronary death, tion of ezetimibe (105) or PCSK9 inhibitors
abnormal transaminase levels, myositis, MI, stroke, or coronary revascularization (108,137) to statin therapy, including
should be considered for indi- bleeding, or other serious bleeding). factor (family history of premature
viduals with stable coronary During a mean follow-up of 7.4 years, ASCVD, hypertension, dyslipidemia, smok-
and/or peripheral artery dis- there was a significant 12% reduction ing, or CKD/albuminuria) who are not at
ease and low bleeding risk to in the primary efficacy end point (8.5% increased risk of bleeding (e.g., older age,
prevent major adverse limb vs. 9.6%; P = 0.01). In contrast, major anemia, renal disease) (148–151). Nonin-
and cardiovascular events. A bleeding was significantly increased from vasive imaging techniques such as coro-
10.38 Aspirin therapy (75–162 mg/day) 3.2 to 4.1% in the aspirin group (rate ra- nary calcium scoring may potentially help
may be considered as a primary tio 1.29; P = 0.003), with most of the ex- further tailor aspirin therapy, particularly
prevention strategy in those cess being gastrointestinal bleeding and in those at low risk (152,153). For people
with diabetes who are at in- other extracranial bleeding. There were >70 years of age (with or without diabe-
creased cardiovascular risk, af- no significant differences by sex, weight, tes), the balance appears to have greater
ter a comprehensive discussion or duration of diabetes or other baseline risk than benefit (144,146). Thus, for pri-
diabetes, there were no significant dif- including intracranial hemorrhage, was with rivaroxaban added to aspirin treatment
ferences in cardiovascular events or ma- noted with dual antiplatelet therapy. in both COMPASS and VOYAGER PAD.
jor bleeding between patients assigned The net clinical benefit (ischemic benefit The risks and benefits of dual antiplate-
to 81 mg and those assigned to 325 mg vs. bleeding risk) was improved with ti- let or antiplatelet plus anticoagulant treat-
of aspirin daily (156). In the U.S., the cagrelor therapy in the large prespeci- ment strategies should be thoroughly
most common low-dose tablet is 81 mg. fied subgroup of patients with history discussed with eligible patients, and
Although platelets from people with di- of percutaneous coronary intervention, shared decision-making should be used
abetes have altered function, it is un- while no net benefit was seen in pa- to determine an individually appropriate
clear what, if any, effect that finding has tients without prior percutaneous coro- treatment approach. This field of cardio-
on the required dose of aspirin for car- nary intervention (165). However, early vascular risk reduction is evolving rapidly,
dioprotective effects in people with dia- aspirin discontinuation compared with as are the definitions of optimal care for
betes. Many alternate pathways for continued dual antiplatelet therapy af- patients with differing types and circum-
Table 10.3A—Cardiovascular and cardiorenal outcomes trials of available antihyperglycemic medications completed after
the issuance of the FDA 2008 guidelines: DPP-4 inhibitors
SAVOR-TIMI 53 (224) EXAMINE (235) TECOS (226) CARMELINA (193,236) CAROLINA (193,237)
(n = 16,492) (n = 5,380) (n = 14,671) (n = 6,979) (n = 6,042)
Intervention Saxagliptin/placebo Alogliptin/placebo Sitagliptin/placebo Linagliptin/placebo Linagliptin/
glimepiride
Main inclusion Type 2 diabetes and Type 2 diabetes and Type 2 diabetes and Type 2 diabetes and Type 2 diabetes and
criteria history of or ACS within 15–90 preexisting CVD high CV and renal high CV risk
multiple risk days before risk
factors for CVD randomization
A1C inclusion $6.5 6.5–11.0 6.5–8.0 6.5–10.0 6.5–8.5
criteria (%)
—, not assessed/reported; ACS, acute coronary syndrome; CHF, congestive heart failure; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease;
DPP-4, dipeptidyl peptidase 4; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; ESRD, end-stage renal disease; GLP-1, glucagon-like peptide 1; HF,
heart failure; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular event; MI, myocardial infarction; UL, upper limit. Data from this table was adapted from
Cefalu et al. (238) in the January 2018 issue of Diabetes Care. †Age was reported as means in all trials except EXAMINE, which reported me-
dians; diabetes duration was reported as means in all trials except SAVOR-TIMI 53 and EXAMINE, which reported medians. ‡Significant differ-
ence in A1C between groups (P < 0.05). §Outcomes reported as hazard ratio (95% CI). jjWorsening nephropathy is defined as a doubling of
creatinine level, initiation of dialysis, renal transplantation, or creatinine >6.0 mg/dL (530 mmol/L) in SAVOR-TIMI 53. Worsening nephropathy
was a prespecified exploratory adjudicated outcome in SAVOR-TIMI 53.
S174
Table 10.3B—Cardiovascular and cardiorenal outcomes trials of available antihyperglycemic medications completed after the issuance of the FDA 2008 guidelines: GLP-1
receptor agonists
ELIXA (208) LEADER (203) SUSTAIN-6 (204)* EXSCEL (209) REWIND (207) PIONEER-6 (205)
(n = 6,068) (n = 9,340) (n = 3,297) (n = 14,752) (n = 9,901) (n = 3,183)
Intervention Lixisenatide/placebo Liraglutide/placebo Semaglutide s.c. Exenatide QW/ Dulaglutide/ Semaglutide oral/
injection/placebo placebo placebo placebo
Main inclusion criteria Type 2 diabetes and Type 2 diabetes and Type 2 diabetes and Type 2 diabetes Type 2 diabetes and Type 2 diabetes and high
history of ACS preexisting CVD, preexisting CVD, with or without prior ASCVD CV risk (age of $50
Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management
(<180 days) CKD, or HF at HF, or CKD at preexisting CVD event or risk years with established
$50 years of age $50 years of age factors for ASCVD CVD or CKD, or age of
or CV risk at $60 or CV risk at $60 $60 years with CV
years of age years of age risk factors only)
A1C inclusion criteria (%) 5.5–11.0 $7.0 $7.0 6.5–10.0 #9.5 None
Age (years)† 60.3 64.3 64.6 62 66.2 66
Race (% White) 75.2 77.5 83.0 75.8 75.7 72.3
Sex (% male) 69.3 64.3 60.7 62 53.7 68.4
Diabetes duration (years)† 9.3 12.8 13.9 12 10.5 14.9
Median follow-up (years) 2.1 3.8 2.1 3.2 5.4 1.3
Statin use (%) 93 72 73 74 66 85.2 (all lipid-lowering)
Metformin use (%) 66 76 73 77 81 77.4
Prior CVD/CHF (%) 100/22 81/18 60/24 73.1/16.2 32/9 84.7/12.2
Mean baseline A1C (%) 7.7 8.7 8.7 8.0 7.4 8.2
Mean difference in A1C 0.3‡^ 0.4‡ 0.7 or 1.0^ 0.53‡^ 0.61‡ 0.7
between groups at end of
treatment (%)
Year started/reported 2010/2015 2010/2016 2013/2016 2010/2017 2011/2019 2017/2019
Primary outcome§ 4-point MACE 1.02 3-point MACE 0.87 3-point MACE 0.74 3-point MACE 0.91 3-point MACE 0.88 3-point MACE 0.79
(0.89–1.17) (0.78–0.97) (0.58–0.95) (0.83–1.00) (0.79–0.99) (0.57–1.11)
Continued on p. S175
Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
0.87 (0.79–0.95)
Cardiovascular death§ 0.98 (0.78–1.22) 0.78 (0.66–0.93) 0.98 (0.65–1.48) 0.88 (0.76–1.02) 0.91 (0.78–1.06) 0.49 (0.27–0.92)
Ml§ 1.03 (0.87–1.22) 0.86 (0.73–1.00) 0.74 (0.51–1.08) 0.97 (0.85–1.10) 0.96 (0.79–1.15) 1.18 (0.73–1.90)
Stroke§ 1.12 (0.79–1.58) 0.86 (0.71–1.06) 0.61 (0.38–0.99) 0.85 (0.70–1.03) 0.76 (0.61–0.95) 0.74 (0.35–1.57)
HF hospitalization§ 0.96 (0.75–1.23) 0.87 (0.73–1.05) 1.11 (0.77–1.61) 0.94 (0.78–1.13) 0.93 (0.77–1.12) 0.86 (0.48–1.55)
Unstable angina hospitalization§ 1.11 (0.47–2.62) 0.98 (0.76–1.26) 0.82 (0.47–1.44) 1.05 (0.94–1.18) 1.14 (0.84–1.54) 1.56 (0.60–4.01)
All-cause mortality§ 0.94 (0.78–1.13) 0.85 (0.74–0.97) 1.05 (0.74–1.50) 0.86 (0.77–0.97) 0.90 (0.80–1.01) 0.51 (0.31–0.84)
Worsening nephropathy§jj — 0.78 (0.67–0.92) 0.64 (0.46–0.88) — 0.85 (0.77–0.93) —
—, not assessed/reported; ACS, acute coronary syndrome; ASCVD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; CHF, congestive heart failure; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovas-
cular disease; GLP-1, glucagon-like peptide 1; HF, heart failure; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular event; Ml, myocardial infarction. Data from this table was adapted from Cefalu et al. (238) in the
January 2018 issue of Diabetes Care. *Powered to rule out a hazard ratio of 1.8; superiority hypothesis not prespecified. †Age was reported as means in all trials; diabetes duration was reported as
means in all trials except EXSCEL, which reported medians. ‡Significant difference in A1C between groups (P < 0.05). ^AIC change of 0.66% with 0.5 mg and 1.05% with 1 mg dose of semaglutide.
§Outcomes reported as hazard ratio (95% Cl). jjWorsening nephropathy is defined as the new onset of urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio >300 mg/g creatinine or a doubling of the serum creatinine
level and an estimated glomerular filtration rate of <45 mL/min/1.73 m2, the need for continuous renal replacement therapy, or death from renal disease in LEADER and SUSTAIN-6 and as new macro-
albuminuria, a sustained decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate of 30% or more from baseline, or chronic renal replacement therapy in REWIND. Worsening nephropathy was a prespecified ex-
ploratory adjudicated outcome in LEADER, SUSTAIN-6, and REWIND.
lar events. A
cular death. A
hospitalization. A
kidney events. A
Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management
is recommended to improve
reduced ejection fraction, a
symptoms, physical limita- testing and are unable to exercise should cardiovascular risk assessment in people
tions, and quality of life. A undergo pharmacologic stress echocardi- with type 2 diabetes (183), their routine
10.43 For people with type 2 diabe- ography or nuclear imaging. use leads to radiation exposure and may
tes and chronic kidney disease result in unnecessary invasive testing such
with albuminuria treated with Screening Asymptomatic Patients as coronary angiography and revasculariza-
maximum tolerated doses of The screening of asymptomatic patients tion procedures. The ultimate balance of
ACE inhibitor or angiotensin with high ASCVD risk is not recom- benefit, cost, and risks of such an ap-
receptor blocker, addition of mended (171), in part because these proach in asymptomatic patients re-
finerenone is recommended high-risk patients should already be re- mains controversial, particularly in the
to improve cardiovascular out- ceiving intensive medical therapy—an modern setting of aggressive ASCVD
comes and reduce the risk of approach that provides benefit similar risk factor control.
chronic kidney disease pro- to invasive revascularization (172,173).
in people with CKD is included in trials, 10,142 participants with type 2 dia- in the canagliflozin and placebo groups, re-
Section 11, “Chronic Kidney Disease betes were randomized to canagliflozin or spectively (HR 10.80 [95% CI 1.39–83.65])
and Risk Management.” placebo and were followed for an average (194).
Cardiovascular outcomes trials of di- 3.6 years. The mean age of patients was The Dapagliflozin Effect on Cardiovas-
peptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors 63 years, and 66% had a history of cardio- cular Events-Thrombosis in Myocardial In-
have all, so far, not shown cardiovascular vascular disease. The combined analysis of farction 58 (DECLARE-TIMI 58) trial was
benefits relative to placebo. In addition, the two trials found that canagliflozin sig- another randomized, double-blind trial
the CAROLINA (Cardiovascular Outcome nificantly reduced the composite outcome that assessed the effects of dapagliflozin
Study of Linagliptin Versus Glimepiride in of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke ver- versus placebo on cardiovascular and
Type 2 Diabetes) study demonstrated sus placebo (occurring in 26.9 vs. 31.5 par- renal outcomes in 17,160 people with
noninferiority between a DPP-4 inhibitor, ticipants per 1,000 patient-years; HR 0.86 type 2 diabetes and established ASCVD
linagliptin, and a sulfonylurea, glimepir- [95% CI 0.75–0.97]). The specific estimates or multiple risk factors for ASCVD (196).
Table 10.3C—Cardiovascular and cardiorenal outcomes trials of available antihyperglycemic medications completed after the issuance of the FDA 2008 guidelines: SGLT2
inhibitors
DAPA-CKD EMPEROR-Reduced EMPEROR-Preserved
EMPA-REG CANVAS DECLARE-TIMI 58 (197,239) DAPA-HF (11) (200) (189,241) DELIVER (199)
OUTCOME (8) Program (9) (196) CREDENCE (194) (n = 4,304; 2,906 VERTIS CV (201,240) (n = 4,744; 1,983 (n = 3,730; 1,856 (n = 5,988; 2,938 with (n = 6,263; 2,807
(n = 7,020) (n = 10,142) (n = 17,160) (n = 4,401) with diabetes) (n = 8,246) with diabetes) with diabetes) diabetes) with diabetes)
Intervention Empagliflozin/placebo Canagliflozin/placebo Dapagliflozin/placebo Canagliflozin/placebo Dapagliflozin/placebo Ertugliflozin/placebo Dapagliflozin/placebo Empagliflozin/placebo* Empagliflozin/placebo Dapagliflozin/placebo
Main inclusion Type 2 diabetes and Type 2 diabetes and Type 2 diabetes and Type 2 diabetes Albuminuric kidney Type 2 diabetes and NYHA class II, III, or NYHA class II, III, or NYHA class II, III, or IV NYHA class II, III, or IV
criteria preexisting CVD preexisting CVD at established ASCVD and albuminuric disease, with or ASCVD IV heart failure IV heart failure heart failure and an heart failure and an
$30 years of age or multiple risk kidney disease without diabetes and an ejection and an ejection ejection fraction ejection fraction
or $2 CV risk factors for ASCVD fraction #40%, fraction #40%, >40% >40% with or
Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management
Age (years)† 63.1 63.3 64.0 63 61.8 64.4 66 67.2, 66.5 71.8, 71.9 71.7
Race (% White) 72.4 78.3 79.6 66.6 53.2 87.8 70.3 71.1, 69.8 76.3, 75.4 71.2
Sex (% male) 71.5 64.2 62.6 66.1 66.9 70 76.6 76.5, 75.6 55.4, 55.3 56.1
Median follow-up 3.1 3.6 4.2 2.6 2.4 3.5 1.5 1.3 2.2 2.3
(years)
Prior CVD/CHF (%) 99/10 65.6/14.4 40/10 50.4/14.8 37.4/10.9 99.9/23.1 100% with CHF 100% with CHF 100% with CHF 100% with CHF
Mean baseline 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.3 7.1% (7.8% in those 8.2 — — — 6.6
A1C (%) with diabetes)
Year started/reported 2010/2015 2009/2017 2013/2018 2017/2019 2017/2020 2013/2020 2017/2019 2017/2020 2017/2020 2018/2022
Continued on p. S179
Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
CV death or HF death from renal death from renal from CV causes 0.75 (0.65–0.86) (0.69–0.90) (0.73–0.92)
hospitalization or CV cause 0.70 or CV cause 0.61 0.74 (0.65–0.85)
0.83 (0.73–0.95) (0.59–0.82) (0.51–0.72) Results did not differ
by diabetes status
Key secondary 4-point MACE 0.89 All-cause and CV Death from any cause CV death or HF $50% decline in CV death or HF CV death or HF Total HF All HF hospitalizations Total number
outcome§ (0.78–1.01) mortality (see 0.93 (0.82–1.04) hospitalization eGFR, ESKD, or hospitalization hospitalization hospitalizations (first and recurrent) worsening HF and
below) Renal composite 0.69 (0.57–0.83) death from renal 0.88 (0.75–1.03) 0.75 (0.65–0.85) 0.70 (0.58–0.85) 0.73 (0.61–0.88) CV deaths 0.77
($40% decrease in 3-point MACE 0.80 cause 0.56 CV death 0.92 Mean slope of Rate of decline in eGFR (0.67–0.89)
eGFR rate to <60 (0.67–0.95) (0.45–0.68) (0.77–1.11) change in eGFR (1.25 vs. 2.62 Change in KCCQ TSS
mL/min/1.73 m2, CV death or HF Renal death, renal 1.73 (1.10–2.37) mL/min/1.73 m2; at month 8 1.11
new ESRD, or hospitalization replacement P < 0.001) (1.03–1.21)
death from renal 0.71 (0.55–0.92) therapy, or Mean change in
or CV causes 0.76 Death from any doubling of KCCQ TSS 2.4
(0.67–0.87) cause 0.69 creatinine 0.81 (1.5–3.4)
(0.53–0.88) (0.63–1.04) All-cause mortality
0.94 (0.83–1.07)
Cardiovascular death§ 0.62 (0.49–0.77) 0.87 (0.72–1.06) 0.98 (0.82–1.17) 0.78 (0.61–1.00) 0.81 (0.58–1.12) 0.92 (0.77–1.11) 0.82 (0.69–0.98) 0.92 (0.75–1.12) 0.91 (0.76–1.09) 0.88 (0.74–1.05)
HF hospitalization§ 0.65 (0.50–0.85) 67 (0.52–0.87) 0.73 (0.61–0.88) 0.61 (0.47–0.80) — 0.70 (0.54–0.90) 0.70 (0.59–0.83) 0.69 (0.59–0.81) 0.73 (0.61–0.88) 0.77 (0.67–0.89)
All-cause mortality§ 0.68 (0.57–0.82) 87 (0.74–1.01) 0.93 (0.82–1.04) 0.83 (0.68–1.02) 0.69 (0.53–0.88) 0.93 (0.80–1.08) 0.83 (0.71–0.97) 0.92 (0.77–1.10) 1.00 (0.87–1.15) 0.94 (0.83–1.07)
Worsening 0.61 (0.53–0.70) 0.60 (0.47–0.77) 0.53 (0.43–0.66) (See primary (See primary (See secondary 0.71 (0.44–1.16) Composite renal Composite renal —
nephropathy§jj outcome) outcome) outcomes) outcome 0.50 outcome** 0.95
(0.32–0.77) (0.73–1.24)
—, not assessed/reported; CHF, congestive heart failure; CV, cardiovascular; CVD, cardiovascular disease; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; ESRD, end-stage renal disease; HF, heart failure;
KCCQ TSS, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Total Symptom Score; MACE, major adverse cardiovascular event; Ml, myocardial infarction; SGLT2, sodium–glucose cotransporter 2; NYFIA, New
York Fleart Association. Data from this table was adapted from Cefalu et al. (238) in the January 2018 issue of Diabetes Care. *Baseline characteristics for EMPEROR-Reduced displayed as empagliflozin,
placebo. †Age was reported as means in all trials; diabetes duration was reported as means in all trials except EMPA-REG OUTCOME, which reported as percentage of population with diabetes duration
>10 years, and DECLARE-TIMI 58, which reported median. ‡Significant difference in A1C between groups (P < 0.05). ^AIC change of 0.30 in EMPA-REG OUTCOME is based on pooled results for both
doses (i.e., 0.24% for 10 mg and 0.36% for 25 mg of empagliflozin). §Outcomes reported as hazard ratio (95% Cl). jjDefinitions of worsening nephropathy differed between trials. **Composite outcome
in EMPEROR-Preserved: time to first occurrence of chronic dialysis, renal transplantation; sustained reduction of $40% in eGFR, sustained eGFR <15 mL/min/1.73 m2 for individuals with baseline eGFR
$30 mL/min/1.73 m2.
Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management
S179
or hospitalization for heart failure (HR Sotagliflozin, an SGLT1 and SGLT2 in- people with type 2 diabetes at high risk
0.71 [95% CI 0.55–0.92]). The effects of hibitor not currently approved by the for cardiovascular disease or with cardio-
dapagliflozin therapy were similar in FDA in the U.S., lowers glucose via de- vascular disease (203). Study participants
individuals with and without type 2 layed glucose absorption in the gut in had a mean age of 64 years and a mean
diabetes. addition to increasing urinary glucose duration of diabetes of nearly 13 years.
Results of the Dapagliflozin and Pre- excretion and has been evaluated in the Over 80% of study participants had estab-
vention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Effect of Sotagliflozin on Cardiovascular lished cardiovascular disease. After a
Failure (DAPA-HF) trial, the Empagliflozin and Renal Events in Patients With median follow-up of 3.8 years, LEADER
Outcome Trial in Patients With Chronic Type 2 Diabetes and Moderate Renal Im- showed that the primary composite out-
Heart Failure and a Reduced Ejection pairment Who Are at Cardiovascular Risk come (MI, stroke, or cardiovascular death)
Fraction (EMPEROR-Reduced), Empagli- (SCORED) trial (202). A total of 10,584 occurred in fewer participants in the
flozin Outcome Trial in Patients With people with type 2 diabetes, CKD, and ad- treatment group (13.0%) when com-
for noninferiority) (205). The cardiovascu- outcome of cardiovascular death, MI, diabetes and established ASCVD (210,211).
lar effects of this formulation of sema- stroke, or hospitalization for unstable SGLT2 inhibitors also reduce risk of heart
glutide will be further tested in a large, angina occurred in 406 patients (13.4%) failure hospitalization and progression of
longer-term outcomes trial. in the lixisenatide group vs. 399 (13.2%) kidney disease in people with established
The Harmony Outcomes trial random- in the placebo group (HR 1.2 [95% CI ASCVD, multiple risk factors for ASCVD, or
ized 9,463 people with type 2 diabetes 0.89–1.17]), which demonstrated the albuminuric kidney disease (212,213). In
and cardiovascular disease to once-weekly noninferiority of lixisenatide to placebo people with type 2 diabetes and estab-
subcutaneous albiglutide or matching pla- (P < 0.001) but did not show superior- lished ASCVD, multiple ASCVD risk factors,
cebo, in addition to their standard care ity (P = 0.81). or diabetic kidney disease, an SGLT2 inhibi-
(206). Over a median duration of 1.6 The Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular tor with demonstrated cardiovascular ben-
years, the GLP-1 receptor agonist reduced Event Lowering (EXSCEL) trial also reported efit is recommended to reduce the risk of
the risk of cardiovascular death, MI, or results with the once-weekly GLP-1 recep- major adverse cardiovascular events and/
associated with increased morbidity and agonists lixisenatide, liraglutide, sema- placebo on a primary composite outcome
mortality, commonly coincide, and inde- glutide, exenatide once-weekly, albi- of cardiovascular death or hospitalization
pendently contribute to adverse out- glutide, or dulaglutide compared with for worsening heart failure in a population
comes (217). Strategies to mitigate these placebo (Table 10.3B) (203,204,207–209). of 3,730 patients with NYHA class II, III, or
risks are needed, and the heart failure- Reduced incidence of heart failure IV heart failure and an ejection fraction of
related risks and benefits of glucose- has been observed with the use of 40% or less (200). At baseline, 49.8% of
lowering medications should be considered SGLT2 inhibitors (8,194,196). In EMPA- participants had a history of diabetes.
carefully when determining a regimen of REG OUTCOME, the addition of empagli- Over a median follow-up of 16 months,
care for people with diabetes and either flozin to standard care led to a signifi- those in the empagliflozin-treated group
established heart failure or high risk for cant 35% reduction in hospitalization for had a reduced risk of the primary outcome
the development of heart failure. heart failure compared with placebo (8). (HR 0.75 [95% CI 0.65–0.86]; P < 0.001)
Data on the effects of glucose-lowering Although the majority of patients in the and fewer total hospitalizations for heart
failure (HR 0.70 [95% CI 0.58–0.85]; P <
Post Worsening Heart Failure (SOLOIST- vs. 3.4%) and severe hypoglycemia of worsening heart failure and cardiovas-
WHF) included 21,947 patients and dem- (1.5% vs. 0.3%) were more common cular death. In addition, an SGLT2 inhibitor
onstrated reduced risk for the composite with sotagliflozin than with placebo. The is recommended in this patient population
of cardiovascular death or hospitalization trial was originally also intended to to improve symptoms, physical limitations,
for heart failure, cardiovascular death, first evaluate the effects of SGLT inhibition and quality of life. The benefits seen in
hospitalization for heart failure, and all- in people with HFpEF, and ultimately no this patient population likely represent a
cause mortality. The findings on the stud- evidence of heterogeneity of treatment class effect, and they appear unrelated to
ied end points were consistent in both tri- effect by ejection fraction was noted. glucose lowering given comparable out-
als of heart failure with mildly reduced or However, the relatively small percent- comes in people with heart failure with
preserved ejection fraction and in all five age of such patients enrolled (only 21% and without diabetes.
trials combined. Collectively, these studies of participants had ejection fraction
indicate that SGLT2 inhibitors reduce the >50%) and the early termination of the Finerenone in People With Type 2 Diabetes
inhibitor or ARB, addition of finernone College of Cardiology “2020 Expert Con- individuals with more long-standing dia-
should be considered to improve car- sensus Decision Pathway on Novel betes may be more challenging, particu-
diovascular outcomes and reduce the Therapies for Cardiovascular Risk Re- larly if patients are using an already
risk of CKD progression. duction in Patients With Type 2 Dia- complex glucose-lowering regimen. In
betes” (234). Figure 10.3, reproduced such patients, SGLT2 inhibitor or GLP-1
Clinical Approach from that decision pathway, outlines receptor agonist therapy may need to
As has been carefully outlined in Fig. 9.3 the approach to risk reduction with replace some or all of their existing med-
in the preceding Section 9, “Pharmacologic SGLT2 inhibitor or GLP-1 receptor ago- ications to minimize risks of hypoglyce-
Approaches to Glycemic Treatment,” peo- nist therapy in conjunction with other mia and adverse side effects, and
ple with type 2 diabetes with or at high traditional, guideline-based preventive potentially to minimize medication
risk for ASCVD, heart failure, or CKD medical therapies for blood pressure, costs. Close collaboration between pri-
should be treated with a cardioprotective lipids, and glycemia and antiplatelet mary and specialty care professionals
SGLT2 inhibitor and/or GLP-1 receptor ago- therapy. can help to facilitate these transitions in
nist as part of the comprehensive ap- Adoption of these agents should be clinical care and, in turn, improve out-
proach to cardiovascular and kidney risk reasonably straightforward in people with comes for highrisk people with type 2
reduction. Importantly, these agents established cardiovascular or kidney dis- diabetes.
should be included in the regimen of care ease who are later diagnosed with dia-
irrespective of the need for additional betes, as the cardioprotective agents can References
glucose lowering, and irrespective of be used from the outset of diabetes 1. American Diabetes Association. Economic costs
of diabetes in the U.S. in 2017. Diabetes Care
metformin use. Such an approach has management. On the other hand, incor- 2018;41:917–928
also been described in the American Di- poration of SGLT2 inhibitor or GLP-1 re- 2. Ali MK, Bullard KM, Saaddine JB, Cowie CC,
abetes Association–endorsed American ceptor agonist therapy in the care of Imperatore G, Gregg EW. Achievement of goals in
diabetesjournals.org/care Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management S185
U.S. diabetes care, 1999-2010. N Engl J Med Heart Association-American College of Cardiology- 31. Thomopoulos C, Parati G, Zanchetti A.
2013;368:1613–1624 Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease risk score Effects of blood-pressure-lowering treatment on
3. Buse JB, Ginsberg HN, Bakris GL, et al.; American in a modern multi-ethnic cohort. Eur Heart J outcome incidence in hypertension: 10 - Should
Heart Association; American Diabetes Association. 2017;38:598–608 blood pressure management differ in hypertensive
Primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases in 17. Bohula EA, Morrow DA, Giugliano RP, et al. patients with and without diabetes mellitus?
people with diabetes mellitus: a scientific statement Atherothrombotic risk stratification and ezetimibe Overview and meta-analyses of randomized trials.
from the American Heart Association and the for secondary prevention. J Am Coll Cardiol J Hypertens 2017;35:922–944
American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care 2017;69:911–921 32. Xie X, Atkins E, Lv J, et al. Effects of intensive
2007;30:162–172 18. Bohula EA, Bonaca MP, Braunwald E, et al. blood pressure lowering on cardiovascular and
4. Gaede P, Lund-Andersen H, Parving HH, Atherothrombotic risk stratification and the efficacy renal outcomes: updated systematic review and
Pedersen O. Effect of a multifactorial intervention and safety of vorapaxar in patients with stable meta-analysis. Lancet 2016;387:435–443
on mortality in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med ischemic heart disease and previous myocardial 33. Wright JT Jr, Williamson JD, Whelton PK,
2008;358:580–591 infarction. Circulation 2016;134:304–313 et al.; SPRINT Research Group. A randomized trial
5. Cavender MA, Steg PG, Smith SC Jr, et al.; 19. Whelton PK, Carey RM, Aronow WS, et al. of intensive versus standard blood-pressure
REACH Registry Investigators. Impact of diabetes 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ control. N Engl J Med 2015;373:2103–2116
cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality in medication compliance: a meta-analysis. Am J of the renin-angiotensin system: meta-analysis of
type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2020;43:1878–1884 Med 2007;120:713–719 randomised trials. BMJ 2013;346:f360
45. Abalos E, Duley L, Steyn DW. Antihypertensive 60. Catala-Lopez F, Macıas Saint-Gerons D, 74. Zhao P, Xu P, Wan C, Wang Z. Evening
drug therapy for mild to moderate hypertension Gonzalez-Bermejo D, et al. Cardiovascular and versus morning dosing regimen drug therapy
during pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev renal outcomes of renin-angiotensin system for hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev
2014;2:CD002252 blockade in adult patients with diabetes mellitus: 2011 (10):CD004184
46. Magee LA, von Dadelszen P, Rey E, et al. a systematic review with network meta-analyses. 75. Hermida RC, Ayala DE, Moj on A, Fernandez
Less-tight versus tight control of hypertension in PLoS Med 2016;13:e1001971 JR. Influence of time of day of blood pressure-
pregnancy. N Engl J Med 2015;372:407–417 61. Palmer SC, Mavridis D, Navarese E, et al. lowering treatment on cardiovascular risk in
47. Brown MA, Magee LA, Kenny LC, et al.; Comparative efficacy and safety of blood hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes.
International Society for the Study of Hyper- pressure-lowering agents in adults with diabetes Diabetes Care 2011;34:1270–1276
tension in Pregnancy (ISSHP). Hypertensive disorders and kidney disease: a network meta-analysis. 76. Rahman M, Greene T, Phillips RA, et al. A
of pregnancy: ISSHP classification, diagnosis, and Lancet 2015;385:2047–2056 trial of 2 strategies to reduce nocturnal blood
management recommendations for international 62. Barzilay JI, Davis BR, Bettencourt J, pressure in Blacks with chronic kidney disease.
practice. Hypertension 2018;72:24–43 et al.; ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group. Hypertension 2013;61:82–88
87. Arnett DK, Blumenthal RS, Albert MA, et al. people with diabetes in 14 randomised trials of on glycaemia and risk of new-onset diabetes: a
2019 ACC/AHA guideline on the primary statins: a meta-analysis. Lancet 2008;371:117–125 prespecified analysis of the FOURIER randomised
prevention of cardiovascular disease: a report of 100. Taylor F, Huffman MD, Macedo AF, et al. controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2017;
the American College of Cardiology/American Statins for the primary prevention of cardiovascular 5:941–950
Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;1: 113. Moriarty PM, Jacobson TA, Bruckert E,
Guidelines. Circulation 2019;140:e596–e646 CD004816 et al. Efficacy and safety of alirocumab, a
88. Chasman DI, Posada D, Subrahmanyan L, Cook 101. Carter AA, Gomes T, Camacho X, Juurlink DN, monoclonal antibody to PCSK9, in statin-intolerant
NR, Stanton VP Jr, Ridker PM. Pharmacogenetic Shah BR, Mamdani MM. Risk of incident diabetes patients: design and rationale of ODYSSEY
study of statin therapy and cholesterol reduction. among patients treated with statins: population ALTERNATIVE, a randomized phase 3 trial. J Clin
JAMA 2004;291:2821–2827 based study. BMJ 2013;346:f2610–f2610 Lipidol 2014;8:554–561
89. Meek C, Wierzbicki AS, Jewkes C, et al. Daily 102. Jellinger PS, Handelsman Y, Rosenblit 114. Zhang XL, Zhu QQ, Zhu L, et al. Safety and
and intermittent rosuvastatin 5 mg therapy in PD, et al. American Association of Clinical efficacy of anti-PCSK9 antibodies: a meta-analysis
statin intolerant patients: an observational study. Endocrinologists and American College of of 25 randomized, controlled trials. BMC Med
Curr Med Res Opin 2012;28:371–378 Endocrinology guidelines for management of 2015;13:123
90. Mihaylova B, Emberson J, Blackwell L, et al.; dyslipidemia and prevention of cardiovascular 115. Giugliano RP, Pedersen TR, Saver JL, et al.;
lipid therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J 141. Belch J, MacCuish A, Campbell I, et al.; disease: shared decision making in clinical practice.
Med 2010;362:1563–1574 Prevention of Progression of Arterial Disease and JAMA 2016;316:709–710
127. Boden WE, Probstfield JL, Anderson T, et al.; Diabetes Study Group; Diabetes Registry Group; 155. Campbell CL, Smyth S, Montalescot G,
AIM-HIGH Investigators. Niacin in patients with Royal College of Physicians Edinburgh. The pre- Steinhubl SR. Aspirin dose for the prevention
low HDL cholesterol levels receiving intensive vention of progression of arterial disease and of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review.
statin therapy. N Engl J Med 2011;365:2255–2267 diabetes (POPADAD) trial: factorial randomised JAMA 2007;297:2018–2024
128. Landray MJ, Haynes R, Hopewell JC, et al.; placebo controlled trial of aspirin and antioxidants 156. Jones WS, Mulder H, Wruck LM, et al.;
HPS2-THRIVE Collaborative Group. Effects of in patients with diabetes and asymptomatic ADAPTABLE Team. Comparative effectiveness of
extended-release niacin with laropiprant in high- peripheral arterial disease. BMJ 2008;337:a1840– aspirin dosing in cardiovascular disease. N Engl J
risk patients. N Engl J Med 2014;371:203–212 a1840 Med 2021;384:1981–1990
129. Rajpathak SN, Kumbhani DJ, Crandall J, 142. Zhang C, Sun A, Zhang P, et al. Aspirin for 157. Davı G, Patrono C. Platelet activation and
Barzilai N, Alderman M, Ridker PM. Statin therapy primary prevention of cardiovascular events in atherothrombosis. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2482–
and risk of developing type 2 diabetes: a meta- patients with diabetes: A meta-analysis. Diabetes 2494
analysis. Diabetes Care 2009;32:1924–1929 Res Clin Pract 2010;87:211–218 158. Larsen SB, Grove EL, Neergaard-Petersen S,
130. Sattar N, Preiss D, Murray HM, et al. Statins 143. De Berardis G, Sacco M, Strippoli GFM, et al. W€ urtz M, Hvas AM, Kristensen SD. Determinants
double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 184. Wing RR, Bolin P, Brancati FL, et al.; Look 195. Neal B, Perkovic V, Matthews DR, et al.;
2018;391:205–218 AHEAD Research Group. Cardiovascular effects of CANVAS-R Trial Collaborative Group. Rationale,
170. Bonaca MP, Bauersachs RM, Anand SS, et al. intensive lifestyle intervention in type 2 diabetes. design and baseline characteristics of the
Rivaroxaban in peripheral artery disease after N Engl J Med 2013;369:145–154 CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study-
revascularization. N Engl J Med 2020;382:1994– 185. Braunwald E, Domanski MJ, Fowler SE, et al.; Renal (CANVAS-R): A randomized, placebo-
2004 PEACE Trial Investigators. Angiotensin-converting- controlled trial. Diabetes Obes Metab 2017;19:
171. Bax JJ, Young LH, Frye RL, Bonow RO, enzyme inhibition in stable coronary artery 387–393
Steinberg HO; ADA. Screening for coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2004;351:2058–2068 196. Wiviott SD, Raz I, Bonaca MP, et al.;
disease in patients with diabetes. Diabetes Care 186. Pitt B, Filippatos G, Agarwal R, et al.; DECLARE–TIMI 58 Investigators. Dapagliflozin
2007;30:2729–2736 FIGARO-DKD Investigators. Cardiovascular events and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes.
172. Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al.; with finerenone in kidney disease and type 2 N Engl J Med 2019;380:347–357
COURAGE Trial Research Group. Optimal medical diabetes. N Engl J Med 2021;385:2252–2263 197. Heerspink HJL, Stefansson BV, Correa-
therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary 187. Filippatos G, Anker SD, Agarwal R, et al.; Rotter R, et al.; DAPA-CKD Trial Committees and
disease. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1503–1516 FIGARO-DKD Investigators. Finerenone reduces Investigators. Dapagliflozin in patients with chronic
173 Frye RL, August P, Brooks MM, et al.; BARI risk of incident heart failure in patients with kidney disease. N Engl J Med 2020;383:1436–1446
2 inhibitors for prevention of major adverse 221. Inzucchi SE, Masoudi FA, McGuire DK. risk: epidemiology, mechanisms, and prevention.
cardiovascular and renal outcomes in type 2 Metformin in heart failure. Diabetes Care 2007; Lancet 2013;382:339–352
diabetes mellitus. Circulation 2019;139:2022–2031 30:e129–e129 233. Bakris GL, Agarwal R, Anker SD, et al.;
211. Palmer SC, Tendal B, Mustafa RA, et al. 222. Eurich DT, Majumdar SR, McAlister FA, FIDELIO-DKD Investigators. Effect of finerenone
Sodium-glucose cotransporter protein-2 (SGLT-2) Tsuyuki RT, Johnson JA. Improved clinical on chronic kidney disease outcomes in type 2
inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) outcomes associated with metformin in patients diabetes. N Engl J Med 2020;383:2219–2229
receptor agonists for type 2 diabetes: systematic with diabetes and heart failure. Diabetes Care 234. Das SR, Everett BM, Birtcher KK, et al. 2020
review and network meta-analysis of randomised 2005;28:2345–2351 expert consensus decision pathway on novel
controlled trials. BMJ 2021;372:m4573 223. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA therapies for cardiovascular risk reduction in
212. Zelniker TA, Wiviott SD, Raz I, et al. SGLT2 drug safety communication: FDA revises warnings patients with type 2 diabetes: a report of the
inhibitors for primary and secondary prevention regarding use of the diabetes medicine metformin American College of Cardiology Solution Set
of cardiovascular and renal outcomes in type 2 in certain patients with reduced kidney function, Oversight Committee. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020;76:
diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis 2016. Accessed 21 October 2022. Available from 1117–1145
of cardiovascular outcome trials. Lancet 2019; https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and- 235. White WB, Cannon CP, Heller SR, et al.;
393:31–39 availability/fda-drug-safety-communication- EXAMINE Investigators. Alogliptin after acute
with severely increased al- normal urinary albumin-to- 11.5b For people with type 2 diabe-
buminuria (urinary albumin- creatinine ratio (<30 mg/g tes and diabetic kidney dis-
to-creatinine ratio $300 mg/g creatinine), and normal esti- ease, use of a sodium–glucose
creatinine) and/or estimated mated glomerular filtration cotransporter 2 inhibitor is rec-
glomerular filtration rate rate. A ommended to reduce chronic
<60 mL/min/1.73 m2 . A 11.4d Do not discontinue renin- kidney disease progression
11.4b Periodically monitor serum cre- angiotensin system blockade and cardiovascular events in
atinine and potassium levels for increases in serum creati- patients with an estimated
for the development of in- nine (#30%) in the absence glomerular filtration rate $20
creased creatinine and hyper- of volume depletion. A mL/min/1.73 m2 and urinary
kalemia when ACE inhibitors, 11.5a For people with type 2 diabe- albumin ranging from normal
angiotensin receptor blockers, tes and diabetic kidney dis- to 200 mg/g creatinine. B
and mineralocorticoid receptor ease, use of a sodium–glucose 11.5c In people with type 2 diabetes
antagonists are used, or hypo- cotransporter 2 inhibitor is rec- and diabetic kidney disease,
kalemia when diuretics are ommended to reduce chronic consider use of sodium–glucose
used. B kidney disease progression cotransporter 2 inhibitors (if
11.4c An ACE inhibitor or an angio- and cardiovascular events in estimated glomerular filtration
tensin receptor blocker is not patients with an estimated rate is $20 mL/min/1.73 m2),
recommended for the primary glomerular filtration rate a glucagon-like peptide 1 ago-
prevention of chronic kidney $20 mL/min/1.73 m2 and nist, or a nonsteroidal mineralo-
disease in people with diabetes urinary albumin $200 mg/g corticoid receptor antagonist
who have normal blood pressure, creatinine. A (if estimated glomerular filtration
diabetesjournals.org/care Chronic Kidney Disease and Risk Management S193
rate is $25 mL/min/1.73 m2) (diabetic kidney disease) in adults, >20% between measurements in uri-
additionally for cardiovascular which occurs in 20–40% of people with nary albumin excretion, two of three
risk reduction. A diabetes (1,3–5). Diabetic kidney disease specimens of UACR collected within a
11.5d In people with chronic kidney typically develops after a diabetes dura- 3- to 6-month period should be abnormal
disease and albuminuria who tion of 10 years in type 1 diabetes (the before considering a patient to have
are at increased risk for cardio- most common presentation is 5–15 years moderately or severely elevated albu-
vascular events or chronic kidney after the diagnosis of type 1 diabetes) minuria (1,2,13,14). Exercise within 24 h,
disease progression, a nonsteroi- but may be present at diagnosis of type 2 infection, fever, congestive heart failure,
dal mineralocorticoid receptor diabetes. CKD can progress to end-stage marked hyperglycemia, menstruation,
antagonist shown to be effective renal disease (ESRD) requiring dialysis or and marked hypertension may elevate
kidney transplantation and is the leading UACR independently of kidney damage
in clinical trials is recommended
cause of ESRD in the U.S. (6). In addition, (15).
to reduce chronic kidney disease
diabetic kidney disease may be present possible causes other than diabetes) Lastly, it should be noted that ACE
at diagnosis or without retinopathy in may also affect these decisions (24). inhibitors and ARBs are commonly not
type 2 diabetes. Reduced eGFR without dosed at maximum tolerated doses
albuminuria has been frequently re- ACUTE KIDNEY INJURY because of fear that serum creatinine
ported in type 1 and type 2 diabetes will rise. As noted above, this is an error.
Acute kidney injury (AKI) is diagnosed by
and is becoming more common over Note that in all clinical trials demonstrat-
time as the prevalence of diabetes in- a 50% or greater sustained increase in se-
rum creatinine over a short period of ing efficacy of ACE inhibitors and ARBs in
creases in the U.S. (3,4,18,19). slowing kidney disease progression, the
An active urinary sediment (containing time, which is also reflected as a rapid
decrease in eGFR (25,26). People with di- maximum tolerated doses were used—
red or white blood cells or cellular casts), not very low doses that do not provide
rapidly increasing albuminuria or total abetes are at higher risk of AKI than
benefit. Moreover, there are now studies
proteinuria, the presence of nephrotic those without diabetes (27). Other risk
demonstrating outcome benefits on both
syndrome, rapidly decreasing eGFR, or factors for AKI include preexisting CKD,
kidney function may be detected by in- Assessment of Comorbidities,” for further Glycemic Targets
information on immunization). Intensive lowering of blood glucose with
creases in albuminuria before changes
the goal of achieving near-normoglycemia
in eGFR (43), and this also significantly
Prevention has been shown in large randomized
affects cardiovascular risk. Moreover, an
The only proven primary prevention inter- studies to delay the onset and pro-
initial reduction of >30% from baseline,
ventions for CKD are blood glucose and gression of albuminuria and reduce
subsequently maintained over at least 2 eGFR in people with type 1 diabetes
blood pressure control. There is no evi-
years, is considered a valid surrogate for (51,52) and type 2 diabetes (1,53–58).
dence that renin-angiotensin-aldosterone
renal benefit by the Division of Cardiology Insulin alone was used to lower blood
system (RAAS) inhibitors or any other
and Nephrology of the U.S. Food and glucose in the Diabetes Control and
interventions prevent the development
Drug Administration (FDA) (10). Contin- of diabetic kidney disease. Thus, the Complications Trial (DCCT)/Epidemiology
ued surveillance can assess both response American Diabetes Association does of Diabetes Interventions and Complica-
to therapy and disease progression and not recommend routine use of these tions (EDIC) study of type 1 diabetes,
may aid in assessing participation in ACE medications solely for the purpose of while a variety of agents were used
inhibitor or ARB therapy. In addition, in prevention of the development of di- in clinical trials of type 2 diabetes,
clinical trials of ACE inhibitors or ARB abetic kidney disease. supporting the conclusion that lower-
therapy in type 2 diabetes, reducing albu- ing blood glucose itself helps prevent
minuria to levels <300 mg/g creatinine INTERVENTIONS CKD and its progression. The effects
or by >30% from baseline has been asso- Nutrition of glucose-lowering therapies on CKD
ciated with improved renal and cardiovas- For people with non-dialysis-dependent have helped define A1C targets (see
CKD, dietary protein intake should be Table 6.2).
cular outcomes, leading some to suggest
0.8 g/kg body weight per day (the rec- The presence of CKD affects the risks
that medications should be titrated to
ommended daily allowance) (1). Com- and benefits of intensive lowering of
maximize reduction in UACR. Data from
pared with higher levels of dietary protein blood glucose and a number of specific
post hoc analyses demonstrate less ben- glucose-lowering medications. In the Ac-
intake, this level slowed GFR decline with
efit on cardiorenal outcomes at half tion to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Dia-
evidence of a greater effect over time.
doses of RAS blockade (44). In type 1 di- betes (ACCORD) trial of type 2 diabetes,
Higher levels of dietary protein intake
abetes, remission of albuminuria may (>20% of daily calories from protein or adverse effects of intensive management
occur spontaneously, and cohort studies >1.3 g/kg/day) have been associated of blood glucose levels (hypoglycemia
evaluating associations of change in al- with increased albuminuria, more rapid and mortality) were increased among
buminuria with clinical outcomes have kidney function loss, and CVD mortality people with kidney disease at baseline
reported inconsistent results (45,46). and therefore should be avoided. Reduc- (59,60). Moreover, there is a lag time
The prevalence of CKD complications ing the amount of dietary protein below of at least 2 years in type 2 diabetes to
correlates with eGFR (42). When eGFR is the recommended daily allowance of over 10 years in type 1 diabetes for the
<60 mL/min/1.73 m2, screening for 0.8 g/kg/day is not recommended be- effects of intensive glucose control to
complications of CKD is indicated (Table cause it does not alter blood glucose manifest as improved eGFR outcomes
11.1). Early vaccination against hepatitis levels, cardiovascular risk measures, or (56,60,61). Therefore, in some people
B virus is indicated in individuals likely the course of GFR decline (47). with prevalent CKD and substantial co-
to progress to ESRD (see Section 4, Restriction of dietary sodium (to <2,300 morbidity, target A1C levels may be less
“Comprehensive Medical Evaluation and mg/day) may be useful to control blood intensive (1,62).
S196 Chronic Kidney Disease and Risk Management Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
Blood Pressure and Use of RAAS moderately increased albuminuria with- selecting antihyperglycemia agents (see
Inhibitors out hypertension, outcome trials have Section 9, “Pharmacologic Approaches to
RAAS inhibition remains a mainstay of not been performed in this setting to Glycemic Treatment”).
management for people with diabetic determine whether they improve renal
kidney disease with albuminuria and for outcomes. Moreover, two long-term, dou- Selection of Glucose-Lowering
the treatment of hypertension in people ble-blind studies demonstrated no reno- Medications for People With Chronic
with diabetes (with or without diabetic protective effect of either ACE inhibitors Kidney Disease
kidney disease). Indeed, all the trials or ARBs in type 1 and type 2 diabetes For people with type 2 diabetes and es-
that evaluated the benefits of SGLT2 in- among those who were normotensive tablished CKD, special considerations for
hibition or nonsteroidal mineralocorti- with or without high albuminuria (for- the selection of glucose-lowering medica-
coid receptor antagonist effects were merly microalbuminuria) (78,79). tions include limitations to available med-
done in individuals who were being Absent kidney disease, ACE inhibitors ications when eGFR is diminished and a
A number of large cardiovascular out- (28). Additionally, the development of 0.55–0.92; P 5 0.009). Finally, all-cause
comes trials in people with type 2 dia- the primary end point, which included mortality was decreased in the dapagli-
betes at high risk for CVD or with chronic dialysis for $30 days, kidney flozin group compared with the placebo
existing CVD examined kidney effects as transplantation or eGFR <15 mL/min/ group (P < 0.004).
secondary outcomes. These trials in- 1.73 m2 sustained for $30 days by cen- In addition to renal effects, while
clude EMPA-REG OUTCOME [BI 10773 tral laboratory assessment, doubling SGLT2 inhibitors demonstrated reduced
(Empagliflozin) Cardiovascular Outcome from the baseline serum creatinine aver- risk of heart failure hospitalizations,
Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus age sustained for $30 days by central some also demonstrated cardiovascular
Patients], CANVAS (Canagliflozin Cardio- laboratory assessment, or renal death or risk reduction. GLP-1 RAs clearly demon-
vascular Assessment Study), LEADER (Lira- cardiovascular death, was reduced by strated cardiovascular benefits. Namely,
glutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: 30%. This benefit was on background in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME, CANVAS,
Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Re- ACE inhibitor or ARB therapy in >99% of Dapagliflozin Effect on Cardiovascular
event information, for these agents. Addi- in people with an eGFR $20 mL/min/ and the mean albuminuria was 852 mg/g
tional clinical trials focusing on CKD and 1.73 m2. (interquartile range 446–1,634 mg/g).
cardiovascular outcomes in people with Of note, GLP-1 RAs may also be used The primary end point was reduced
CKD are ongoing and will be reported in at low eGFR for cardiovascular protection with finerenone compared with pla-
the next few years. but may require dose adjustment (113). cebo (HR 0.82 [95% CI 0.73–0.93]; P 5
For people with type 2 diabetes and 0.001), as was the key secondary com-
CKD, the selection of specific agents may Renal and Cardiovascular Outcomes posite of cardiovascular outcome (HR
depend on comorbidity and CKD stage. of Mineralocorticoid Receptor 0.86 [95% CI 0.75–0.99]; P 5 0.03).
SGLT2 inhibitors may be more useful for Antagonists in Chronic Kidney Hyperkalemia resulted in 2.3% discontin-
individuals at high risk of CKD progres- Disease uation in the study group compared
sion (i.e., with albuminuria or a history of MRAs historically have not been well with 0.9% in the placebo group. How-
documented eGFR loss) (Fig. 9.3) due to studied in diabetic kidney disease ever, the study was completed, and
the placebo group (HR 0.64 [95% CI found to reduce cost, improve quality of 13. Gomes MB, Gonçalves MF. Is there a
0.41–0.995]). There was a higher inci- care, and delay dialysis (120). However, physiological variability for albumin excretion
rate? Study in patients with diabetes type 1 and
dence of hyperkalemia in the finerenone other specialists and health care professio- non-diabetic individuals. Clin Chim Acta 2001;304:
group, 10.8% vs. 5.3%, although only 1.2% nals should also educate their patients 117–123
of the 3,686 individuals on finerenone about the progressive nature of CKD, the 14. Naresh CN, Hayen A, Weening A, Craig JC,
stopped the study due to hyperkalemia kidney preservation benefits of proactive Chadban SJ. Day-to-day variability in spot urine
treatment of blood pressure and blood albumin-creatinine ratio. Am J Kidney Dis 2013;
(0.6% vs. 0.4% of the placebo group).
62:1095–1101
The FIDELITY prespecified pooled effi- glucose, and the potential need for renal 15. Tankeu AT, Kaze FF, Noubiap JJ, Chelo D,
cacy and safety analysis incorporated replacement therapy. Dehayem MY, Sobngwi E. Exercise-induced
individuals from both the FIGARO-DKD albuminuria and circadian blood pressure
and FIDELIO-DKD trials (N 5 13,171) to References abnormalities in type 2 diabetes. World J
1. Tuttle KR, Bakris GL, Bilous RW, et al. Diabetic Nephrol 2017;6:209–216
allow for evaluation across the spec- 16. Delanaye P, Glassock RJ, Pottel H, Rule AD.
kidney disease: a report from an ADA Consensus
diabetes and nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2019; in patients with type 2 diabetes: a prespecified blood-pressure lowering and glucose control in
380:2295–2306 secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2014;371:1392–1406
29. Nadkarni GN, Ferrandino R, Chang A, et al. JAMA Cardiol 2021;6:801–810 57. Zoungas S, Arima H, Gerstein HC, et al.;
Acute kidney injury in patients on SGLT2 inhibitors: 44. Epstein M, Reaven NL, Funk SE, McGaughey Collaborators on Trials of Lowering Glucose
a propensity-matched analysis. Diabetes Care KJ, Oestreicher N, Knispel J. Evaluation of the (CONTROL) group. Effects of intensive glucose
2017;40:1479–1485 treatment gap between clinical guidelines and the control on microvascular outcomes in patients
30. Wanner C, Inzucchi SE, Lachin JM, et al.; utilization of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of
EMPA-REG OUTCOME Investigators. Empagliflozin inhibitors. Am J Manag Care 2015;21(Suppl.): individual participant data from randomised
and progression of kidney disease in type 2 S212–S220 controlled trials. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol
diabetes. N Engl J Med 2016;375:323–334 45. de Boer IH, Gao X, Cleary PA, et al.; Diabetes 2017;5:431–437
31. Neuen BL, Ohkuma T, Neal B, et al. Cardio- Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of 58. Agrawal L, Azad N, Bahn GD, et al.; VADT
vascular and renal outcomes with canagliflozin Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/ Study Group. Long-term follow-up of intensive
according to baseline kidney function: data from EDIC) Research Group. Albuminuria changes and glycaemic control on renal outcomes in the
the CANVAS Program. Circulation 2018;138: cardiovascular and renal outcomes in type 1 Veterans Affairs Diabetes Trial (VADT). Dia-
1537–1550 diabetes: the DCCT/EDIC study. Clin J Am Soc betologia 2018;61:295–299
72. Jardine MJ, Mahaffey KW, Neal B, et al.; 86. Neal B, Perkovic V, Mahaffey KW, et al.; kidney disease stages 3A, 3B, or 4. Diabetes Care
CREDENCE study investigators. The Canagliflozin CANVAS Program Collaborative Group. Canagliflozin 2018;41:547–553
and Renal Endpoints in Diabetes with Established and cardiovascular and renal events in type 2 100. Chu PY, Hackstadt AJ, Chipman J, et al.
Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation (CREDENCE) diabetes. N Engl J Med 2017;377:644–657 Hospitalization for lactic acidosis among patients
study rationale, design, and baseline chara- 87. Zelniker TA, Braunwald E. Cardiac and renal with reduced kidney function treated with
cteristics. Am J Nephrol 2017;46:462–472 effects of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 in- metformin or sulfonylureas. Diabetes Care 2020;
73. Mahaffey KW, Jardine MJ, Bompoint S, et al. hibitors in diabetes: JACC state-of-the-art review. J 43:1462–1470
Canagliflozin and cardiovascular and renal Am Coll Cardiol 2018;72:1845–1855 101. McGuire DK, Shih WJ, Cosentino F, et al.
outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus and chronic 88. Woods TC, Satou R, Miyata K, et al. Association of SGLT2 inhibitors with cardiovascular
kidney disease in primary and secondary cardio- Canagliflozin prevents intrarenal angiotensinogen and kidney outcomes in patients with type 2
vascular prevention groups. Circulation 2019;140: augmentation and mitigates kidney injury and diabetes: a meta-analysis. JAMA Cardiol 2021;6:
739–750 hypertension in mouse model of type 2 diabetes 148–158
74. Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation mellitus. Am J Nephrol 2019;49:331–342 102. Zelniker TA, Wiviott SD, Raz I, et al.
Study Investigators. Effects of ramipril on cardio- 89. Heerspink HJL, Perco P, Mulder S, et al. Comparison of the effects of glucagon-like
vascular and microvascular outcomes in people Canagliflozin reduces inflammation and fibrosis peptide receptor agonists and sodium-glucose
114. Bomback AS, Kshirsagar AV, Amamoo MA, receptor antagonists in cardiorenal medicine. Eur finerenone in patients with type 2 diabetes
Klemmer PJ. Change in proteinuria after adding Heart J 2021;42:152–161 and chronic kidney disease: the FIDELITY
aldosterone blockers to ACE inhibitors or 117. Filippatos G, Anker SD, Agarwal R, et al.; pooled analysis. Eur Heart J 2022;43:474–484
angiotensin receptor blockers in CKD: a systematic FIDELIO-DKD Investigators. Finerenone and 120. Smart NA, Dieberg G, Ladhani M, Titus T.
review. Am J Kidney Dis 2008;51:199–211 cardiovascular outcomes in patients with chronic Early referral to specialist nephrology services
115. Sarafidis P, Papadopoulos CE, Kamperidis kidney disease and type 2 diabetes. Circulation for preventing the progression to end-stage
V, Giannakoulas G, Doumas M. Cardiovascular 2021;143:540–552 kidney disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev
protection with sodium-glucose cotransporter- 118. Pitt B, Filippatos G, Agarwal R, et al.; 2014;6:CD007333
2 inhibitors and mineralocorticoid receptor FIGARO-DKD Investigators. Cardiovascular events 121. Vassalotti JA, Centor R, Turner BJ, Greer RC,
an-tagonists in chronic kidney disease: a with finerenone in kidney disease and type 2 Choi M; National Kidney Foundation Kidney
milestone achieved. Hypertension 2021;77: diabetes. N Engl J Med 2021;385:2252–2263 Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative. Practical
1442–1455 119. Agarwal R, Filippatos G, Pitt B, et al.; approach to detection and management of
116. Agarwal R, Kolkhof P, Bakris G, et al. FIDELIO-DKD and FIGARO-DKD investigators. chronic kidney disease for the primary care
Steroidal and non-steroidal mineralocorticoid Cardiovascular and kidney outcomes with clinician. Am J Med 2016;129:153–162.e7
DIABETIC RETINOPATHY
Recommendations
12.1 Optimize glycemic control to reduce the risk or slow the progression of
diabetic retinopathy. A
12.2 Optimize blood pressure and serum lipid control to reduce the risk or
slow the progression of diabetic retinopathy. A
in these trials. Retinopathy status should trimester and should be moni- photography may also enhance efficiency
be assessed when intensifying glucose- tored every trimester and for and reduce costs when the expertise of
lowering therapies such as those using 1 year postpartum as indicated ophthalmologists can be used for more
GLP-1 RAs, since rapid reductions in A1C by the degree of retinopathy. B complex examinations and for therapy
can be associated with initial worsening (15,18,19). In-person exams are still nec-
of retinopathy (11). essary when the retinal photos are of
The preventive effects of therapy and unacceptable quality and for follow-up if
Screening the fact that individuals with prolifera- abnormalities are detected. Retinal pho-
Recommendations tive diabetic retinopathy (PDR) or macu- tos are not a substitute for dilated com-
12.3 Adults with type 1 diabetes lar edema may be asymptomatic provide prehensive eye exams, which should be
should have an initial dilated strong support for screening to detect performed at least initially and at yearly
diabetic retinopathy. Prompt diagnosis intervals thereafter or more frequently
and comprehensive eye exami-
type 1 or type 2 diabetes, the prevalence 12.11 Intravitreous injections of anti– nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy
of any diabetic retinopathy and PDR in vascular endothelial growth or less-than-high-risk PDR. Panretinal
early pregnancy was 52.3% and 6.1%, re- factor are a reasonable alter- laser photocoagulation is still commonly
spectively. The pooled progression rate per native to traditional panretinal used to manage complications of dia-
100 pregnancies for new diabetic reti- betic retinopathy that involve retinal
laser photocoagulation for
nopathy development was 15.0 (95% CI neovascularization and its complications.
some individuals with prolifer-
9.9–20.8), worsened nonproliferative A more gentle, macular focal/grid laser
ative diabetic retinopathy and
diabetic retinopathy was 31.0 (95% CI photocoagulation technique was shown
also reduce the risk of vision
23.2–39.2), pooled sight-threatening pro- in the ETDRS to be effective in treating
loss in these individuals. A
gression rate from nonproliferative dia- eyes with clinically significant macular
12.12 Intravitreous injections of anti–
betic retinopathy to PDR was 6.3 (95% CI edema from diabetes (26), but this is
vascular endothelial growth
3.3–10.0), and worsened PDR was 37.0 now largely considered to be second-line
factor are indicated as first-
located at or threatening the macular and 5 years after the diagnosis symptoms, reduce sequelae, and im-
center), current data from well-designed of type 1 diabetes and at least prove quality of life.
clinical trials demonstrate that intravi- annually thereafter. B
treal anti-VEGF agents provide a more 12.16 Assessment for distal symmet- Specific treatment to reverse the un-
effective treatment plan for center- ric polyneuropathy should in- derlying nerve damage is currently not
involved diabetic macular edema than clude a careful history and available. Glycemic control can effec-
monotherapy with laser (30,31). Most tively prevent diabetic peripheral neu-
assessment of either tem-
patients require near-monthly adminis- ropathy (DPN) and cardiac autonomic
perature or pinprick sensation
tration of intravitreal therapy with anti- neuropathy (CAN) in type 1 diabetes
(small-fiber function) and vibra-
VEGF agents during the first 12 months (36,37) and may modestly slow their
tion sensation using a 128-Hz
of treatment, with fewer injections needed progression in type 2 diabetes (38), but
tuning fork (for large-fiber func-
in subsequent years to maintain remission
tion). All people with diabetes it does not reverse neuronal loss. Treat-
where the clinical features are atypical pressure by >20 mmHg or >10 mmHg, neuropathy in people with
or the diagnosis is unclear. respectively, upon standing without an type 2 diabetes. C Optimize
In all people with diabetes and appropriate increase in heart rate). CAN blood pressure and serum lipid
DPN, causes of neuropathy other than treatment is generally focused on allevi- control to reduce the risk or
diabetes should be considered, including ating symptoms.
slow the progression of dia-
toxins (e.g., alcohol), neurotoxic medica-
betic neuropathy. B
tions (e.g., chemotherapy), vitamin B12 Gastrointestinal Neuropathies. Gastrointes-
12.19 Assess and treat pain related
deficiency, hypothyroidism, renal disease, tinal neuropathies may involve any por-
to diabetic peripheral neu-
malignancies (e.g., multiple myeloma, tion of the gastrointestinal tract, with
ropathy B and symptoms of
bronchogenic carcinoma), infections (e.g., manifestations including esophageal
autonomic neuropathy to im-
HIV), chronic inflammatory demyelinating dysmotility, gastroparesis, constipation,
diarrhea, and fecal incontinence. Gastro- prove quality of life. E
neuropathy, inherited neuropathies, and
12.20 Gabapentinoids, serotonin-
and neuropathy development has be- some areas of disagreement exist, particu- of sodium channel blockers in treating
come increasingly clear in type 2 diabe- larly around SNRI/opioid dual-mechanism pain in DPN (60).
tes, the optimal therapeutic intervention agents (61). A recent head-to-head trial Capsaicin. Capsaicin has received FDA ap-
has not been identified. Positive effects suggested therapeutic equivalency for proval for treatment of pain in DPN using
of physical activity, weight loss, and bar- TCAs, SNRIs, and gabapentinoids in the an 8% patch, with one high-quality study
iatric surgery have been reported in indi- treatment of pain in DPN (62). The trial reported. One medium-quality study of
viduals with DPN, but use of conventional also supported the role of combination 0.075% capsaicin cream has been re-
lipid-lowering pharmacotherapy (such as therapy over monotherapy for the treat- ported. In patients with contraindica-
statins or fenofibrates) does not appear ment of pain in DPN. tions to oral pharmacotherapy or who
to be effective in treating or preventing Gabapentinoids. Gabapentinoids include prefer topical treatments, the use of
DPN development (56). several calcium channel a2-d subunit li- topical capsaicin can be considered.
gands. Eight high-quality studies and seven Carbamazepine and a-Lipoic Acid. Carba-
gastrointestinal motility, including opioids, pinprick, temperature, vibra- 12.29 The use of specialized ther-
anticholinergics, tricyclic antidepressants, tion), and vascular assess- apeutic footwear is recom-
GLP-1 RAs, and pramlintide, may also ment, including pulses in the mended for people with
improve intestinal motility (67,71). How- legs and feet. B diabetes at high risk for ul-
ever, the risk of removal of GLP-1 RAs 12.23 Individuals with evidence of ceration, including those with
should be balanced against their potential sensory loss or prior ulceration loss of protective sensation,
benefits. In cases of severe gastroparesis, or amputation should have foot deformities, ulcers, cal-
pharmacologic interventions are needed. their feet inspected at every
Only metoclopramide, a prokinetic agent, lous formation, poor periph-
visit. A eral circulation, or history of
is approved by the FDA for the treatment 12.24 Obtain a prior history of ul-
of gastroparesis. However, the level of amputation. B
ceration, amputation, Charcot 12.30 For chronic diabetic foot ul-
evidence regarding the benefits of meto-
foot, angioplasty or vascular cers that have failed to heal
Identifying the at-risk foot begins with more frequently for those in higher-risk noncompressible vessels. Toe systolic blood
a detailed history documenting diabetes categories (75,76). pressure tends to be more accurate. Toe
control, smoking history, exercise toler- LOPS is vital to risk assessment. One systolic blood pressures <30 mmHg are
ance, history of claudication or rest pain, of the most useful tests to determine suggestive of PAD and an inability to
and prior ulcerations or amputations. A LOPS is the 10-g monofilament test. heal foot ulcerations (80). Individuals with
thorough examination of the feet should Studies have shown that clinical exami- abnormal pulse volume recording tracings
be performed annually in all people with nation and the 10-g monofilament test and toe pressures <30 mmHg with foot
diabetes and more frequently in at-risk are the two most sensitive tests in iden- ulcers should be referred for immediate
individuals (75). The examination should tifying the foot at risk for ulceration vascular evaluation. Due to the high
include assessment of skin integrity, as- (78). The monofilament test should be prevalence of PAD in people with dia-
sessment for LOPS using the 10-g mono- performed with at least one other neu- betes, it has been recommended by the
filament along with at least one other rologic assessment tool (e.g., pinprick, Society for Vascular Surgery and the
Table 12.1—International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot risk stratification system and corresponding foot screening
frequency
Category Ulcer risk Characteristics Examination frequency*
0 Very low No LOPS and No PAD Annually
1 Low LOPS or PAD Every 6–12 months
2 Moderate LOPS 1 PAD, or Every 3–6 months
LOPS 1 foot deformity, or
PAD 1 foot deformity
3 High LOPS or PAD and one or more of the following: Every 1–3 months
History of foot ulcer
Amputation (minor or major)
End-stage renal disease
Adapted with permission from Schaper et al. (76). LOPS, loss of protective sensation; PAD, peripheral artery disease. *Examination frequency
suggestions are based on expert opinion and patient-centered requirements.
diabetesjournals.org/care Retinopathy, Neuropathy, and Foot Care S211
Individuals considered at risk should education and self-care. People in the include the following five basic prin-
understand the implications of foot de- moderate- to high-risk category should ciples of ulcer treatment:
formities, LOPS, and PAD; the proper be referred to foot care specialists for
care of the foot, including nail and skin further evaluation and regular surveil- • Offloading of plantar ulcerations
care; and the importance of foot inspec- lance as outlined in Table 12.1. This in- • Debridement of necrotic, nonviable
tions on a daily basis. Individuals with cludes individuals with LOPS, PAD, and/ tissue
LOPS should be educated on appropriate or structural foot deformities, such as • Revascularization of ischemic wounds
ways to examine their feet (palpation or Charcot foot, bunions, or hammertoes. when necessary
visual inspection with an unbreakable Individuals with any open ulceration or • Management of infection: soft tissue
mirror) for daily surveillance of early unexplained swelling, erythema, or in- or bone
foot problems. Patients should also be creased skin temperature should be re- • Use of physiologic, topical dressings
ferred urgently to a foot care specialist
educated on the importance of refer-
2. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial retinopathy: a meta-analysis. Arch Ophthalmol diabetic retinopathy: the Protocol W randomized
Research Group; Nathan DM, Genuth S, Lachin J, 2011;129:435–444 clinical trial. JAMA Ophthalmol 2021;139:701–712
et al. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes 17. Walton OB 4th, Garoon RB, Weng CY, et al. 30. Elman MJ, Bressler NM, Qin H, et al.;
on the development and progression of long- Evaluation of automated teleretinal screening Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network.
term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes program for diabetic retinopathy. JAMA Ophthalmol Expanded 2-year follow-up of ranibizumab plus
mellitus. N Engl J Med 1993;329:977–986 2016;134:204–209 prompt or deferred laser or triamcinolone plus
3. Stratton IM, Kohner EM, Aldington SJ, et al. 18. Daskivich LP, Vasquez C, Martinez C Jr, Tseng prompt laser for diabetic macular edema.
UKPDS 50: risk factors for incidence and progression CH, Mangione CM. Implementation and evaluation Ophthalmology 2011;118:609–614
of retinopathy in type II diabetes over 6 years of a large-scale teleretinal diabetic retinopathy 31. Mitchell P, Bandello F, Schmidt-Erfurth U,
from diagnosis. Diabetologia 2001;44:156–163 screening program in the Los Angeles County et al.; RESTORE study group. The RESTORE study:
4. Estacio RO, McFarling E, Biggerstaff S, Jeffers Department of Health Services. JAMA Intern ranibizumab monotherapy or combined with
BW, Johnson D, Schrier RW. Overt albuminuria Med 2017;177:642–649 laser versus laser monotherapy for diabetic
predicts diabetic retinopathy in Hispanics with 19. Sim DA, Mitry D, Alexander P, et al. The macular edema. Ophthalmology 2011;118:615–625
NIDDM. Am J Kidney Dis 1998;31:947–953 evolution of teleophthalmology programs in the 32. Wells JA, Glassman AR, Ayala AR, et al.;
5. Yau JWY, Rogers SL, Kawasaki R, et al.; Meta- United Kingdom: beyond diabetic retinopathy
43. Freeman R. Not all neuropathy in diabetes followed for 13 years: ADDITION-Denmark. Diabetes controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2014;109:
is of diabetic etiology: differential diagnosis of Care 2018;41:1068–1075 375–385
diabetic neuropathy. Curr Diab Rep 2009;9:423–431 56. Afshinnia F, Reynolds EL, Rajendiran TM, 71. Umpierrez GE (Ed.) Therapy for Diabetes
44. Pop-Busui R, Evans GW, Gerstein HC, et al.; et al. Serum lipidomic determinants of human Mellitus and Related Disorders. 6th ed. Arlington,
Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes diabetic neuropathy in type 2 diabetes. Ann Clin VA, American Diabetes Association; 2014
Study Group. Effects of cardiac autonomic Transl Neurol 2022;9:1392–1404 72. Sugumar A, Singh A, Pasricha PJ. A sys-
dysfunction on mortality risk in the Action to 57. Lu Y, Xing P, Cai X, et al. Prevalence and risk tematic review of the efficacy of domperidone for
Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) factors for diabetic peripheral neuropathy in type 2 the treatment of diabetic gastroparesis. Clin
trial. Diabetes Care 2010;33:1578–1584 diabetic patients from 14 countries: estimates Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008;6:726–733
45. Pop-Busui R, Cleary PA, Braffett BH, et al.; of the INTERPRET-DD study. Front Public Health 73. Maganti K, Onyemere K, Jones MP. Oral
DCCT/EDIC Research Group. Association between 2020;8:534372 erythromycin and symptomatic relief of gastro-
cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy and left 58. Sadosky A, Schaefer C, Mann R, et al. Burden paresis: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol
ventricular dysfunction: DCCT/EDIC study (Diabetes of illness associated with painful diabetic peripheral 2003;98:259–263
Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of neuropathy among adults seeking treatment in the 74. McCallum RW, Snape W, Brody F, Wo J,
Diabetes Interventions and Complications). J Am US: results from a retrospective chart review and Parkman HP, Nowak T. Gastric electrical
85. Goodall RJ, Ellauzi J, Tan MKH, Onida S, of chronic diabetic foot ulcers: the TWO2 study. 100. Lalieu RC, Brouwer RJ, Ubbink DT, Hoencamp
Davies AH, Shalhoub J. A systematic review of the Diabetes Care 2020;43:616–624 R, Bol Raap R, van Hulst RA. Hyperbaric oxygen
impact of foot care education on self efficacy and 93. Boulton AJM, Armstrong DG, L€ ondahl M, therapy for nonischemic diabetic ulcers: a sys-
self care in patients with diabetes. Eur J Vasc et al. New Evidence-Based Therapies for Complex tematic review. Wound Repair Regen 2020;28:
Endovasc Surg 2020;60:282–292 Diabetic Foot Wounds. Arlington, VA, American 266–275
86. Yuncken J, Williams CM, Stolwyk RJ, Haines Diabetes Association, 2022 101. Niederauer MQ, Michalek JE, Liu Q, Papas
TP. People with diabetes do not learn and recall 94. Sheehan P, Jones P, Caselli A, Giurini JM, KK, Lavery LA, Armstrong DG. Continuous
their diabetes foot education: a cohort study. Veves A. Percent change in wound area of diffusion of oxygen improves diabetic foot
Endocrine 2018;62:250–258 diabetic foot ulcers over a 4-week period is a ulcer healing when compared with a placebo
87. Walton DV, Edmonds ME, Bates M, Vas PRJ, robust predictor of complete healing in a 12-week control: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre
Petrova NL, Manu CA. People living with diabetes prospective trial. Diabetes Care 2003;26:1879– study. J Wound Care 2018;27(Suppl. 9):S30–
are unaware of their foot risk status or why they 1882 S45
are referred to a multidisciplinary foot team. J 95. Blume PA, Walters J, Payne W, Ayala J, Lantis J. 102. Serena TE, Bullock NM, Cole W, Lantis J, Li L,
Wound Care 2021;30:598–603 Comparison of negative pressure wound therapy Moore S, et al. Topical oxygen therapy in the
88. Bus SA, van Deursen RW, Armstrong DG, using vacuum-assisted closure with advanced moist
provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guide-
lines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional
Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for up-
dating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a de-
tailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the
evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full
list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction
and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are
invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.
Recommendations
13.1 Consider the assessment of medical, psychological, functional (self-
management abilities), and social domains in older adults to provide
a framework to determine targets and therapeutic approaches for dia-
betes management. B
13.2 Screen for geriatric syndromes (i.e., polypharmacy, cognitive impairment,
depression, urinary incontinence, falls, persistent pain, and frailty) in older
adults, as they may affect diabetes self-management and diminish quality
of life. B
Diabetes is a highly prevalent health condition in the aging population. Over one-
quarter of people over the age of 65 years have diabetes, and one-half of older
adults have prediabetes (1,2), and the number of older adults living with these con-
ditions is expected to increase rapidly in the coming decades. Diabetes in older
adults is also a highly heterogeneous condition. While type 2 diabetes predomi-
nates in the older population as much as in the younger population, improvements
in insulin delivery, technology, and care over the last few decades have led to in-
creasing numbers of people with childhood and adult-onset type 1 diabetes surviv- Disclosure information for each author is
ing and thriving into their later decades. Diabetes management in older adults available at https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-SDIS.
requires regular assessment of medical, psychological, functional, and social do- Suggested citation: ElSayed NA, Aleppo G, Aroda
mains. When assessing older adults with diabetes, it is important to accurately cat- VR, et al., American Diabetes Association. 13.
egorize the type of diabetes as well as other factors, including diabetes duration, Older adults: Standards of Care in Diabetes—
2023. Diabetes Care 2023;46(Suppl. 1):S216–S229
the presence of complications, and treatment-related concerns, such as fear of hy-
poglycemia. Screening for diabetes complications in older adults should be individu- © 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.
alized and periodically revisited, as the results of screening tests may impact Readers may use this article as long as the
work is properly cited, the use is educational
targets and therapeutic approaches (3–5). Older adults with diabetes have higher and not for profit, and the work is not altered.
rates of premature death, functional disability, accelerated muscle loss, and coexist- More information is available at https://www.
ing illnesses, such as hypertension, coronary heart disease, and stroke, than those diabetesjournals.org/journals/pages/license.
diabetesjournals.org/care Older Adults S217
without diabetes. At the same time, is associated with a decline in cognitive mild cognitive impairment or dementia
older adults with diabetes are also at function (15,16), and longer duration of (4,29). Screening for cognitive impairment
greater risk than other older adults for diabetes is associated with worsening cog- should additionally be considered when
several common geriatric syndromes, nitive function. There are ongoing studies an individual presents with a significant
such as polypharmacy, cognitive impair- evaluating whether preventing or delay- decline in clinical status due to increased
ment, depression, urinary incontinence, ing diabetes onset may help to maintain problems with self-care activities, such as
injurious falls, persistent pain, and frailty cognitive function in older adults. How- errors in calculating insulin dose, difficulty
(1). These conditions may impact older ever, studies examining the effects of counting carbohydrates, skipped meals,
adults’ diabetes self-management abili- intensive glycemic and blood pressure con- skipped insulin doses, and difficulty rec-
ties and quality of life if left unaddressed trol to achieve specific targets have not ognizing, preventing, or treating hypo-
(2,6,7). See Section 4, “Comprehensive demonstrated a reduction in brain function glycemia. People who screen positive
Medical Evaluation and Assessment of decline (17,18). for cognitive impairment should receive
education is appropriate (when compli- ing the potential benefits of intranasal 13.4 Because older adults with di-
cating factors arise or when transitions insulin therapy and metformin therapy abetes have a greater risk of
in care occur) or whether the current provide insights for future clinical trials hypoglycemia than younger
plan is too complex for the individual’s and mechanistic studies (20–23). adults, episodes of hypogly-
self-management ability or the care- Despite the paucity of therapies to cemia should be ascertained
givers providing care (11). Particular atten- prevent or remedy cognitive decline, and addressed at routine
tion should be paid to complications that identifying cognitive impairment early visits. B
can develop over short periods of time has important implications for diabetes 13.5 For older adults with type 1
and/or would significantly impair func- care. The presence of cognitive impair- diabetes, continuous glucose
tional status, such as visual and lower- ment can make it challenging for clinicians monitoring is recommended to
extremity complications. Please refer to the to help their patients reach individualized reduce hypoglycemia. A
American Diabetes Association (ADA) con- glycemic, blood pressure, and lipid tar- 13.6 For older adults with type 2
sensus report “Diabetes in Older Adults” gets. Cognitive dysfunction makes it diffi- diabetes on multiple daily
for details (3). cult for individuals to perform complex doses of insulin, continuous
self-care tasks (24), such as monitoring glucose monitoring should be
NEUROCOGNITIVE FUNCTION glucose and adjusting insulin doses. It considered to improve glyce-
also hinders their ability to appropriately mic outcomes and decrease
Recommendation maintain the timing of meals and content glucose variability. B
13.3 Screening for early detection of the diet. When clinicians are providing 13.7 For older adults with type 1 dia-
of mild cognitive impairment care for people with cognitive dysfunc- betes, consider the use of auto-
or dementia should be per- tion, it is critical to simplify care plans and mated insulin delivery systems
formed for adults 65 years to facilitate and engage the appropriate B and other advanced insulin
of age or older at the ini- support structure to assist individuals in delivery devices such as con-
tial visit, annually, and as all aspects of care. nected pens E to reduce risk
appropriate. B Older adults with diabetes should be of hypoglycemia, based on
carefully screened and monitored for individual ability.
cognitive impairment (2). Several simple
Older adults with diabetes are at higher assessment tools are available to screen
risk of cognitive decline and institution- for cognitive impairment (24,25), such Older adults are at higher risk of hypo-
alization (12,13). The presentation of as the Mini-Mental State Examination glycemia for many reasons, including
cognitive impairment ranges from sub- (26), Mini-Cog (27), and the Montreal insulin deficiency necessitating insulin
tle executive dysfunction to memory Cognitive Assessment (28), which may therapy and progressive renal insuffi-
loss and overt dementia. People with di- help to identify individuals requiring ciency (31). As described above, older
abetes have higher incidences of all- neuropsychological evaluation, particu- adults have higher rates of unidenti-
cause dementia, Alzheimer disease, and larly those in whom dementia is sus- fied cognitive impairment and demen-
vascular dementia than people with nor- pected (i.e., experiencing memory loss tia, leading to difficulties in adhering to
mal glucose tolerance (14). The effects and decline in their basic and instru- complex self-care activities (e.g., glucose
of hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, and hy- mental activities of daily living). Annual monitoring, insulin dose adjustment).
perinsulinemia on the brain are areas of screening is indicated for adults 65 years Cognitive decline has been associated
intense research. Poor glycemic control of age or older for early detection of with increased risk of hypoglycemia,
S218 Older Adults Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
and conversely, severe hypoglycemia has 8% (95% CI 6.0–11.5) increase in time improvements in time in range compared
been linked to increased risk of de- spent in range between 70 and 180 mg/dL. with sensor-augmented pump therapy
mentia (32,33). Therefore, as dis- A 6-month extension of the trial demon- (46). Moreover, they found small but sig-
cussed in Recommendation 13.3, it is strated that these benefits were sustained nificant decreases in hypoglycemia with
important to routinely screen older for up to a year (42). These and other the hybrid closed-loop strategy. Boughton
adults for cognitive impairment and short-term trials are supported by obser- et al. (47) reported results of an open-
dementia and discuss findings with vational data from the Diabetes Control label, crossover design clinical trial in
the patients and their caregivers. and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of 37 older adults ($60 years) in which
People with diabetes and their care- Diabetes Interventions and Complications 16 weeks of treatment with a hybrid
givers should be routinely queried about (DCCT/EDIC) study indicating that among closed-loop advanced insulin delivery
hypoglycemia (e.g., selected questions older adults (mean age 58 years) with system was compared with sensor-
from the Diabetes Care Profile) (34) and long-standing type 1 diabetes, routine augmented pump therapy. They found
13.10 Screening for diabetes compli- determining individualized glycemic Based on concepts of competing mortal-
cations should be individualized targets. ity and time to benefit, people with ad-
in older adults. Particular atten- A1C may have limitations in those vanced diabetes complications are less
tion should be paid to compli- who have medical conditions that im- likely to benefit from reducing the risk of
cations that would lead to pact red blood cell turnover (see Sec- microvascular complications (55). In addi-
functional impairment. C tion 2, “Classification and Diagnosis of tion, they are more likely to suffer seri-
13.11 Treatment of hypertension to Diabetes,” for additional details on the ous adverse effects of therapeutics, such
individualized target levels is in- limitations of A1C) (54). Many condi- as hypoglycemia (56). However, those
dicated in most older adults. C tions associated with increased red with poorly managed diabetes may be
13.12 Treatment of other cardiovas- blood cell turnover, such as hemodialy- subject to acute complications of diabe-
cular risk factors should be sis, recent blood loss or transfusion, or tes, including dehydration, poor wound
individualized in older adults erythropoietin therapy, are commonly healing, and hyperglycemic hyperosmo-
Table 13.1—Framework for considering treatment goals for glycemia, blood pressure, and dyslipidemia in older adults with
diabetes
Fasting or
Patient characteristics/ preprandial Bedtime Blood
health status Rationale Reasonable A1C goal‡ glucose glucose pressure Lipids
Healthy (few coexisting Longer remaining <7.0–7.5% (53–58 80–130 mg/dL 80–180 mg/dL <130/80 Statin, unless
chronic illnesses, intact life expectancy mmol/mol) (4.4–7.2 (4.4–10.0 mmHg contraindicated
cognitive and functional mmol/L) mmol/L) or not tolerated
status)
Complex/intermediate Intermediate <8.0% (64 mmol/mol) 90–150 mg/dL 100–180 mg/dL <130/80 Statin, unless
(multiple coexisting remaining life (5.0–8.3 (5.6–10.0 mmHg contraindicated
chronic illnesses* or two expectancy, mmol/L) mmol/L) or not tolerated
or more instrumental high treatment
This table represents a consensus framework for considering treatment goals for glycemia, blood pressure, and dyslipidemia in older adults
with diabetes. The patient characteristic categories are general concepts. Not every patient will clearly fall into a particular category. Consider-
ation of patient and caregiver preferences is an important aspect of treatment individualization. Additionally, a patient’s health status and
preferences may change over time. ADL, activities of daily living; LTC, long-term care. ‡A lower A1C goal may be set for an individual if
achievable without recurrent or severe hypoglycemia or undue treatment burden. *Coexisting chronic illnesses are conditions serious enough
to require medications or lifestyle management and may include arthritis, cancer, heart failure, depression, emphysema, falls, hypertension,
incontinence, stage 3 or worse chronic kidney disease, myocardial infarction, and stroke. “Multiple” means at least three, but many patients
may have five or more (66). **The presence of a single end-stage chronic illness, such as stage 3–4 heart failure or oxygen-dependent lung
disease, chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis, or uncontrolled metastatic cancer, may cause significant symptoms or impairment of func-
tional status and significantly reduce life expectancy. Adapted from Kirkman et al. (3).
morbidity and mortality are likely to LIFESTYLE MANAGEMENT Lifestyle management in older adults
result from a clinical focus on compre- should be tailored to frailty status. Dia-
Recommendations
hensive cardiovascular risk factor modifi- betes in the aging population is associ-
13.13 Optimal nutrition and pro-
cation. There is strong evidence from ated with reduced muscle strength, poor
tein intake is recommended
clinical trials of the value of treating hy- muscle quality, and accelerated loss of
for older adults; regular ex-
pertension in older adults (61,62), with muscle mass, which may result in sarco-
ercise, including aerobic ac-
treatment of hypertension to individual- penia and/or osteopenia (65,66). Diabetes
tivity, weight-bearing exercise,
ized target levels indicated in most. is also recognized as an independent risk
and/or resistance training,
There is less evidence for lipid-lowering factor for frailty. Frailty is characterized by
should be encouraged in all
therapy and aspirin therapy, although decline in physical performance and an
older adults who can safely
the benefits of these interventions for increased risk of poor health outcomes
engage in such activities. B
primary and secondary prevention are due to physiologic vulnerability and func-
13.14 For older adults with type 2
likely to apply to older adults whose life tional or psychosocial stressors. Inadequate
diabetes, overweight/obesity,
expectancies equal or exceed the time nutritional intake, particularly inadequate
and capacity to safely exer-
frames of the clinical trials (63). In the protein intake, can increase the risk of
cise, an intensive lifestyle in-
case of statins, the follow-up time of sarcopenia and frailty in older adults.
tervention focused on dietary
clinical trials ranged from 2 to 6 years. Management of frailty in diabetes in-
changes, physical activity, and
While the time frame of trials can be cludes optimal nutrition with adequate
modest weight loss (e.g.,
used to inform treatment decisions, a protein intake combined with an exercise
5–7%) should be considered
more specific concept is the time to program that includes aerobic, weight-
for its benefits on quality of
benefit for a therapy. For statins, a bearing, and resistance training. The ben-
life, mobility and physical func-
meta-analysis of the previously men- efits of a structured exercise program (as
tioning, and cardiometabolic
tioned trials showed that the time to in the Lifestyle Interventions and Inde-
risk factor control. A
benefit is 2.5 years (64). pendence for Elders [LIFE] study) in frail
diabetesjournals.org/care Older Adults S221
older adults include reducing sedentary the risk of hypoglycemia if it determination of whether a person is
time, preventing mobility disability, and can be achieved within the in- considered overtreated requires an elicita-
reducing frailty (67,68). The goal of these dividualized A1C target. B tion of the person’s perceptions of the
programs is not weight loss but en- 13.18 Simplification of complex treat- current medication burden and preferen-
hanced functional status. ces for treatments. For those seeking to
ment plans (especially insulin)
For nonfrail older adults with type 2 simplify their diabetes regimen, deintensi-
is recommended to reduce the
diabetes and overweight or obesity, an fication of regimens in individuals taking
risk of hypoglycemia and poly-
intensive lifestyle intervention designed noninsulin glucose-lowering medications
pharmacy and decrease the
to reduce weight is beneficial across can be achieved by either lowering the
multiple outcomes. The Look AHEAD burden of the disease if it can
be achieved within the individ- dose or discontinuing some medications,
(Action for Health in Diabetes) trial is
ualized A1C target. B as long as the individualized glycemic tar-
described in Section 8, “Obesity and
13.19 Consider costs of care and in- gets are maintained (89). When older
Titrate dose of basal insulin based on fasting If mealtime insulin ≤10 units/dose:
fingerstick glucose test results over a week Discontinue prandial insulin and add
If prandial insulin >10 units/dose:
noninsulin agent(s)
Additional Tips Using patient and drug characteristics to guide decision-making, as depicted in
Fig. 9.3 and Table 9.2, select additional agent(s) as needed:
Do not use rapid- and short-acting insulin at bedtime
Every 2 weeks, adjust insulin dose and/or add glucose-lowering agents based on
While adjusting prandial insulin, may use simplified fingerstick glucose testing performed before lunch and before dinner
sliding scale, for example:
Goal: 90–150 mg/dL (5.0–8.3 mmo/L) before meals; may change
{Premeal glucose >250 mg/dL (13.9 mmol/L), goal based on overall health and goals of care**
give 2 units of short- or rapid-acting insulin
If 50% of premeal fingerstick values over 2 weeks are above goal, increase the
{Premeal glucose >350 mg/dL (19.4 mmol/L), dose or add another agent
give 4 units of short- or rapid-acting insulin
If >2 premeal fingerstick values/week are <90 mg/dL (5.0 mmol/L),
Stop sliding scale when not needed daily decrease the dose of medication
Figure 13.1—Algorithm to simplify insulin regimen for older adults with type 2 diabetes. eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate. *Basal insulins: glar-
gine U-100 and U-300, detemir, degludec, and human NPH. **See Table 13.1. ¥Prandial insulins: short-acting (regular human insulin) or rapid-acting
(lispro, aspart, and glulisine). §Premixed insulins: 70/30, 75/25, and 50/50 products. Adapted with permission from Munshi et al. (93).
vitamin B12 deficiency should be consid- Incretin-Based Therapies other populations (100). See Section 9,
ered (96). Oral dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) “Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic
inhibitors have few side effects and Treatment,” and Section 10, “Cardio-
minimal risk of hypoglycemia, but their vascular Disease and Risk Management,”
Thiazolidinediones
cost may be a barrier to some older for a more extensive discussion regard-
Thiazolidinediones, if used at all, should be
adults. DPP-4 inhibitors do not reduce ing the specific indications for this class
used very cautiously in older adults on in-
or increase major adverse cardiovascular of agents. In a systematic review and
sulin therapy as well as in those with or at
outcomes (100). Across the trials of this meta-analysis of GLP-1 receptor agonist
risk for heart failure, osteoporosis, falls or
drug class, there appears to be no inter- trials, these agents have been found to
fractures, and/or macular edema (97,98).
action by age-group (101–103). A chal- reduce major adverse cardiovascular
Lower doses of a thiazolidinedione in com-
lenge of interpreting the age-stratified events, cardiovascular deaths, stroke, and
bination therapy may mitigate these side
analyses of this drug class and other car- myocardial infarction to the same degree
effects.
diovascular outcomes trials is that while for people over and under 65 years of
most of these analyses were prespeci- age (104). While the evidence for this class
Insulin Secretagogues fied, they were not powered to detect of agents for older adults continues to
Sulfonylureas and other insulin secreta- differences. grow, there are a number of practical is-
gogues are associated with hypoglyce- GLP-1 receptor agonists have demon- sues that should be considered specifi-
mia and should be used with caution. strated cardiovascular benefits among cally for older people. These drugs are
If used, sulfonylureas with a shorter du- people with diabetes and established injectable agents (with the exception of
ration of action, such as glipizide, are atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease oral semaglutide) (105), which require
preferred. Glyburide is a longer-acting (ASCVD) and those at higher ASCVD visual, motor, and cognitive skills for ap-
sulfonylurea and should be avoided in risk, and newer trials are expanding propriate administration. Agents with a
older adults (99). our understanding of their benefits in weekly dosing schedule may reduce the
diabetesjournals.org/care Older Adults S223
Table 13.2—Considerations for treatment regimen simplification and deintensification/deprescribing in older adults with
diabetes (93,128)
When may treatment
Patient characteristics/ Reasonable A1C/ When may regimen deintensification/
health status treatment goal Rationale/considerations simplification be required? deprescribing be required?
Healthy (few coexisting <7.0–7.5% (53–58 Patients can generally If severe or recurrent If severe or recurrent
chronic illnesses, mmol/mol) perform complex tasks to hypoglycemia occurs in hypoglycemia occurs in
intact cognitive and maintain good glycemic patients on insulin patients on noninsulin
functional status) control when health is therapy (regardless of therapies with high risk
stable A1C) of hypoglycemia
During acute illness, patients If wide glucose excursions (regardless of A1C)
may be more at risk for are observed If wide glucose excursions
administration or dosing If cognitive or functional are observed
Treatment regimen simplification refers to changing strategy to decrease the complexity of a medication regimen (e.g., fewer administration
times, fewer blood glucose checks) and decreasing the need for calculations (such as sliding-scale insulin calculations or insulin-carbohydrate
ratio calculations). Deintensification/deprescribing refers to decreasing the dose or frequency of administration of a treatment or discontinu-
ing a treatment altogether. ADL, activities of daily living; LTC, long-term care.
S224 Older Adults Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
burden of administration. GLP-1 receptor Other Factors to Consider A1C, reducing glycemic variability, and
agonists may also be associated with The needs of older adults with diabetes reducing risk of hypoglycemia (45) (see
nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Given and their caregivers should be evaluated Section 7, “Diabetes Technology,” and
the gastrointestinal side effects of this to construct a tailored care plan. Im- Section 9, “Pharmacologic Approaches to
class, GLP-1 receptor agonists may not paired social functioning may reduce Glycemic Treatment”). In older people
be preferred in older adults who are these individuals’ quality of life and in- with type 1 diabetes, administration of
experiencing unexplained weight loss. crease the risk of functional dependency insulin may become more difficult as
(7). The person’s living situation must complications, cognitive impairment,
Sodium–Glucose Cotransporter 2 be considered as it may affect diabetes and functional impairment arise. This in-
Inhibitors management and support needs. Social creases the importance of caregivers in
SGLT2 inhibitors are administered orally, and instrumental support networks (e.g., the lives of these individuals. Many
which may be convenient for older adults adult children, caretakers) that provide older people with type 1 diabetes re-
well as the LTC staff and caregivers Another consideration for the LTC set- and dignity are primary goals
(115). Training should include diabetes ting is that unlike in the hospital setting, for diabetes management at
detection and institutional quality as- health care professionals are not required the end of life. C
sessment. LTC facilities should develop to evaluate patients daily. According to
their own policies and procedures for federal guidelines, assessments should
prevention and management of hypogly- be done at least every 30 days for the The management of the older adult at
cemia. With the increased longevity of first 90 days after admission and then the end of life receiving palliative medi-
populations, the care of people with dia- at least once every 60 days. Although in cine or hospice care is a unique situation.
betes and its complications in LTC is an practice patients may actually be seen Overall, palliative medicine promotes
area that warrants greater study. more frequently, the concern is that comfort, symptom control and preven-
these individuals may have uncontrolled tion (pain, hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia,
Resources glucose levels or wide excursions with- and dehydration), and preservation of
1. A stable patient: Continue with the across the disease course: diabetes & aging study. impairment and Alzheimer’s disease. Discov Med
person’s previous regimen, with a J Gen Intern Med 2012;27:1674–1681 2013;16:277–286
7. Laiteerapong N, Karter AJ, Liu JY, et al. 23. Tomlin A, Sinclair A. The influence of cognition
focus on 1) the prevention of on self-management of type 2 diabetes in older
Correlates of quality of life in older adults with
hypoglycemia and 2) the manage- diabetes: the diabetes & aging study. Diabetes people. Psychol Res Behav Manag 2016;9:7–20
ment of hyperglycemia using blood Care 2011;34:1749–1753 24. National Institute on Aging. Assessing
glucose testing, keeping levels below 8. McClintock MK, Dale W, Laumann EO, Waite Cognitive Impairment in Older Patients. Accessed
the renal threshold of glucose, and L. Empirical redefinition of comprehensive health 19 October 2022. Available from https://www.
and well-being in the older adults of the United nia.nih.gov/health/assessing-cognitive-impairment-
hyperglycemia-mediated dehydration. older-patients
States. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2016;113:E3071–
There is no role for A1C monitoring. 25. Alzheimer’s Association. Cognitive Assessment.
E3080
2. A patient with organ failure: Pre- 9. Laiteerapong N, Iveniuk J, John PM, Laumann Accessed 19 October 2022. Available from https://
venting hypoglycemia is of greatest EO, Huang ES. Classification of older adults who alz.org/professionals/healthcare-professionals/
significance. Dehydration must be have diabetes by comorbid conditions, United cognitive-assessment
26. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-
Study Group. Effects of intensive glucose older adults with diabetes. Diabetes Care 2020; older adults: the LIFE study randomized clinical trial.
lowering in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 43:1724–1731 JAMA 2014;311:2387–2396
2008;358:2545–2559 53. Brown SES, Meltzer DO, Chin MH, Huang 68. Gill TM, Baker DI, Gottschalk M, Peduzzi PN,
38. Duckworth W, Abraira C, Moritz T, et al.; ES. Perceptions of quality-of-life effects of Allore H, Byers A. A program to prevent
VADT Investigators. Glucose control and vascular treatments for diabetes mellitus in vulnerable functional decline in physically frail, elderly
complications in veterans with type 2 diabetes. N and nonvulnerable older patients. J Am Geriatr persons who live at home. N Engl J Med
Engl J Med 2009;360:129–139 Soc 2008;56:1183–1190 2002;347:1068–1074
39. Toschi E, Slyne C, Sifre K, et al. The relationship 54. NGSP. Factors that Interfere with HbA1c Test 69. Curtis JM, Horton ES, Bahnson J, et al.; Look
between cgm-derived metrics, A1C, and risk of Results. Accessed 19 October 2022. Available AHEAD Research Group. Prevalence and predictors
hypoglycemia in older adults with type 1 diabetes. from http://www.ngsp.org/factors.asp of abnormal cardiovascular responses to exercise
Diabetes Care 2020;43:2349–2354 55. Huang ES, Zhang Q, Gandra N, Chin MH, testing among individuals with type 2 diabetes: the
40. Carlson AL, Kanapka LG, Miller KM, et al. Meltzer DO. The effect of comorbid illness and Look AHEAD (Action for Health in Diabetes) study.
Hypoglycemia and glycemic control in older functional status on the expected benefits of Diabetes Care 2010;33:901–907
adults with type 1 diabetes: baseline results from intensive glucose control in older patients with 70. Bray G, Gregg E, Haffner S, et al.; Look
the WISDM Study. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2021; type 2 diabetes: a decision analysis. Ann Intern Ahead Research Group. Baseline characteristics
medication non-adherence among older U.S. deficiency in the Diabetes Prevention Program expectancy of type 1 diabetes: the Pittsburgh
adults with diabetes from 2010 to 2014. J Health Outcomes Study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2016; Epidemiology of Diabetes Complications study
Med Econ 2018;4:7 101:1754–1761 cohort. Diabetes 2012;61:2987–2992
82. Schmittdiel JA, Steers N, Duru OK, et al. 97. Schwartz AV, Chen H, Ambrosius WT, et al. 113. Bullard KM, Cowie CC, Lessem SE, et al.
Patient-provider communication regarding drug Effects of TZD use and discontinuation on Prevalence of diagnosed diabetes in adults by
costs in Medicare Part D beneficiaries with fracture rates in ACCORD Bone Study. J Clin diabetes type—United States, 2016. MMWR
diabetes: a TRIAD Study. BMC Health Serv Res Endocrinol Metab 2015;100:4059–4066 Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2018;67:359–361
2010;10:164 98. Billington EO, Grey A, Bolland MJ. The effect 114. Heise T, Nosek L, Rønn BB, et al. Lower
83. Patel MR, Resnicow K, Lang I, Kraus K, of thiazolidinediones on bone mineral density within-subject variability of insulin detemir in
Heisler M. Solutions to address diabetes-related and bone turnover: systematic review and meta- comparison to NPH insulin and insulin glargine
financial burden and cost-related nonadherence: analysis. Diabetologia 2015;58:2238–2246 in people with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes 2004;
results from a pilot study. Health Educ Behav 99. American Geriatrics Society 2015 Beers 53:1614–1620
2018;45:101–111 Criteria Update Expert Panel. American Geriatrics 115. Munshi MN, Florez H, Huang ES, et al.
84. Arnold SV, Lipska KJ, Wang J, Seman L, Mehta Society 2015 updated Beers criteria for potentially Management of diabetes in long-term care and
SN, Kosiborod M. Use of intensive glycemic inappropriate medication use in older adults. J Am
patients with type 2 diabetes in a national guidelines for treating frail older adults with 128. Munshi MN, Slyne C, Segal AR, Saul N,
sample of nursing homes. JAMA Intern Med type 2 diabetes: from the Diabetes Care Program Lyons C, Weinger K. Liberating A1C goals in older
2018;178:713–715 of Nova Scotia (DCPNS) and the Palliative and adults may not protect against the risk of
127. Mallery LH, Ransom T, Steeves B, Cook B, Therapeutic Harmonization (PATH) program. J Am hypoglycemia. J Diabetes Complications 2017;31:
Dunbar P, Moorhouse P. Evidence-informed Med Dir Assoc 2013;14:801–808 1197–1199
hormone; consider normal; IgG tTG and monitoring acceptable initially ratio; random sample retinal photography pulses, pinprick, 10-g
antithyroglobulin and deamidated gliadin acceptable initially monofilament
antithyroid antibodies if IgA sensation tests,
peroxidase antibodies deficient vibration, and ankle
reflexes
When to start Soon after diagnosis Soon after diagnosis At diagnosis Soon after diagnosis; Puberty or >10 years Puberty or $11 years old, Puberty or $10 years
preferably after old, whichever is whichever is earlier, old, whichever is
glycemia has earlier, and diabetes and diabetes duration earlier, and diabetes
improved and duration of 5 years of 3–5 years duration of 5 years
$2 years old
Follow-up frequency Every 1–2 years if Within 2 years and Every visit If LDL #100 mg/dL, If normal, annually; if If normal, every 2 years; If normal, annually
thyroid antibodies then at 5 years after repeat at 9–11 years abnormal, repeat consider less frequently
negative; more often diagnosis; sooner if old; then, if <100 with confirmation in (every 4 years) if
if symptoms develop symptoms develop mg/dL, every 3 years two of three samples A1C <8% and eye
or presence of over 6 months professional agrees
thyroid antibodies
Target NA NA <90th percentile for LDL <100 mg/dL Albumin-to-creatinine No retinopathy No neuropathy
age, sex, and height; ratio <30 mg/g
if $13 years old,
<120/80 mmHg
Treatment Appropriate treatment After confirmation, Lifestyle modification If abnormal, optimize Optimize glycemia and Optimize glycemia; Optimize glycemia;
of underlying thyroid start gluten-free for elevated blood glycemia and medical blood pressure; ACE treatment per referral to neurology
disorder diet pressure (90th to nutrition therapy; if inhibitor* if albumin- ophthalmology
<95th percentile for after 6 months LDL to-creatinine ratio is
age, sex, and height >160 mg/dL or elevated in two of
or, if $13 years old, >130 mg/dL with three samples over
120–129/<80 mmHg); cardiovascular risk 6 months
lifestyle modification factor(s), initiate statin
and ACE inhibitor or therapy (for those aged
ARB* for hypertension >10 years)*
($95th percentile for
age, sex, and height or,
if $13 years old,
$130/80 mmHg)
ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; NA, not applicable; tTG, tissue transglutaminase. *Due to the potential teratogenic effects, individuals of childbearing age should receive reproductive counseling, and
medication should be avoided in individuals of childbearing age who are not using reliable contraception.
Children and Adolescents
S231
Table 14.1B—Recommendations for screening and treatment of complications and related conditions in pediatric type 2 diabetes
Polycystic ovarian
syndrome (for
Nonalcoholic Obstructive sleep adolescent female
Hypertension Nephropathy Neuropathy Retinopathy fatty liver disease apnea individuals) Dyslipidemia
Corresponding 14.77–14.80 14.81–14.86 14.87 and 14.88 14.89–14.92 14.93 and 14.94 14.95 14.96–14.98 14.100–14.104
recommendations
Children and Adolescents
Method Blood pressure Albumin-to- Foot exam with foot Dilated fundoscopy AST and ALT Screening for Screening for Lipid profile
monitoring creatinine ratio; pulses, pinprick, measurement symptoms symptoms;
random sample 10-g monofilament laboratory
acceptable sensation tests, evaluation if
initially vibration, and positive
ankle reflexes symptoms
When to start At diagnosis At diagnosis At diagnosis At/soon after At diagnosis At diagnosis At diagnosis Soon after diagnosis,
diagnosis preferably after
glycemia has
improved
Follow-up frequency Every visit If normal, annually; If normal, annually If normal, annually Annually Every visit Every visit Annually
if abnormal,
repeat with
confirmation in
two of three
samples over
6 months
Target <90th percentile for <30 mg/g No neuropathy No retinopathy NA NA NA LDL <100 mg/dL,
age, sex, and height; HDL >35 mg/dL,
if $13 years old, triglycerides
<130/80 mmHg <150 mg/dL
Treatment Lifestyle modification Optimize glycemia Optimize glycemia; Optimize glycemia; Refer to gastro- If positive symptoms, If no contra- If abnormal, optimize
for elevated blood and blood referral to treatment per enterology for refer to sleep indications, oral glycemia and medical
pressure (90th to pressure; ACE neurology ophthalmology persistently specialist and contraceptive pills; nutrition therapy; if
<95th percentile for inhibitor* if elevated or polysomnogram medical nutrition after 6 months, LDL
age, sex, and height albumin-to- worsening therapy; metformin >130 mg/dL, initiate
or, if $13 years old, creatinine ratio transaminases statin therapy (for
120–129/<80 mmHg); is elevated in those aged >10
lifestyle modification two of three years)*; if triglycerides
and ACE inhibitor or samples over >400 mg/dL fasting
ARB* for hypertension 6 months or >1,000 mg/dL
($95th percentile for nonfasting, begin
age, sex, and height fibrate
or, if $13 years,
$130/80 mmHg)
ARB, angiotensin receptor blocker; NA, not applicable. *Due to the potential teratogenic effects, individuals of childbearing age should receive reproductive counseling, and medication should be
avoided in individuals of childbearing age who are not using reliable contraception.
Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
eating between 10 and 12 years social adjustment (peer relationships) diabetes. These psychosocial factors are
of age. Refer to a qualified men- and school performance can facilitate significantly related to self-management
tal health professional for further both well-being and academic achieve- difficulties, elevated A1C, reduced qual-
assessment and treatment if ment (52). Elevated A1C is a risk factor ity of life, and higher rates of acute and
indicated. B for underperformance at school and in- chronic diabetes complications.
creased absenteeism (53).
Shared decision-making with youth re- Glycemic Monitoring, Insulin
Rapid and dynamic cognitive, develop- garding the adoption of management Delivery, and Targets
mental, and emotional changes occur dur- plan components and self-management Recommendations
ing childhood, adolescence, and emerging behaviors can improve diabetes self- 14.18 All youth with type 1 diabetes
adulthood. Diabetes management during efficacy, participation in diabetes care, should monitor glucose levels
childhood and adolescence places sub- and metabolic outcomes (26,54). Although multiple times daily (up to
technology, including continu- conjunction with A1C whenever achieving a lower A1C should be bal-
ous glucose monitors, insulin possible. E anced against the risks of hypoglycemia
pumps, connected insulin pens, and the developmental burdens of in-
and automated insulin delivery tensive treatment plans in youth (107).
systems as prescribed by their Current standards for diabetes manage- Recent data with newer devices and in-
diabetes care team. E ment reflect the need to minimize hy- sulins indicate that the risk of hypogly-
14.23 A1C goals must be individual- perglycemia as safely as possible. The cemia with lower A1C is less than it was
ized and reassessed over time. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial before (108–117). Some data suggest
An A1C of <7% (53 mmol/mol) (DCCT), which did not enroll children that there could be a threshold where
is appropriate for many children <13 years of age, demonstrated that lower A1C is associated with more hypo-
and adolescents. B near normalization of blood glucose glycemia (118,119); however, the confi-
14.24 Less stringent A1C goals (such levels was more difficult to achieve in dence intervals were large, suggesting
Please refer to Section 7, “Diabetes Tech- peroxidase and antithyroglo- diabetes, or IgG tTG and dea-
nology,” for more information on the use bulin antibodies soon after midated gliadin antibodies if
of blood glucose meters, CGM, and insu- diagnosis. B IgA is deficient. B
lin pumps. More information on insulin 14.30 Measure thyroid-stimulating 14.32 Repeat screening within 2 years
injection technique can be found in Sec- hormone concentrations at di- of diabetes diagnosis and then
tion 9, “Pharmacologic Approaches to agnosis when clinically stable again after 5 years and con-
Glycemic Treatment.”
or soon after optimizing glyce- sider more frequent screening
mia. If normal, suggest recheck- in youth who have symptoms
Key Concepts in Setting Glycemic Targets
• Targets should be individualized, and
ing every 1–2 years or sooner or a first-degree relative with
if the youth has positive thyroid celiac disease. B
lower targets may be reasonable based
antibodies or develops symp- 14.33 Individuals with confirmed ce-
on a benefit–risk assessment.
toms or signs suggestive of liac disease should be placed
• Blood glucose targets should be modi-
(155). European guidelines on screening nutrition, physical activity, sleep, (<100 mg/dL [2.6 mmol/L]),
for celiac disease in children (not specific and, if appropriate, weight a lipid profile repeated every
to children with type 1 diabetes) suggest management. C 3 years is reasonable. E
that biopsy may not be necessary in 14.36 In addition to lifestyle mod-
symptomatic children with high anti- ification, ACE inhibitors or
body titers (i.e., greater than 10 times angiotensin receptor blockers Dyslipidemia Treatment
the upper limit of normal) provided that should be started for treat- Recommendations
further testing is performed (verification ment of confirmed hyperten-
of endomysial antibody positivity on a 14.40 If lipids are abnormal, initial
sion (defined as blood pressure therapy should consist of op-
separate blood sample) (156). Whether consistently $95th percentile
this approach may be appropriate for timizing glycemia and medical
for age, sex, and height or, in nutrition therapy to limit the
asymptomatic children in high-risk groups
adolescents aged $13 years, amount of calories from fat
media thickness have yielded incon- Although intervention data are sparse, smoking rates are significantly higher
sistent results (162,163). the American Heart Association catego- among youth with diabetes than among
rizes children with type 1 diabetes in the youth without diabetes (182,183). In
Screening. Diabetes predisposes to the highest tier for cardiovascular risk and youth with diabetes, it is important to
development of accelerated arterioscle- recommends both lifestyle and pharma- avoid additional CVD risk factors. Smok-
rosis. Lipid evaluation for these patients cologic treatment for those with elevated ing increases the risk of the onset of al-
contributes to risk assessment and identi- LDL cholesterol levels (175,178). Initial buminuria; therefore, smoking avoidance
fies an important proportion of those with therapy should include a nutrition plan is important to prevent both microvas-
dyslipidemia. Therefore, initial screening that restricts saturated fat to 7% of total cular and macrovascular complications
should be done soon after diagnosis. If calories and dietary cholesterol to (170,184). Discouraging cigarette smok-
the initial screen is normal, subsequent 200 mg/day (170). Data from random- ing, including electronic cigarettes (185,
screening may be done at 9–11 years of ized clinical trials in children as young as 186), is an important part of routine dia-
childbearing age who are not Retinopathy (like albuminuria) most Section 2, “Classification and Diagnosis of
using reliable contraception. B commonly occurs after the onset of pu- Diabetes.” For additional support for these
berty and after 5–10 years of diabetes recommendations, see the ADA position
duration (192). It is currently recognized statement “Evaluation and Management
Data from 7,549 participants <20 years that there is a low risk of development of of Youth-Onset Type 2 Diabetes” (3).
of age in the T1D Exchange clinic registry vision-threatening retinal lesions prior to The prevalence of type 2 diabetes in
emphasize the importance of meeting 12 years of age (193,194). A 2019 publi- youth has continued to increase over
glycemic and blood pressure goals, par- cation based on the follow-up of the the past 20 years (4). The CDC published
ticularly as diabetes duration increases, DCCT adolescent cohort supports a lower projections for type 2 diabetes prevalence
in order to reduce the risk of diabetic kid- frequency of eye examinations than pre- using the SEARCH database; assuming a
ney disease. The data also underscore viously recommended, particularly in 2.3% annual increase, the prevalence in
the importance of routine screening to adolescents with A1C closer to the target those under 20 years of age will quadru-
14.52 If screening is normal, repeat ketosis may be present in pediatric indi- and adolescents, should be
screening at a minimum of viduals with clinical features of type 2 encouraged to participate in
3-year intervals E, or more fre- diabetes (including obesity and acantho- at least 60 min of moderate to
quently if BMI is increasing. C sis nigricans) (209). The presence of islet vigorous physical activity daily
autoantibodies has been associated (with muscle and bone strength
14.53 Fasting plasma glucose, 2-h
with faster progression to insulin defi- training at least 3 days/week) B
plasma glucose during a 75-g
ciency (209). At the onset, DKA occurs and to decrease sedentary
oral glucose tolerance test,
in 6% of youth aged 10–19 years with behavior. C
and A1C can be used to test
type 2 diabetes (215). Although uncom- 14.59 Nutrition for youth with pre-
for prediabetes or diabetes in
mon, type 2 diabetes has been ob- diabetes and type 2 diabetes,
children and adolescents. B served in prepubertal children under
14.54 Children and adolescents with like for all children and adoles-
the age of 10 years, and thus it should
overweight or obesity in whom cents, should focus on healthy
lifestyle or metformin only who or without long-acting insulin), Glycemic targets should be individual-
achieve significant weight im- glucagon-like peptide 1 recep- ized, taking into consideration the long-
provement. E tor agonist therapy approved term health benefits of more stringent
14.64 Less stringent A1C goals (such for youth with type 2 diabetes targets and risk for adverse effects, such
as 7.5% [58 mmol/mol]) may should be considered in chil- as hypoglycemia. A lower target A1C in
be appropriate if there is an in- dren 10 years of age or older if youth with type 2 diabetes when com-
creased risk of hypoglycemia. E they have no past medical his- pared with those recommended in type 1
14.65 A1C targets for individuals on tory or family history of medul- diabetes is justified by a lower risk of
insulin should be individual- lary thyroid carcinoma or hypoglycemia and higher risk of compli-
multiple endocrine neoplasia cations (202,219–222).
ized, taking into account the
type 2. A Self-management in pediatric diabe-
relatively low rates of hypogly-
14.72 Individuals treated with metfor- tes involves both the youth and their
cemia in youth-onset type 2
New-Onset Diabetes in Youth With Overweight or Obesity With Clinical Suspicion of Type 2 Diabetes
Initiate lifestyle management and diabetes education
Metformin
Metformin • Titrate up to 2,000 mg per day Manage DKA or HHNK
• Titrate up to 2,000 mg per day as tolerated i.v. insulin until acidosis resolves, then
as tolerated subcutaneous, as for type 1 diabetes
Long-acting insulin: start at 0.5 units/kg/day until antibodies are known
and titrate every 2–3 days based on
BGM
NEGATIVE POSITIVE
Continue metformin
Consider adding glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor
agonist approved for youth with type 2 diabetes
Titrate/initiate insulin therapy; if using long-acting insulin
only and glycemic target not met with escalating
doses, then add prandial insulin; total daily insulin
dose may exceed 1 unit/kg/day
Figure 14.1—Management of new-onset diabetes in youth with overweight or obesity with clinical suspicion of type 2 diabetes. A1C 8.5% 5 69
mmol/mol. Adapted from the ADA position statement “Evaluation and Management of Youth-Onset Type 2 Diabetes” (3). BGM, blood glucose
monitoring; CGM, continuous glucose monitoring; DKA, diabetic ketoacidosis; HHNK, hyperosmolar hyperglycemic nonketotic syndrome; i.v., intra-
venous; MDI, multiple daily injections.
to safely manage the device. Initial treat- therapy in youth with type 2 diabetes; the CGM in youth with type 2 diabetes are
ment should also be with insulin when the combination did not perform better than sparse (233), CGM could be consid-
distinction between type 1 diabetes and metformin alone in achieving durable ered in individuals requiring frequent
type 2 diabetes is unclear and in patients glycemic control (227). blood glucose monitoring for diabetes
who have random blood glucose concen- A randomized clinical trial in youth management.
trations $250 mg/dL (13.9 mmol/L) and/ aged 10–17 years with type 2 diabetes
or A1C $8.5% (69 mmol/mol) (226). demonstrated the addition of subcuta- Metabolic Surgery
Metformin therapy should be added af- neous liraglutide (up to 1.8 mg daily) to Recommendations
ter resolution of ketosis/ketoacidosis. metformin (with or without long-acting 14.75 Metabolic surgery may be
When initial insulin treatment is not insulin) as safe and effective to de- considered for the treatment
required, initiation of metformin is rec- crease A1C (estimated decrease of 1.06 of adolescents with type 2
ommended. The TODAY study found that percentage points at 26 weeks and 1.30 diabetes who have severe obe-
metformin alone provided durable glyce- percentage points at 52 weeks), al- sity (BMI >35 kg/m2) and who
mic control (A1C #8% [64 mmol/mol] though it did increase the frequency of have elevated A1C and/or
for 6 months) in approximately half of gastrointestinal side effects (229). Lira- serious comorbidities despite
the subjects (227). The Restoring Insulin glutide and once-weekly exenatide ex- lifestyle and pharmacologic
Secretion (RISE) Consortium study did not tended release are approved for the intervention. A
demonstrate differences in measures of treatment of type 2 diabetes in youth 14.76 Metabolic surgery should be
glucose or b-cell function preservation be- aged 10 years or older (230–232). performed only by an experi-
tween metformin and insulin, but there Blood glucose monitoring plans enced surgeon working as part
was more weight gain with insulin (228). should be individualized, taking into of a well-organized and engaged
To date, the TODAY study is the only consideration the pharmacologic treat- multidisciplinary team, including a
trial combining lifestyle and metformin ment of the person. Although data on
S244 Children and Adolescents Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
or slow the progression of 14.98 Metformin, in addition to life- age who are not using reli-
retinopathy. B style modification, is likely to able contraception. B
14.91 Less frequent examination (ev- improve the menstrual cyclicity 14.104 If triglycerides are >400 mg/dL
ery 2 years) may be considered and hyperandrogenism in fe- (4.7 mmol/L) fasting or
if achieving glycemic targets male individuals with type 2 >1,000 mg/dL (11.6 mmol/L)
and a normal eye exam. C diabetes. E nonfasting, optimize glycemia
14.92 Programs that use retinal pho- and begin fibrate, with a goal
tography (with remote reading of <400 mg/dL (4.7 mmol/L)
or use of a validated assess- Cardiovascular Disease fasting to reduce risk for pan-
ment tool) to improve access creatitis. C
Recommendation
to diabetic retinopathy screen- 14.99 Intensive lifestyle interventions
ing can be appropriate screening focusing on weight loss, dysli-
These diabetes comorbidities also ap- sociocultural context and efforts to per- who have diabetes. During this period
pear to be higher than in youth with sonalize diabetes management are of of major life transitions, youth may be-
type 1 diabetes despite shorter diabetes critical importance to minimize barriers gin to move out of their parents’ homes
duration and lower A1C (252). In addition, to care, enhance participation, and max- and become increasingly responsible for
the progression of vascular abnormali- imize response to treatment. their diabetes care. Their new responsi-
ties appears to be more pronounced in Evidence about psychiatric disorders bilities include self-management of their
youth-onset type 2 diabetes than with and symptoms in youth with type 2 dia- diabetes, making medical appointments,
type 1 diabetes of similar duration, in- betes is limited (256–260), but given the and financing health care once they are
cluding ischemic heart disease and stroke sociocultural context for many youth and no longer covered by their parents’ health
(255). the medical burden and obesity associ- insurance plans (ongoing coverage until
ated with type 2 diabetes, ongoing sur- age 26 years is currently available under
Psychosocial Factors veillance of mental health/behavioral provisions of the U.S. Affordable Care
2. Chiang JL, Maahs DM, Garvey KC, et al. Type 1 International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent 31. Hood KK, Beavers DP, Yi-Frazier J, et al.
diabetes in children and adolescents: a position Diabetes (ISPAD) endorsed by JDRF and supported Psychosocial burden and glycemic control during
statement by the American Diabetes Association. by the American Diabetes Association (ADA). the first 6 years of diabetes: results from the
Diabetes Care 2018;41:2026–2044 Diabetologia 2020;63:2501–2520 SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth study. J Adolesc
3. Arslanian S, Bacha F, Grey M, Marcus MD, 17. U.S. Department of Health and Human Health 2014;55:498–504
White NH, Zeitler P. Evaluation and management Services. Physical activity guidelines for Americans, 32. Ducat L, Philipson LH, Anderson BJ. The
of youth-onset type 2 diabetes: a position state- 2nd ed., 2018. Accessed 21 October 2022. Available mental health comorbidities of diabetes. JAMA
ment by the American Diabetes Association. from https://health.gov/sites/default/files/2019-09/ 2014;312:691–692
Diabetes Care 2018;41:2648–2668 Physical_Activity_Guidelines_2nd_edition.pdf 33. Hagger V, Hendrieckx C, Sturt J, Skinner TC,
4. Lawrence JM, Divers J, Isom S, et al.; SEARCH 18. Tsalikian E, Kollman C, Tamborlane WB, et al.; Speight J. Diabetes distress among adolescents
for Diabetes in Youth Study Group. Trends in Diabetes Research in Children Network (DirecNet) with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review. Curr
prevalence of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in Study Group. Prevention of hypoglycemia during Diab Rep 2016;16:9
children and adolescents in the US, 2001-2017. exercise in children with type 1 diabetes by 34. Anderson BJ, Laffel LM, Domenger C, et al.
JAMA 2021;326:717–727 suspending basal insulin. Diabetes Care 2006;29: Factors associated with diabetes-specific health-
5. Thomas NJ, Jones SE, Weedon MN, Shields related quality of life in youth with type 1
Ambassador intervention to improve glycemic 63. Cameron FJ, de Beaufort C, Aanstoot HJ, 74. Mauras N, Mazaika P, Buckingham B, et al.;
control in youth with type 1 diabetes: a randomized et al.; Hvidoere International Study Group. Diabetes Research in Children Network (DirecNet).
trial. Pediatr Diabetes 2014;15:142–150 Lessons from the Hvidoere International Study Longitudinal assessment of neuroanatomical and
48. Laffel LMB, Vangsness L, Connell A, Goebel- Group on childhood diabetes: be dogmatic about cognitive differences in young children with type 1
Fabbri A, Butler D, Anderson BJ. Impact of outcome and flexible in approach. Pediatr diabetes: association with hyperglycemia. Diabetes
ambulatory, family-focused teamwork intervention Diabetes 2013;14:473–480 2015;64:1770–1779
on glycemic control in youth with type 1 diabetes. 64. Miller KM, Beck RW, Foster NC, Maahs DM. 75. Foland-Ross LC, Tong G, Mauras N, et al.;
J Pediatr 2003;142:409–416 HbA1c levels in type 1 diabetes from early Diabetes Research in Children Network
49. Anderson BJ, Vangsness L, Connell A, Butler childhood to older adults: a deeper dive into the (DirecNet). Brain function differences in children
D, Goebel-Fabbri A, Laffel LMB. Family conflict, influence of technology and socioeconomic with type 1 diabetes: a functional MRI study of
adherence, and glycaemic control in youth with status on HbA1c in the T1D Exchange clinic working memory. Diabetes 2020;69:1770–1778
short duration type 1 diabetes. Diabet Med registry findings. Diabetes Technol Ther 2020;22: 76. Pourabbasi A, Tehrani-Doost M, Qavam SE,
2002;19:635–642 645–650 Arzaghi SM, Larijani B. Association of diabetes
50. Hilliard ME, Powell PW, Anderson BJ. Evidence- 65. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial mellitus and structural changes in the central
based behavioral interventions to promote diabetes Research Group. Effect of intensive diabetes nervous system in children and adolescents: a
closed-loop control in children with type 1 insulin therapy improves glycemic control in between 1995 and 2012. PLoS Med 2014;11:
diabetes. N Engl J Med 2020;383:836–845 adolescents and young adults: outcomes from e1001742
90. Dorando E, Haak T, Pieper D. Correction: the international diabetes closed-loop trial. 116. Johnson SR, Cooper MN, Jones TW, Davis
continuous glucose monitoring for glycemic Diabetes Technol Ther 2021;23:342–349 EA. Long-term outcome of insulin pump therapy
control in children and adolescents diagnosed 104. Schoelwer MJ, Kanapka LG, Wadwa RP, in children with type 1 diabetes assessed in a
with diabetes type 1: a systematic review and et al.; iDCL Trial Research Group. Predictors of large population-based case-control study.
meta-analysis. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes time-in-range (70-180 mg/dL) achieved using a Diabetologia 2013;56:2392–2400
2022;130:e1–e3 closed-loop control system. Diabetes Technol 117. Karges B, Kapellen T, Wagner VM, et al.;
91. Brown SA, Forlenza GP, Bode BW, et al.; Ther 2021;23:475–481 DPV Initiative. Glycated hemoglobin A1c as a risk
Omnipod 5 Research Group. Multicenter trial of a 105. Sherr JL, Bode BW, Forlenza GP, et al.; factor for severe hypoglycemia in pediatric type 1
tubeless, on-body automated insulin delivery Omnipod 5 in Preschoolers Study Group. Safety diabetes. Pediatr Diabetes 2017;18:51–58
system with customizable glycemic targets in and glycemic outcomes with a tubeless automated 118. Saydah S, Imperatore G, Divers J, et al.
pediatric and adult participants with type 1 insulin delivery system in very young children with Occurrence of severe hypoglycaemic events
diabetes. Diabetes Care 2021;44:1630–1640 type 1 diabetes: a single-arm multicenter clinical among US youth and young adults with type 1 or
92. Carlson AL, Sherr JL, Shulman DI, et al. Safety trial. Diabetes Care 2022;45:1907–1910 type 2 diabetes. Endocrinol Diabetes Metab 2019;
129. Levine BS, Anderson BJ, Butler DA, Antisdel from Germany and Austria. Horm Res Paediatr 156. Husby S, Koletzko S, Korponay-Szab o IR,
JE, Brackett J, Laffel LM. Predictors of glycemic 2015;84:190–198 et al.; ESPGHAN Working Group on Coeliac
control and short-term adverse outcomes in youth 144. Jonsdottir B, Larsson C, Carlsson A, et al.; Disease Diagnosis; ESPGHAN Gastroenterology
with type 1 diabetes. J Pediatr 2001;139:197–203 Better Diabetes Diagnosis Study Group. Thyroid Committee; European Society for Pediatric
130. Miller KM, Beck RW, Bergenstal RM, et al.; and islet autoantibodies predict autoimmune Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition.
T1D Exchange Clinic Network. Evidence of a thyroid disease at type 1 diabetes diagnosis. J European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology,
strong association between frequency of self- Clin Endocrinol Metab 2017;102:1277–1285 Hepatology, and Nutrition guidelines for the
monitoring of blood glucose and hemoglobin A1c 145. Mohn A, Di Michele S, Di Luzio R, Tumini S, diagnosis of coeliac disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol
levels in T1D exchange clinic registry participants. Chiarelli F. The effect of subclinical hypothyroidism Nutr 2012;54:136–160
Diabetes Care 2013;36:2009–2014 on metabolic control in children and adolescents 157. Paul SP, Sandhu BK, Spray CH, Basude D,
131. Battelino T, Danne T, Bergenstal RM, et al. with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med 2002; Ramani P. Evidence supporting serology-based
Clinical targets for continuous glucose monitoring 19:70–73 pathway for diagnosing celiac disease in
data interpretation: recommendations from the 146. Holmes GKT. Screening for coeliac disease asymptomatic children from high-risk groups. J
international consensus on time in range. in type 1 diabetes. Arch Dis Child 2002;87: Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2018;66:641–644
495–498 158. Abid N, McGlone O, Cardwell C, McCallion
function in children with type 1 diabetes. Pediatr Hypertension, and Obesity in Youth Committee; filtration rate from serum creatinine and cystatin
Diabetes 2007;8:193–198 American Heart Association Council of Cardio- C. N Engl J Med 2012;367:20–29
169. Urbina EM, Wadwa RP, Davis C, et al. vascular Disease in the Young; American Heart 192. Cho YH, Craig ME, Hing S, et al.
Prevalence of increased arterial stiffness in Association Council on Cardiovascular Nursing. Microvascular complications assessment in
children with type 1 diabetes mellitus differs by Drug therapy of high-risk lipid abnormalities in adolescents with 2- to 5-yr duration of type 1
measurement site and sex: the SEARCH for children and adolescents: a scientific statement diabetes from 1990 to 2006. Pediatr Diabetes
Diabetes in Youth Study. J Pediatr 2010;156: from the American Heart Association Athero- 2011;12:682–689
731–737 sclerosis, Hypertension, and Obesity in Youth 193. Scanlon PH, Stratton IM, Bachmann MO,
170. Expert Panel on Integrated Guidelines for Committee, Council of Cardiovascular Disease in the Jones C; Four Nations Diabetic Retinopathy
Cardiovascular Health and Risk Reduction in Young, with the Council on Cardiovascular Nursing. Screening Study Group. Risk of diabetic retinopathy
Children and Adolescents; National Heart, Lung, Circulation 2007;115:1948–1967 at first screen in children at 12 and 13 years of age.
and Blood Institute. Expert panel on integrated 179. Salo P, Viikari J, H€am€al€ainen M, et al. Serum Diabet Med 2016;33:1655–1658
guidelines for cardiovascular health and risk cholesterol ester fatty acids in 7- and 13-month- 194. Beauchamp G, Boyle CT, Tamborlane WV,
reduction in children and adolescents: summary old children in a prospective randomized trial of a et al.; T1D Exchange Clinic Network. Treatable
report. Pediatrics 2011;128(Suppl. 5):S213–S256 low-saturated fat, low-cholesterol diet: the STRIP diabetic retinopathy is extremely rare among
ments in diet, physical activity, and behavior with type 2 diabetes: the TODAY clinical trial. management-pediatric-patients-aged-12-years-and-
therapy. Circulation 2012;125:1157–1170 Diabetes Care 2013;36:1758–1764 older
206. Whalen DJ, Belden AC, Tillman R, Barch 222. TODAY Study Group. Rapid rise in 237. Inge TH, Courcoulas AP, Jenkins TM, et al.;
DM, Luby JL. Early adversity, psychopathology, hypertension and nephropathy in youth with Teen-LABS Consortium. Weight loss and health
and latent class profiles of global physical health type 2 diabetes: the TODAY clinical trial. Diabetes status 3 years after bariatric surgery in adolescents.
from preschool through early adolescence. Care 2013;36:1735–1741 N Engl J Med 2016;374:113–123
Psychosom Med 2016;78:1008–1018 223. Grey M, Schreiner B, Pyle L. Development 238. Inge TH, Laffel LM, Jenkins TM, et al.;
207. Dabelea D, Mayer-Davis EJ, Saydah S, et al.; of a diabetes education program for youth with Teen–Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery
SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study. Prevalence type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ 2009;35:108–116 (Teen-LABS) and Treatment Options of Type 2
of type 1 and type 2 diabetes among children 224. American Diabetes Association. Be Healthy Diabetes in Adolescents and Youth (TODAY)
and adolescents from 2001 to 2009. JAMA Today; Be Healthy For Life. Accessed 21 October Consortia. Comparison of surgical and medical
2014;311:1778–1786 2022. Available from http://main.diabetes.org/ therapy for type 2 diabetes in severely obese
208. Buse JB, Kaufman FR, Linder B, Hirst K, El dorg/PDFs/Type-2-Diabetes-in-Youth/ adolescents. JAMA Pediatr 2018;172:452–460
Ghormli L; HEALTHY Study Group. Diabetes Type-2-Diabetes-in-Youth.pdf 239. Rubino F, Nathan DM, Eckel RH, et al.;
screening with hemoglobin A(1c) versus fasting 225. Atkinson A, Radjenovic D. Meeting quality Delegates of the 2nd Diabetes Surgery Summit.
252. Eppens MC, Craig ME, Cusumano J, et al. and adolescents: a 1-year follow-up study. Eur 272. Agarwal S, Raymond JK, Isom S, et al.
Prevalence of diabetes complications in Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2017;26:35–46 Transfer from paediatric to adult care for young
adolescents with type 2 compared with type 1 265. TODAY Study Group. Pregnancy outcomes adults with type 2 diabetes: the SEARCH for
diabetes. Diabetes Care 2006;29:1300–1306 in young women with youth-onset type 2 Diabetes in Youth Study. Diabet Med 2018;35:
253. Song SH, Hardisty CA. Early onset type 2 diabetes followed in the TODAY Study. Diabetes 504–512
diabetes mellitus: a harbinger for complications Care 2021;45:1038–1045 273. Mays JA, Jackson KL, Derby TA, et al. An
in later years—clinical observation from a 266. Arnett JJ. Emerging adulthood. A theory of evaluation of recurrent diabetic ketoacidosis,
secondary care cohort. QJM 2009;102:799–806 development from the late teens through the fragmentation of care, and mortality across
254. Zeitler P, Fu J, Tandon N, et al.; International twenties. Am Psychol 2000;55:469–480 Chicago, Illinois. Diabetes Care 2016;39:1671–1676
Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes. 267. Weissberg-Benchell J, Wolpert H, Anderson 274. Lotstein DS, Seid M, Klingensmith G, et al.;
ISPAD clinical practice consensus guidelines 2014. BJ. Transitioning from pediatric to adult care: a SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study Group.
Type 2 diabetes in the child and adolescent. new approach to the post-adolescent young Transition from pediatric to adult care for youth
Pediatr Diabetes 2014;15(Suppl. 20):26–46 person with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care diagnosed with type 1 diabetes in adolescence.
255. Song SH. Complication characteristics 2007;30:2441–2446 Pediatrics 2013;131:e1062–e1070
between young-onset type 2 versus type 1 268. Peters A; American Diabetes Association 275. Lyons SK, Becker DJ, Helgeson VS. Transfer
DIABETES IN PREGNANCY
The prevalence of diabetes in pregnancy has been increasing in the U.S. in parallel
with the worldwide epidemic of obesity. Not only is the prevalence of type 1 diabe-
tes and type 2 diabetes increasing in individuals of reproductive age, but there is
also a dramatic increase in the reported rates of gestational diabetes mellitus
(GDM). Diabetes confers significantly greater maternal and fetal risk largely related
to the degree of hyperglycemia but also related to chronic complications and co-
morbidities of diabetes. In general, specific risks of diabetes in pregnancy include
spontaneous abortion, fetal anomalies, preeclampsia, fetal demise, macrosomia,
neonatal hypoglycemia, hyperbilirubinemia, and neonatal respiratory distress syn-
drome, among others. In addition, diabetes in pregnancy may increase the risk of
obesity, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes in offspring later in life (1,2).
Preconception Counseling
Recommendations
15.1 Starting at puberty and continuing in all people with diabetes and re- Disclosure information for each author is
available at https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-SDIS.
productive potential, preconception counseling should be incorporated
into routine diabetes care. A Suggested citation: ElSayed NA, Aleppo G, Aroda
VR, et al., American Diabetes Association. 15.
15.2 Family planning should be discussed, and effective contraception (with Management of diabetes in pregnancy: Standards
consideration of long-acting, reversible contraception) should be pre- of Care in Diabetes—2023. Diabetes Care 2023;
scribed and used until an individual’s treatment plan and A1C are opti- 46(Suppl. 1):S254–S266
mized for pregnancy. A © 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.
15.3 Preconception counseling should address the importance of achieving Readers may use this article as long as the
glucose levels as close to normal as is safely possible, ideally A1C work is properly cited, the use is educational
<6.5% (48 mmol/mol), to reduce the risk of congenital anomalies, pre- and not for profit, and the work is not altered.
eclampsia, macrosomia, preterm birth, and other complications. A More information is available at https://www.
diabetesjournals.org/journals/pages/license.
diabetesjournals.org/care Management of Diabetes in Pregnancy S255
All individuals with diabetes and repro- to make well-informed decisions (8). Pre- point is the need to incorporate a ques-
ductive potential should be informed conception counseling resources tailored tion about plans for pregnancy into the
about the importance of achieving and for adolescents are available at no cost routine primary and gynecologic care of
maintaining as near euglycemia as safely through the American Diabetes Associa- people with diabetes. Preconception
possible prior to conception and through- tion (ADA) (15). care for people with diabetes should in-
out pregnancy. Observational studies show clude the standard screenings and care
an increased risk of diabetic embryopathy, Preconception Care recommended for any person planning
especially anencephaly, microcephaly, con- pregnancy (16). Prescription of prenatal
Recommendations
genital heart disease, renal anomalies, vitamins with at least 400 mg of folic
15.4 Individuals with preexisting
and caudal regression, directly propor- acid and 150 mg of potassium iodide
diabetes who are planning a
tional to elevations in A1C during the (18) is recommended prior to concep-
pregnancy should ideally begin
first 10 weeks of pregnancy (3). Although tion. Review and counseling on the use
receiving care in preconception
GLYCEMIC TARGETS IN
Table 15.1—Checklist for preconception care for people with diabetes (16,19)
PREGNANCY
Preconception education should include:
w Comprehensive nutrition assessment and recommendations for:
Recommendations
Overweight/obesity or underweight
15.7 Fasting and postprandial blood Meal planning
glucose monitoring are recom- Correction of dietary nutritional deficiencies
mended in both gestational Caffeine intake
diabetes mellitus and pre- Safe food preparation technique
w Lifestyle recommendations for:
existing diabetes in pregnancy
Regular moderate exercise
to achieve optimal glucose lev- Avoidance of hyperthermia (hot tubs)
els. Glucose targets are fasting Adequate sleep
plasma glucose <95 mg/dL w Comprehensive diabetes self-management education
w Counseling on diabetes in pregnancy per current standards, including natural history of
(5.3 mmol/L) and either 1-h post-
the A1C target in diabetes and w Genetic carrier status (based on history):
and glucose management indi- w Management plan for general health, gynecologic concerns, comorbid conditions, or
cator calculations should not complications, if present, including hypertension, nephropathy, retinopathy; Rh
be used in pregnancy as es- incompatibility; and thyroid dysfunction
timates of A1C. C DKA, diabetic ketoacidosis; DVT/PE, deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism; ECG, elec-
15.13 Nutrition counseling should en- trocardiogram; NAFLD, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; PCOS, polycystic ovary syndrome;
dorse a balance of macronutrients TSH, thyroid-stimulating hormone.
diabetesjournals.org/care Management of Diabetes in Pregnancy S257
including nutrient-dense fruits, Processed foods, fatty red meat, and Lower limits are based on the mean
vegetables, legumes, whole sweetened foods and beverages should of normal blood glucose in pregnancy
grains, and healthy fats with be limited (26). (33). Lower limits do not apply to individ-
n-3 fatty acids that include uals with type 2 diabetes treated with
nuts and seeds and fish in the Insulin Physiology nutrition alone. Hypoglycemia in preg-
eating pattern. E Given that early pregnancy is a time of nancy is as defined and treated in Rec-
enhanced insulin sensitivity and lower ommendations 6.10–6.15 (Section 6,
glucose levels, many people with type 1 “Glycemic Targets”). These values repre-
Pregnancy in people with normal glu- diabetes will have lower insulin require- sent optimal control if they can be
cose metabolism is characterized by ments and an increased risk for hypo- achieved safely. In practice, it may be
fasting levels of blood glucose that are glycemia (27). Around 16 weeks, insulin challenging for a person with type 1 dia-
lower than in the nonpregnant state resistance begins to increase, and total betes to achieve these targets without
should be achieved without hypoglyce- alerts. A prospective, observational study GDM is characterized by an increased risk
mia, which, in addition to the usual ad- including 20 pregnant people with type 1 of large-for-gestational-age birth weight
verse sequelae, may increase the risk of diabetes simultaneously monitored with and neonatal and pregnancy complica-
low birth weight (43). Given the alter- intermittently scanning CGM (isCGM) and tions and an increased risk of long-term
ation in red blood cell kinetics during real-time CGM (rtCGM) for 7 days in maternal type 2 diabetes and abnormal
pregnancy and physiological changes in early pregnancy demonstrated a higher glucose metabolism of offspring in child-
glycemic parameters, A1C levels may percentage of time below range in the hood. These associations with maternal
need to be monitored more frequently isCGM group. Asymptomatic hypoglyce- oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) results
than usual (e.g., monthly). mia measured by isCGM should there- are continuous with no clear inflection
fore not necessarily lead to a reduction points (35,52). Offspring with exposure to
Continuous Glucose Monitoring in
of insulin dose and/or increased carbo- untreated GDM have reduced insulin sen-
hydrate intake at bedtime unless these
Pregnancy sitivity and b-cell compensation and are
• Two-hour postprandial glucose <120 testing may be useful to identify those Metformin
mg/dL (6.7 mmol/L) who are severely restricting carbohy- Metformin was associated with a lower
drates to control blood glucose. Sim- risk of neonatal hypoglycemia and less
The glycemic target lower limits de- ple carbohydrates will result in higher maternal weight gain than insulin in sys-
fined above for preexisting diabetes apply postmeal excursions. tematic reviews (74,77–79). However,
for GDM treated with insulin. Depending metformin readily crosses the placenta,
on the population, studies suggest that Physical Activity resulting in umbilical cord blood levels
70–85% of people diagnosed with GDM A systematic review demonstrated im- of metformin as high or higher than si-
under Carpenter-Coustan criteria can provements in glucose control and reduc- multaneous maternal levels (80,81). In
manage GDM with lifestyle modification tions in need to start insulin or insulin the Metformin in Gestational Diabetes:
alone; it is anticipated that this propor- dose requirements with an exercise inter- The Offspring Follow-Up (MiG TOFU)
tion will be even higher if the lower Inter- vention. There was heterogeneity in the study’s analyses of 7- to 9-year-old off-
Insulin It may be suited for pregnancy because the but can require much higher doses of in-
Insulin use should follow the guidelines predictive low-glucose threshold for sus- sulin, sometimes necessitating concen-
below. Both multiple daily insulin injec- pending insulin is in the range of premeal trated insulin formulations. Insulin is the
tions and continuous subcutaneous insulin and overnight glucose value targets in preferred treatment for type 2 diabetes
infusion are reasonable delivery strategies, pregnancy and may allow for more in pregnancy. An RCT of metformin
and neither has been shown to be supe- aggressive prandial dosing. See SENSOR- added to insulin for the treatment of
rior to the other during pregnancy (92). AUGMENTED PUMPS and AUTOMATED INSULIN DELIVERY type 2 diabetes found less maternal
SYSTEMS in Section 7, “Diabetes Technology,” weight gain and fewer cesarean births.
MANAGEMENT OF PREEXISTING for more information on these systems. There were fewer macrosomic neonates,
TYPE 1 DIABETES AND TYPE 2
but there was a doubling of small-for-
DIABETES IN PREGNANCY Type 1 Diabetes gestational-age neonates (107). As in
Insulin Use Pregnant individuals with type 1 diabe- type 1 diabetes, insulin requirements
studies are needed to assess the long- had an even better composite outcome POSTPARTUM CARE
term effects of prenatal aspirin exposure score than those without diabetes (118).
Recommendations
on offspring (116). As a result of the CHAP study, ACOG
15.23 Insulin resistance decreases
issued a Practice Advisory recommend-
dramatically immediately post-
PREGNANCY AND DRUG ing a blood pressure of 140/90 mmHg
as the threshold for initiation or titration partum, and insulin require-
CONSIDERATIONS
of medical therapy for chronic hyperten- ments need to be evaluated
Recommendations sion in pregnancy (119) rather than their and adjusted as they are often
15.21 In pregnant individuals with previously recommended threshold of roughly half the prepregnancy
diabetes and chronic hyper- 160/110 mmHg (120). requirements for the initial
tension, a blood pressure The CHAP study provides additional few days postpartum. C
threshold of 140/90 mmHg for guidance for the management of hyper- 15.24 A contraceptive plan should be
discussed and implemented
tested for persistent diabetes or predia- 20% at 10 years, 30% at 20 years, 40% those with diabetes, should be supported
betes at 4–12 weeks postpartum with a at 30 years, 50% at 40 years, and 60% at in attempts to breastfeed. Breastfeeding
fasting 75-g OGTT using nonpregnancy cri- 50 years (129). In the prospective Nurses’ may also confer longer-term metabolic
teria as outlined in Section 2, “Classification Health Study II (NHS II), subsequent dia- benefits to both mother (139) and off-
and Diagnosis of Diabetes,” specifically betes risk after a history of GDM was sig- spring (140). Breastfeeding reduces the
Table 2.2. In the absence of unequivocal nificantly lower in those who followed risk of developing type 2 diabetes in
hyperglycemia, a positive screen for dia- healthy eating patterns (130). Adjusting mothers with previous GDM. It may
betes requires two abnormal values. If for BMI attenuated this association mod- improve the metabolic risk factors
both the fasting plasma glucose ($126 erately, but not completely. Interpreg- of offspring, but more studies are
mg/dL [7.0 mmol/L]) and 2-h plasma glu- nancy weight gain is associated with needed (141). However, lactation can
cose ($200 mg/dL [11.1 mmol/L]) are ab- increased risk of adverse pregnancy out- increase the risk of overnight hypo-
normal in a single screening test, then comes (131) and higher risk of GDM, glycemia, and insulin dosing may need
while in people with BMI >25 kg/m2,
a Danish population-based cohort study of 573 exposure to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhi- and adverse pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med
pregnancies in women with type 1 diabetes. bitors or angiotensin receptor antagonists: a 2008;358:1991–2002
Diabetes Care 2006;29:2612–2616 systematic review. Hypertension 2012;60:444–450 36. Maresh MJA, Holmes VA, Patterson CC,
6. Suhonen L, Hiilesmaa V, Teramo K. Glycaemic 22. Bateman BT, Hernandez-Diaz S, Fischer MA, et al.; Diabetes and Pre-eclampsia Intervention
control during early pregnancy and fetal mal- et al. Statins and congenital malformations: Trial Study Group. Glycemic targets in the second
formations in women with type I diabetes cohort study. BMJ 2015;350:h1035 and third trimester of pregnancy for women with
mellitus. Diabetologia 2000;43:79–82 23. Taguchi N, Rubin ET, Hosokawa A, et al. type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2015;38:34–42
7. Ludvigsson JF, Neovius M, S€ oderling J, Prenatal exposure to HMG-CoA reductase in- 37. Nielsen LR, Ekbom P, Damm P, et al. HbA1c
Gudbj€ ornsdottir S, Svensson AM, Franzen S, et al. hibitors: effects on fetal and neonatal outcomes. levels are significantly lower in early and late
Maternal glycemic control in type 1 diabetes and Reprod Toxicol 2008;26:175–177 pregnancy. Diabetes Care 2004;27:1200–1201
the risk for preterm birth: a population-based 24. Widyaputri F, Rogers SL, Kandasamy R, Shub 38. Mosca A, Paleari R, Dalfra MG, et al.
cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170: A, Symons RCA, Lim LL. Global estimates of Reference intervals for hemoglobin A1c in
691–701 diabetic retinopathy prevalence and progression pregnant women: data from an Italian multicenter
8. Charron-Prochownik D, Sereika SM, Becker D, in pregnant women with preexisting diabetes: a study. Clin Chem 2006;52:1138–1143
et al. Long-term effects of the booster-enhanced systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 39. Hummel M, Marienfeld S, Huppmann M,
measured simultaneously by intermittently 64. Institute of Medicine. Dietary Reference randomized controlled study. Diabetes Care
scanned continuous glucose monitoring and real- Intakes: The Essential Guide to Nutrient 2017;40:332–337
time continuous glucose monitoring in pregnant Requirements. The National Academies Press; 79. Jiang YF, Chen XY, Ding T, Wang XF, Zhu ZN,
women with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Washington, DC, 2006. p. 1344 Su SW. Comparative efficacy and safety of OADs
Ther 2021;23:665–672 65. Hernandez TL, Mande A, Barbour LA. in management of GDM: network meta-analysis
52. Scholtens DM, Kuang A, Lowe LP, et al.; Nutrition therapy within and beyond gestational of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Endocrinol
HAPO Follow-up Study Cooperative Research diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2018;145:39–50 Metab 2015;100:2071–2080
Group; HAPO Follow-Up Study Cooperative 66. Hernandez TL, Van Pelt RE, Anderson MA, 80. Vanky E, Zahlsen K, Spigset O, Carlsen SM.
Research Group. Hyperglycemia and Adverse et al. A higher-complex carbohydrate diet in Placental passage of metformin in women with
Pregnancy Outcome Follow-up Study (HAPO gestational diabetes mellitus achieves glucose polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertil Steril 2005;83:
FUS): Maternal glycemia and childhood glucose targets and lowers postprandial lipids: a ran- 1575–1578
metabolism. Diabetes Care 2019;42:381–392 domized crossover study. Diabetes Care 2014;37: 81. Charles B, Norris R, Xiao X, Hague W.
53. Lowe WL Jr, Scholtens DM, Kuang A, et al.; 1254–1262 Population pharmacokinetics of metformin in
HAPO Follow-up Study Cooperative Research 67. Laredo-Aguilera JA, Gallardo-Bravo M, late pregnancy. Ther Drug Monit 2006;28:67–72
Group. Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Rabanales-Sotos JA, Cobo-Cuenca AI, Carmona- 82. Rowan JA, Rush EC, Plank LD, et al.
women with diabetes. Cochrane Database Syst international, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. 122. Brown MA, Magee LA, Kenny LC, et al.;
Rev 2016;6:CD005542 Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2020;8:834–844 International Society for the Study of Hypertension
93. Pollex EK, Feig DS, Lubetsky A, Yip PM, Koren 108. Clausen TD, Mathiesen E, Ekbom P, in Pregnancy (ISSHP). Hypertensive disorders of
G. Insulin glargine safety in pregnancy: a Hellmuth E, Mandrup-Poulsen T, Damm P. Poor pregnancy: ISSHP classification, diagnosis, and
transplacental transfer study. Diabetes Care 2010; pregnancy outcome in women with type 2 management recommendations for international
33:29–33 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2005;28:323–328 practice. Hypertension 2018;72:24–43
94. Holcberg G, Tsadkin-Tamir M, Sapir O, et al. 109. Cundy T, Gamble G, Neale L, et al. Differing 123. Bateman BT, Patorno E, Desai RJ, et al.
Transfer of insulin lispro across the human causes of pregnancy loss in type 1 and type 2 Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and
placenta. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2004; diabetes. Diabetes Care 2007;30:2603–2607 the risk of congenital malformations. Obstet
115:117–118 110. Duckitt K, Harrington D. Risk factors for Gynecol 2017;129:174–184
95. Boskovic R, Feig DS, Derewlany L, Knie B, pre-eclampsia at antenatal booking: systematic 124. Sibai BM. Treatment of hypertension in
Portnoi G, Koren G. Transfer of insulin lispro review of controlled studies. BMJ 2005;330:565 pregnant women. N Engl J Med 1996;335:257–265
across the human placenta: in vitro perfusion 111. Henderson JT, Whitlock EP, O’Conner E, 125. Kazmin A, Garcia-Bournissen F, Koren G.
studies. Diabetes Care 2003;26:1390–1394 Senger CA, Thompson JH, Rowland MG. Low- Risks of statin use during pregnancy: a systematic
96. McCance DR, Damm P, Mathiesen ER, et al. dose aspirin for the prevention of morbidity and review. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2007;29:906–908
Program outcomes study 10-year follow-up. in type 1 diabetic women. Endocr Pract 2009; review of current evidence. J Pediatr (Rio J)
J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2015;100:1646– 15:187–193 2014;90:7–15
1653 139. Stuebe AM, Rich-Edwards JW, Willett WC, 141. Pathirana MM, Ali A, Lassi ZS, Arstall MA,
137. Achong N, Duncan EL, McIntyre HD, Manson JE, Michels KB. Duration of lactation and Roberts CT, Andraweera PH. Protective
Callaway L. Peripartum management of glycemia incidence of type 2 diabetes. JAMA 2005;294: influence of breastfeeding on cardiovascular
in women with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2601–2610 risk factors in women with previous gesta-
2014;37:364–371 140. Pereira PF, Alfenas R de CG, Ara ujo RMA. tional diabetes mellitus and their children: a
138. Riviello C, Mello G, Jovanovic LG. Does breastfeeding influence the risk of systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hum
Breastfeeding and the basal insulin requirement developing diabetes mellitus in children? A Lact 2022;38:501–512
Recommendations
16.1 Perform an A1C test on all people with diabetes or hyperglycemia (blood
glucose >140 mg/dL [7.8 mmol/L]) admitted to the hospital if not per-
formed in the prior 3 months. B
16.2 Insulin should be administered using validated written or computerized Disclosure information for each author is
protocols that allow for predefined adjustments in the insulin dosage available at https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-SDIS.
based on glycemic fluctuations. B Suggested citation: ElSayed NA, Aleppo G,
Aroda VR, et al., American Diabetes Association.
16. Diabetes care in the hospital: Standards of Care
Considerations on Admission in Diabetes—2023. Diabetes Care 2023;46(Suppl. 1):
S267–S278
High-quality hospital care for diabetes requires standards for care delivery, which are
best implemented using structured order sets and quality improvement strategies for © 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.
process improvement. Unfortunately, “best practice” protocols, reviews, and guide- Readers may use this article as long as the
work is properly cited, the use is educational
lines (2,4) are inconsistently implemented within hospitals. To correct this, medical and not for profit, and the work is not altered.
centers striving for optimal inpatient diabetes treatment should establish protocols More information is available at https://www.
and structured order sets, which include computerized provider order entry (CPOE). diabetesjournals.org/journals/pages/license.
S268 Diabetes Care in the Hospital Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
Initial orders should state the type of Appropriately trained specialists or spe- Standard Definitions of Glucose
diabetes (i.e., type 1, type 2, gestational cialty teams may reduce the length of Abnormalities
diabetes mellitus, pancreatogenic diabetes) stay and improve glycemic and other clini- Hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients is de-
when it is known. Because inpatient treat- cal outcomes (21–23). In addition, the fined as blood glucose levels >140 mg/dL
ment and discharge planning are more ef- increased risk of 30-day readmission fol- (7.8 mmol/L) (33). Blood glucose levels
fective if based on preadmission glycemia, lowing hospitalization that has been at- persistently above this level warrant prompt
A1C should be measured for all people tributed to diabetes can be reduced, and interventions, such as alterations in nu-
with diabetes or hyperglycemia admit- costs saved when inpatient care is pro- trition or changes to medications that
ted to the hospital if an A1C test has not vided by a specialized diabetes manage- cause hyperglycemia. An admission A1C
been performed in the previous 3 months ment team (21,24,25). In a cross-sectional value $6.5% (48 mmol/mol) suggests that
(5–8). In addition, diabetes self-manage- study comparing usual care to specialists the onset of diabetes preceded hospitaliza-
ment knowledge and behaviors should reviewing diabetes cases and making tion (see Section 2, “Classification and
significantly higher mortality (27.5% vs. More frequent POC blood glucose moni- teams allow the use of CGM in selected
25%). The intensively treated group had toring ranging from every 30 min to every people with diabetes on an individual ba-
10- to 15-fold greater rates of hypoglyce- 2 h is the required standard for safe use sis, mostly in noncritical care settings, pro-
mia, which may have contributed to the of intravenous insulin. Safety standards vided both the individual and the glucose
adverse outcomes noted. The findings for blood glucose monitoring that prohibit management team are well educated in
from NICE-SUGAR are supported by sev- sharing lanceting devices, other testing the use of this technology. CGM is not cur-
eral meta-analyses and a randomized con- materials, and needles are mandatory (45). rently approved for intensive care unit use
trolled trial, some of which suggest that The vast majority of hospital glucose due to accuracy concerns such as hypovo-
tight glycemic management increases monitoring is performed with FDA-approved lemia, hypoperfusion, and use of therapies
mortality compared with more moder- prescription POC glucose monitoring sys- such as vasopressor agents.
ate glycemic targets and generally causes tems with and capillary blood taken from During the coronavirus disease 2019
higher rates of hypoglycemia (38–40). finger sticks, similar to the process per- (COVID-19) pandemic, many institutions
written or computerized protocols that safer procedure is administering pran- help minimize hyperglycemia and avoid
allow for predefined adjustments in the dial insulin immediately after eating, rebound hypoglycemia (83,84). The dose
infusion rate, accounting for glycemic with the dose adjusted to be appropriate of basal insulin is best calculated on the
fluctuations and insulin dose (64). for the amount of carbohydrates ingested basis of the insulin infusion rate during
(71). the last 6 h when stable glycemic goals
Noncritical Care Setting A randomized controlled trial has shown were achieved (85). For people being transi-
In most instances, insulin is the pre- that basal-bolus treatment improved glyce- tioned to concentrated insulin (U-200,
ferred treatment for hyperglycemia in mic outcomes and reduced hospital com- U-300, or U-500) in the inpatient setting,
hospitalized patients. However, in certain plications compared with a correction or it is important to ensure correct dosing
circumstances, it may be appropriate to supplemental insulin without basal insulin by utilizing an individual pen or cartridge
continue home therapies, including oral (formerly known as sliding scale) in general for each person and by meticulous phar-
glucose-lowering medications (64,65). If surgery for people with type 2 diabetes macy and nursing supervision of the dose
16.10 Treatment regimens should the hospital (103), possibly as a result the risk for a subsequent event, partly
be reviewed and changed as of decreased insulin clearance. Studies because of impaired counterregulation
necessary to prevent further of “bundled” preventive therapies, includ- (108,109). This relationship also holds
hypoglycemia when a blood ing proactive surveillance of glycemic true for people with diabetes in the in-
glucose value of <70 mg/dL outliers and an interdisciplinary data- patient setting. For example, in a study of
(3.9 mmol/L) is documented. C driven approach to glycemic management, hospitalized individuals treated for hyper-
showed that hypoglycemic episodes in glycemia, 84% who had an episode of
the hospital could be prevented. Com- “severe hypoglycemia” (defined in the
People with or without diabetes may pared with baseline, two such studies study as <40 mg/dL [2.2 mmol/L]) had
experience hypoglycemia in the hospital found that hypoglycemic events fell by a preceding episode of hypoglycemia
setting. While hypoglycemia is associated 56–80% (99,104,105). The Joint Commis- (<70 mg/dL [3.9 mmol/L]) during the
with increased mortality (97), in many sion recommends that all hypoglycemic same admission (110). In another study
the menu at any time during the day. This STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL nutrition bag is the safest way to prevent
option improves patient satisfaction but SITUATIONS hypoglycemia if the parenteral nutrition
complicates meal-insulin coordination. Enteral/Parenteral Feedings is stopped or interrupted. Correctional
Finally, if the hospital food service sup- For individuals receiving enteral or par- insulin should be administered subcu-
ports carbohydrate counting, this option enteral feedings who require insulin, taneously to address any hyperglyce-
should be made available to people the insulin orders should include cover- mia. For full enteral/parenteral feeding
with diabetes counting carbohydrates age of basal, prandial, and correctional guidance, please refer to review articles
at home (115,116). needs (115,122,123). It is essential that detailing this topic (122,124,125).
people with type 1 diabetes continue to Because continuous enteral or paren-
SELF-MANAGEMENT IN THE receive basal insulin even if feedings are teral nutrition results in a continuous
HOSPITAL discontinued. postprandial state, efforts to bring blood
Diabetes self-management in the hospi- Most adults receiving basal insulin glucose levels to below 140 mg/dL
improved time in range (70–180 mg/dL); insulin analogs on glycemia in periop- (146). Individuals with uncomplicated
however, there was an increase in hypo- erative care. DKA may sometimes be treated with
glycemia (133). Whatever insulin orders subcutaneous insulin in the emergency
are initiated, daily adjustments based on A recent review concluded that peri- department or step-down units (147).
levels of glycemia and anticipated changes operative glycemic targets tighter than This approach may be safer and more
in type, doses, and duration of glucocorti- 80–180 mg/dL (4.4–10.0 mmol/L) did cost-effective than treatment with intra-
coids, along with POC blood glucose moni- not improve outcomes and was asso- venous insulin. If subcutaneous insulin
toring, are critical to reducing rates of ciated with more hypoglycemia (137); administration is used, it is important to
hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia. therefore, in general, stricter glycemic provide an adequate fluid replacement,
targets are not advised. Evidence from frequent POC blood glucose monitoring,
Perioperative Care a recent study indicates that compared treatment of any concurrent infections,
It is estimated that up to 20% of general with usual dosing, a reduction of insulin and appropriate follow-up to avoid re-
within 1 month of discharge is advised place increases the likelihood that care reduce readmission rates (151,155).
for all individuals experiencing hyper- they will attend. While there is no standard to prevent re-
glycemia in the hospital. If glycemic admissions, several successful strate-
medications are changed or glucose It is recommended that the following gies have been reported (151). These
management is not optimal at discharge, areas of knowledge be reviewed and ad- include targeting ketosis-prone people
an earlier appointment (in 1–2 weeks) is dressed before hospital discharge: with type 1 diabetes (157), insulin treat-
preferred, and frequent contact may be ment of individuals with admission A1C
needed to avoid hyperglycemia and • Identification of the health care pro- >9% (75 mmol/mol) (158), and the use
hypoglycemia. A discharge algorithm fessionals who will provide diabetes of a transitional care model (159). For
for glycemic medication adjustment based care after discharge. people with diabetic kidney disease, col-
on admission A1C, diabetes medications • Level of understanding related to the laborative patient-centered medical
before admission, and insulin usage diabetes diagnosis, glucose monitor- homes may decrease risk-adjusted re-
11. Garg R, Schuman B, Bader A, et al. Effect of 27. Endocrine Society. Clinical Practice Guidelines. GLUCO-CABG trial. Diabetes Care 2015;38:1665–
preoperative diabetes management on glycemic Accessed 30 August 2022. Available from https:// 1672
control and clinical outcomes after elective surgery. www.endocrine.org/clinical-practice-guidelines 41. Furnary AP, Wu Y, Bookin SO. Effect of
Ann Surg 2018;267:858–862 28. Magee MF, Baker KM, Bardsley JK, Wesley D, hyperglycemia and continuous intravenous insulin
12. van den Boom W, Schroeder RA, Manning Smith KM. Diabetes to go-inpatient: pragmatic infusions on outcomes of cardiac surgical
MW, Setji TL, Fiestan GO, Dunson DB. Effect of lessons learned from implementation of technology- procedures: the Portland Diabetic Project. Endocr
A1C and glucose on postoperative mortality in enabled diabetes survival skills education within Pract 2004;10(Suppl. 2):21–33
noncardiac and cardiac surgeries. Diabetes Care nursing unit workflow in an urban, tertiary care 42. Low Wang CC, Draznin B. Practical approach
2018;41:782–788 hospital. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2021;47: to management of inpatient hyperglycemia in
13. Setji T, Hopkins TJ, Jimenez M, et al. 107–119 select patient populations. Hosp Pract (1995)
Rationalization, development, and implementation 29. Pinkhasova D, Swami JB, Patel N, et al. 2013;41:45–53
of a preoperative diabetes optimization program Patient understanding of discharge instructions 43. Magaji V, Nayak S, Donihi AC, et al.
designed to improve perioperative outcomes and for home diabetes self-management and risk for Comparison of insulin infusion protocols targeting
reduce cost. Diabetes Spectr 2017;30:217–223 hospital readmission and emergency department 110–140 mg/dL in patients after cardiac surgery.
14. Okabayashi T, Shima Y, Sumiyoshi T, et al. visits. Endocr Pract 2021;27:561–566 Diabetes Technol Ther 2012;14:1013–1017
COVID-19: results of an emergent pilot study. J 72. Dhatariya K, Corsino L, Umpierrez GE. primary medical and surgical teams. Cleve Clin
Diabetes Sci Technol 2020;14:1065–1073 Management of diabetes and hyperglycemia J Med 2016;83(Suppl. 1):S34–S43
57. Galindo RJ, Aleppo G, Klonoff DC, et al. in hospitalized patients. In: Feingold KR, Anawalt B, 87. Umpierrez GE, Gianchandani R, Smiley D,
Implementation of continuous glucose moni- Boyce A, et al., Eds. Endotext. South Dartmouth, et al. Safety and efficacy of sitagliptin therapy for
toring in the hospital: emergent considerations MA, MDText.com, Inc. Accessed 30 August 2022. the inpatient management of general medicine
for remote glucose monitoring during the Available from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ and surgery patients with type 2 diabetes: a pilot,
COVID-19 pandemic. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2020; books/NBK279093/ randomized, controlled study. Diabetes Care 2013;
14:822–832 73. Sadhu AR, Patham B, Vadhariya A, 36:3430–3435
58. Agarwal S, Mathew J, Davis GM, et al. Chikermane SG, Johnson ML. Outcomes of 88. Pasquel FJ, Fayfman M, Umpierrez GE.
continuous glucose monitoring in the intensive “real-world” insulin strategies in the management Debate on insulin vs non-insulin use in the
care unit during the COVID-19 pandemic. Diabetes of hospital hyperglycemia. J Endocr Soc 2021; hospital setting-is it time to revise the guidelines
Care 2021;44:847–849 5:bvab101 for the management of inpatient diabetes? Curr
59. Faulds ER, Jones L, McNett M, et al. 74. Umpierrez GE, Smiley D, Jacobs S, et al. Diab Rep 2019;19:65
Facilitators and barriers to nursing implementation Randomized study of basal-bolus insulin therapy 89. Pasquel FJ, Lansang MC, Dhatariya K,
of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in critically Umpierrez GE. Management of diabetes and
algorithm in the inpatient setting. Hosp Pract 116. Draznin B. Food, fasting, insulin, and vincristine, and dexamethasone chemotherapy.
(1995) 2016;44:260–265 glycemic control in the hospital. In Managing Diabetes Technol Ther 2014;16:874–879
100. Amori RE, Pittas AG, Siegel RD, et al. Diabetes and Hyperglycemia in the Hospital 132. Cheng YC, Guerra Y, Morkos M, et al.
Inpatient medical errors involving glucose- Setting. Alexandria, VA, American Diabetes Insulin management in hospitalized patients with
lowering medications and their impact on Association, 2016, p. 70–83 diabetes mellitus on high-dose glucocorticoids:
patients: review of 2,598 incidents from a 117. Mabrey ME, Setji TL. Patient self-manage- management of steroid-exacerbated hyper-
voluntary electronic error-reporting database. ment of diabetes care in the inpatient setting: glycemia. PLoS One 2021;16:e0256682
Endocr Pract 2008;14:535–542 pro. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2015;9:1152–1154 133. Bajaj MA, Zale AD, Morgenlander WR,
101. Alwan D, Chipps E, Yen PY, Dungan K. 118. Shah AD, Rushakoff RJ. Patient self- Abusamaan MS, Mathioudakis N. Insulin dosing
Evaluation of the timing and coordination of management of diabetes care in the inpatient and glycemic outcomes among steroid-treated
prandial insulin administration in the hospital. setting: con. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2015;9: hospitalized patients. Endocr Pract 2022;28:
Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2017;131:18–32 1155–1157 774–779
102. Korytkowski M, Dinardo M, Donihi AC, Bigi L, 119. Yeh T, Yeung M, Mendelsohn Curanaj FA. 134. Todd LA, Vigersky RA. Evaluating peri-
Devita M. Evolution of a diabetes inpatient safety Managing patients with insulin pumps and operative glycemic control of non-cardiac
committee. Endocr Pract 2006;12(Suppl. 3):91–99 surgical patients with diabetes. Mil Med 2021;
147. Kitabchi AE, Umpierrez GE, Fisher JN, 152. Rinaldi A, Snider M, James A, et al. The 157. Maldonado MR, D’Amico S, Rodriguez L,
Murphy MB, Stentz FB. Thirty years of personal impact of a diabetes transitions of care clinic Iyer D, Balasubramanyam A. Improved outcomes
experience in hyperglycemic crises: diabetic on hospital utilization and patient care. Ann in indigent patients with ketosis-prone diabetes:
ketoacidosis and hyperglycemic hyperosmolar Pharmacother. 9 June 2022 [Epub ahead of print]. effect of a dedicated diabetes treatment unit.
state. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008;93:1541–1552 DOI: 10.1177/10600280221102557 Endocr Pract 2003;9:26–32
148. Karajgikar ND, Manroa P, Acharya R, et al. 153. Patel N, Swami J, Pinkhasova D, et al. Sex 158. Wu EQ, Zhou S, Yu A, Lu M, Sharma H, Gill J,
Addressing pitfalls in management of diabetic differences in glycemic measures, complications, et al. Outcomes associated with post-discharge
ketoacidosis with a standardized protocol. Endocr discharge disposition, and postdischarge emergency insulin continuity in US patients with type 2
Pract 2019;25:407–412 room visits and readmission among non-critically diabetes mellitus initiating insulin in the hospital.
149. Dhatariya KK, Glaser NS, Codner E, ill, hospitalized patients with diabetes. BMJ Open Hosp Pract (1995) 2012;40:40–48
Umpierrez GE. Diabetic ketoacidosis. Nat Rev Dis Diabetes Res Care 2022;10:e002722 159. Hirschman KB, Bixby MB. Transitions in care
Primers 2020;6:40 154. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. from the hospital to home for patients with
150. Shepperd S, Lannin NA, Clemson LM, Patient Safety Network – Readmissions and adverse diabetes. Diabetes Spectr 2014;27:192–195
McCluskey A, Cameron ID, Barras SL. Discharge events after discharge, 2019. Accessed 23 October 160. Tuttle KR, Bakris GL, Bilous RW, et al.
planning from hospital to home. Cochrane Database 2022. Available from https://psnet.ahrq.gov/ Diabetic kidney disease: a report from an ADA
Managing the daily health demands of diabetes can be challenging. People living
with diabetes should not have to face discrimination due to diabetes. By advocat-
ing for the rights of those with diabetes at all levels, the American Diabetes Associ-
ation (ADA) can help to ensure that they live a healthy and productive life. A
strategic goal of the ADA is for more children and adults with diabetes to live free
from the burden of discrimination. The ADA is also focused on making sure cost is
not a barrier to successful diabetes management.
One tactic for achieving these goals has been to implement the ADA Standards of
Care through advocacy-oriented position statements. The ADA publishes evidence-based,
peer-reviewed statements on topics such as diabetes and employment, diabetes and
driving, insulin access and affordability, and diabetes management in certain settings such
as schools, childcare programs, and detention facilities. In addition to the ADA’s clinical
documents, these advocacy statements are important tools in educating schools, employ-
ers, licensing agencies, policy makers, and others about the intersection of diabetes man-
agement and the law and for providing scientifically supported policy recommendations.
ADVOCACY STATEMENTS
The following is a partial list of advocacy statements ordered by publication date, with
the most recent statement appearing first. A comprehensive list of advocacy state- Disclosure information for each author is
ments is available at professional.diabetes.org/content/key-statements-and-reports. available at https://doi.org/10.2337/dc23-SDIS.
Suggested citation: ElSayed NA, Aleppo G,
Insulin Access and Affordability Aroda VR, et al., American Diabetes Association.
The ADA’s Insulin Access and Affordability Working Group compiled public informa- 17. Diabetes advocacy: Standards of Care in
Diabetes—2023. Diabetes Care 2023;46(Suppl. 1):
tion and convened a series of meetings with stakeholders throughout the insulin S279–S280
supply chain to learn how each entity affects the cost of insulin for the consumer.
Their conclusions and recommendations are published in an ADA statement (1). © 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.
Readers may use this article as long as the
work is properly cited, the use is educational
Diabetes Care in the School Setting and not for profit, and the work is not altered.
A sizable portion of a child’s day is spent in school, so close communication with More information is available at https://www.
and training and cooperation of school personnel are essential to optimize diabetes diabetesjournals.org/journals/pages/license.
S280 Diabetes Advocacy Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
management, safety, and access to all licensing requirements applied by both diabetes for employment, including how
school-sponsored opportunities. Refer state and federal jurisdictions. For an an assessment should be performed and
to the published ADA position state- overview of existing licensing rules for what changes (accommodations) in the
ment for diabetes management infor- people with diabetes, factors that impact workplace may be needed for an individ-
mation for students with diabetes in driving for this population, and general ual with diabetes, refer to the published
elementary and secondary school set- guidelines for assessing driver fitness and ADA position statement (5).
tings (2). determining appropriate licensing restric-
tions, refer to the published ADA position References
Care of Young Children With 1. Cefalu WT, Dawes DE, Gavlak G, et al.; Insulin
statement (4).
Diabetes in the Childcare Setting Access and Affordability Working Group. Insulin
Editor’s note: Federal commercial driv- Access and Affordability Working Group: conclusions
Very young children (aged <6 years) with
ing rules for individuals with insulin- and recommendations [published correction
diabetes have legal protections and can appears in Diabetes Care 2018;41:1831]. Diabetes
treated diabetes changed on 19 November
DISCLOSURES
Nuha A. ElSayed American Diabetes None None None None Expert, World Health Endocrinologist, Joslin
(Chair)§ Association Organization Diabetes Center
Chair, Diabetes Education
for All
Grazia Aleppo Northwestern Dexcom#, Eli Lilly#, Emmes, Fractyl, Dexcom, None Bayer, Dexcom, Associate Editor, Diabetes
University Feinberg Fractyl Health#, Welldoc Insulet/Self Eli Lilly, Insulet, Technology &
School of Medicine Insulet/Self#, Medscape Therapeutics
Division of Emmes#
Endocrinology,
Metabolism and
Molecular Medicine
Vanita R. Aroda Brigham and Women’s Applied Therapeutics#, None None None Applied Therapeutics, Spouse Sandip Datta, MD,
Hospital Eli Lilly#, Fractyl#, Fractyl, Novo Nordisk*, Senior Medical Director,
Faculty, Harvard Novo Nordisk# Pfizer, Sanofi Early Development,
Medical School Infectious Diseases,
May 2020 to present,
Janssen Pharmaceutical
Companies of Johnson
& Johnson
Consultant/educational
activities: Associate
Editor, Diabetes Care;
Member of the Writing
Group for “Management
of Hyperglycemia in
Type 2 Diabetes, 2022.
Consensus Report by the
American Diabetes
Association (ADA) and
the European Association
for the Study of Diabetes
(EASD)”
Novo Nordisk* (received
other Industry benefits,
such as travel)
Florence M. Brown Joslin Diabetes Center None Dexcom None None None None
Continued on p. S282
S282 Disclosures Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
Other Speakers’
Research research bureau/ Ownership Consultant/
Member Employment grant support honoraria interest advisory board Other
Dennis Bruemmer Cleveland Clinic Lerner Novartis None None None Intellisphere, HCPLive/sponsored
College of Medicine, Esperion (advisory continuing medical
Case Western Reserve board) education
University
Billy S. Collins CDR, U.S. Public Health None None None None None None
Service
Marisa E. Hilliard Baylor College of None JDRF None None None Springer Publishing (book
Diana Isaacs Cleveland Clinic None None Abbott, Dexcom, None Insulet, Eli Lilly, Board of Directors,
Endocrinology & Medtronic, Novo Sanofi, Klinio, Association of Diabetes
Metabolism Institute Nordisk, Bayer Undermyfork Care and Education
Specialists
Clinical Practice Guideline
Oversight Committee,
American Association of
Clinical Endocrinology
Eric L. Johnson University of North None None None None None Editorial Board, Clinical
Dakota School of Diabetes
Medicine and Health
Sciences
Altru Health System
Scott Kahan George Washington None None None None Vivus, Eli Lilly, Novo (All without compensation)
University Milken Nordisk, Currax, Board of Directors, The
Institute School of Gelesis, Medscape Obesity Society
Public Health Board of Directors, Obesity
National Center for Action Coalition
Weight and Wellness Advocacy and Public
Outreach Core
Committee, Endocrine
Society
Kamlesh Khunti University of Leicester Boehringer None None None AstraZeneca, Bayer, None
Leicester Diabetes Ingelheim#, Applied Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp
Centre Therapeutics, & Dohme, Novartis,
Leicester General AstraZeneca#, Novo Nordisk,
Hospital Novartis#, Novo Boehringer Ingelheim
Nordisk#, Oramed
Pharmaceuticals,
Sanofi#, Eli Lilly#,
Merck Sharp &
Dohme#
Jose Leon National Center for None None None None None None
Health in Public
Housing
Continued on p. S283
diabetesjournals.org/care Disclosures S283
Other Speakers’
Research research bureau/ Ownership Consultant/
Member Employment grant support honoraria interest advisory board Other
Sarah K. Lyons Baylor College of None None None Eli Lilly (parent None Unpaid Board Member,
Medicine stockholder)† Epic’s Pediatric
Texas Medical Center Endocrinology Steering
Diabetes and Board
Endocrinology Volunteer member, Clinical
and Research Advisor
Committee of College
Diabetes Network
Mary Lou Perry UVA Heart and None None None None LifeScan Diabetes Editorial Board Member,
Vascular Center- Institute Diabetes Spectrum
Morrison’s Compass
Group
Priya Prahalad Stanford Hospital and None None None None None Unpaid Board Member on
Clinics Epic’s Pediatric
Lucile Packard Endocrinology Steering
Children’s Hospital Board
Richard E. Pratley Advent Health Novo Nordisk# None Novo Nordisk# None Bayer AG#, Editorial Board Member,
Translational Research Gasherbrum Bio#, Diabetes Care
Institute Hanmi Pharmaceutical#, Board Member, International
Hengrui (USA)#, Merck#, Geriatric Diabetes
Novo Nordisk#, Rivus Society
Pharmaceuticals#,
Sun Pharmaceutical
Industries#
Jane Jeffrie Seley Weill Cornell Medicine None None None None None Director of Strategy,
Diabetes Technology
Society
Associate Editor, Diabetes
Spectrum
Section Co-editor, Current
Diabetes Reports
Editor, Journal of Diabetes
Science and Technology
Editor, BMJ Open Diabetes
Research & Care
LifeScan Diabetes Institute
Robert C. Stanton Joslin Diabetes Center None None None None None None
Robert A. Gabbay§ American Diabetes None None None None Onduo*, Spouse Christi Gabbay,
Association HealthReveal, Lark, CHSE, Managing
Vida Health* Director, Major Gifts
and Philanthropy at
American Diabetes
Association
Senior volunteer, Joslin
Diabetes Center
American College of Cardiology Designated Representatives and Staff (Section 10 “Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management”)
Sandeep R. Das University of Texas None None None None None Associate Editor,
Southwestern Medical Circulation
Center
Continued on p. S284
S284 Disclosures Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
Other Speakers’
Research research bureau/ Ownership Consultant/
Member Employment grant support honoraria interest advisory board Other
Mikhail Kosiborod Saint Luke’s Mid AstraZeneca#, AstraZeneca# None None Alnylam, Amgen*, None
America Heart Boehringer Applied Therapeutics#,
Institute Ingelheim# AstraZeneca*#,
Bayer*, Boehringer
Ingelheim*,
Cytokinetics, Eli Lilly,
Esperion Therapeutics,
Janssen#*, Lexicon,
Malaika I. Hill American Diabetes None None None None None None
Association
Laura S. Mitchell American Diabetes None None None None None None
Association
Kenneth Cusi University of Florida Echosens#, Inventiva#, None None None Altimmune, None
Novo Nordisk#, Poxel#, Arrowhead,
Labcorp#, and Zydus# AstraZeneca, 89Bio,
Bristol-Myers Squibb,
Lilly, Madrigal, Merck,
Novo Nordisk,
ProSciento, Quest,
Sagimet Biosciences,
Sonic Incytes, Terns
Christopher H. Beth Israel Deaconess Grifols Grifols None CND Life None None
Gibbons Medical Center Sciences
John M. Giurini Beth Israel Deaconess None None None None None None
Medical Center
Lisa Murdock American Diabetes None None None None None None
Association
Jennifer K. Sun Joslin Diabetes Center Novo Nordisk, Jaeb Center for Genentech/ None None
Boehringer Ingelheim, Health Research/ Roche
Genentech/Roche National Eye
Insitute, JDRF
Crystal C. Woodward American Diabetes None None None None None None
Association
Deborah Young- Office of Behavioral None None None None None None
Hyman Health and Social
Sciences Research,
National Institutes of
Health
*$$10,000 per year from company to individual. #Grant or contract is to university or other employer. †Disclosure made after committee
member began work on the SOC 2022 update. §Nuha A. ElSayed, Raveendhara R. Bannuru, and Robert A. Gabbay are also American Diabe-
tes Association staff.
Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023 S285
Index
A1C, S5, S8, S11, S12, S20, S21–S22, S97–S99 agricultural workers, migrant, S13 bempedoic acid, S169
advantages of, S21 AIM-HIGH trial, S170 beta-carotene, S6, S72, S76
age and, S21–S22 albiglutide, S181, S182 beta-cell replacement therapy, S142, S146
cardiovascular disease and, S102–S103 albuminuria, S7, S75, S79, S105, S148, S159, biguanides, S152
CGM technology effect on, S106, S112, S161, S164, S165, S171, S176, S182, S183, bladder dysfunction, S207, S256
S115–S116 S191, S192, S193, S194, S195, S196, S197, Blood Glucose Awareness Training, S82, S106
confirming diagnosis with, S22 S198, S199, S237, S239, S240 blood glucose monitoring (BGM), S50, S75, S79,
correlation with BGM, S98 alcohol intake, S54, S57, S72, S76, S106, S117, S97, S104, S111–S114, S144–S145, S243
hemoglobinopathies and, S22 S136, S163, S169, S207, S246, S255 in hospitalized patients, S269
BMI cut point in, S28 for diabetes prevention, S42–S43 A1C and outcomes of, S102–S103
age medical nutrition therapy, S68–S76 antiplatelet agents, S170–S172
aspirin use and, S171 physical activity, S76–S78 cardiac testing, S176
effect on A1C, S21–S22 in gestational diabetes, S258 hypertension/blood pressure control,
to start screening for diabetes, S24, S27 psychosocial care, S79–S86 S159–S165
risk factor for diabetes, S27 smoking cessation, S79 lifestyle and pharmacologic interven-
statin treatment and, S167 for weight loss, S130–S131 tions, S176–S184
S286 Index Diabetes Care Volume 46, Supplement 1, January 2023
lipid management, S165–S166 clonidine, S208, S261 DAPA-CKD study, S177, S178, S179, S197, S198
prevention of, S44–S45, S224 clopidogrel, S170 DAPA-HF study, S178, S179, S180, S182
screening, S172, S176 closed-loop systems, S105, S119, S144 dapagliflozin, S62, S151, S152, S177, S178, S180,
statin treatment, S165–S170 do-it-yourself, S120 S181, S182, S183, S197
treatment, S172–S176 hybrid, S141, S218, S234, S260 DARE-19 study, S62
cardiovascular risk, S13, S15, S25, S27, S31, S44, coaching, online, S69, S120 DASH diet, S42, S163, S166
S45, S76, S78, S101, S102, S129, S135, S143, cognitive capacity/impairment, S80, S84–S86 DECLARE-TIMI 58 study, S177, S178, S179, S182,
S158, S159, S160, S162, S166, S167, S169, colesevelam, S152 S197, S198
S172, S176, S180, S184, S193, S194, S195, collaborative care, S49–S51 degludec, S141, S151, S152, S153, S154, S222
S197, S207, S218–S219, S238 collagen vascular diseases, S56 delay, of type 2 diabetes, S5–S6, S41–S48
risk calculator, S159 combination therapy, S7, S143, S144, S146, S147, lifestyle behavior change, S42–S43
care delivery systems, S11–S13 S149, S150–S151, S154, S161, S168, S168–S169, person-centered care goals, S45–S46
access to care and quality improvement, S169–S170, S208, S222 pharmacologic interventions, S43–S44
S13 community health workers, S5, S13, S15, S43, recommendations, S41, S42, S43–S44
behaviors and well-being, S12 S70, S79 of vascular disease and mortality,
type 1 vs type 2 in pediatric patients, S242 evolocumab, S168 S147, S148, S150, S152, S172, S173, S175,
type 2 diabetes, S25–S28 EXAMINE trial, S173, S182 S180, S181, S192, S196, S203, S242, S243,
diagnostic tests, S20–S22 exenatide, S148, S148, S152, S174, S181, S182, S270
A1C, S21–S22 S243 glucocorticoid therapy, S19, S272–S273
age, S21–S22 exercise. see physical activity. glucose, for hypoglycemia, S104, S105
confirmation of, S22 exocrine pancreas diseases, S19, S32 glucose meters, S112–S114
criteria for, S21 EXSCEL trial, S174, S175, S181 counterfeit strips, S113
ethnicity, S22 eye exam, comprehensive, S204, S240 inaccuracy, S114
fasting and 2-hr plasma glucose, S21 ezetimibe, S7, S166, S167, S168, S178 interfering substances, S114
hemoglobinopathies, S22 statins and, S168, S170 optimizing use of, S113–S114
race, S22 oxygen, S114
diet, see Medical nutrition therapy. standards, S13
Dietary Reference Intakes, S259 family history, S23, S25, S27, S29, S30, S32, S57, temperature, S114
DIAMOND trial, S8, S218 S83, S159, S171, S240, S242 glucose monitoring. see blood glucose monitoring.
digital health technology, S120 fasting plasma glucose (FPG) test, S20, S21, S22, glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency,
continuous glucose monitoring, S269 inclisiran, S7, S168–S169 Kumamoto study, S101
diabetes care specialists in, S268 incretin-based therapies, S84, S181, S222–S224
diabetic ketoacidosis, S273 Indian Diabetes Prevention Program (IDPP-1), S44
enteral/parenteral feedings, S272 infections, S51, S62, S128, S144, S148, S207, language barriers, S13
glucocorticoid therapy, S272–S273 S223, S273 latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA),
glucose-lowering treatment in, S269–S270 diabetic foot, S203–S204 S20
glycemic targets in, S268–S269 influenza vaccines, S53–S54, S55 Latino population, S13
hyperosmolar hyperglycemic state, S273 inhaled insulin, S117, S141, S143, S148, LEADER trial, S174–S175, S180, S197
hypoglycemia, S270–S271 S153–S154 lifestyle behavior changes
insulin therapy, S269–S270 injection techniques, S118, S142 delivery and dissemination of, S43
medical nutrition therapy in, S271–S272 insulin analogs, in type 1 diabetics, S119, S140, for diabetes prevention, S42–S43
medication reconciliation, S274 S141, S144, S148, S149, S151, S152, S154, for hypertension, S163
noninsulin therapies, S270 S224, S236, S270, S273 for lipid management, S165–S166
perioperative care, S273 insulin delivery, S112, S117 for weight management, S59, S71, S121
preventing admissions and readmissions, automated systems, S118, S119 in older adults, S220–S221
meglitinides, S54, S152 for diabetes prevention/delay, S42–S43 for lipid management, S166–S170
mental health referrals, S8, S54, S71, S79, S89, nutrition therapy. see medical nutrition therapy. for neuropathic pain, S8, S208
S81, S82, S83, S132, S234–S235, S246 for obesity, S131–S132
mental illness, serious, S81, S84 for pediatric type 2 diabetes, S242–S243
metabolic surgery, S71, S81, S128, S129, S130, obesity, S7, S128–S139 for smoking cessation, S79
S132–S136, S243–S244 assessment, S129 in older adults, S221–S224
metformin, S30, S31, S32, S43–S44, S53, S62, medical devices for weight loss, S132 in pregnancy, S259–S260
S75, S102, S103, S131, S142, S143, S146, metabolic surgery, S132, S135–S136 in prediabetes, S43–S44
S148, S149, S151, S152, S154, S173, S174, nutrition, physical activity, and behav- interfering substances for glucose meter
S176, S178, S182, S184, S196, S217, S221, ioral therapy, S129–S131 readings, S114
S222, S232, S242, S243, S245, S258, S259, pharmacotherapy, S131–S132, 133-134 to glycemic treatment, S7, S54, S140–S157
S260, S261, S262, S273 screening asymptomatic children/adolescents, phentermine, S44, S132, S133
metoclopramide, S209 S24, S25 phentermine/topiramate ER, S132, S133, S244
metoprolol, S208 obstructive sleep apnea, S53, S58, S86, S232, phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors, S209
micronutrients, S71, S72, S75–S76 S245 photocoagulation surgery, S205, S206
gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), S9, for tobacco cessation, S44 social context, S13–S15
S19, S24, S25, S27, S32–S35, S43, S44, from dentist to primary care, S28 social determinants of health (SDOH), S7, S11–S13,
S254, S258–S260, S261–S262 to behavioral health provider, S217 S15, S70, S80, S147
glucose monitoring in, S257 to foot care specialist, S8, S211 sodium intake, S72, S74, S75–S76, S163
glycemic targets in, S256–S258 to gastroenterologist, S245 sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibi-
insulin physiology in, S257 to mental health professional, S8, S80–S81 tors, S102, S103, S142, S148, S149, S151,
metformin in, S259 to nephrologist, S8, S192, S194, S199, S152, S154, S158, S159, S177–S180, S181,
pharmacologic therapy, S259 S244 S182, S183, S184, S194, S196, S197, S198,
physical activity in, S259 to neurologist, S206, S231 S218, S224, S270, S273
postpartum care, S261–S262 to sleep specialist, S87, S245 SOLOIST-WHF trial, S183
pre-existing type 1 and 2 diabetes in, to registered dietitian nutritionist, S43, sotagliflozin, S180, S182, S183
S255, S256, S257, S260 S255, S257, S274 SPRINT trial, S160, S161, S162
preconception care, S255, S256 registered dietitian nutritionist (RDN), S43, S255, staging
preconception counseling, S254–S255 S257, S274 of diabetic kidney disease, S54, S194
preeclampsia and aspirin, S260–S261 reimbursement, for DSMES, S69, S70 of type 1 diabetes, S20
liver, S58 subcutaneous insulin regimens, S112, ulcers, foot, S53, S78, S206, S209–S212
organ, post-transplant diabetes mellitus S114–S115, S140, S144–S145, S148 ultra-rapid-acting insulin analogs, S143, S145
after, S19, S29–S30 surgical treatment, S142
pancreas, S142, S146 type 2 diabetes
renal, S146, S57, S173, S174, S180, S182, A1C and cardiovascular disease outcomes
S197 vagus nerve stimulator, S132
in, S103
tricyclic antidepressants, S8, S131, S207, S208, vascular disease, S176, S209
in children/adolescents, S240–S246
prevention of, in prediabetes, S44–S45
S209 classification, S19–S20
TWILIGHT trial, S172 VERIFY trial, S149
combination therapy, S7, S143, S144,
two-hour plasma glucose (2-h PG) test, S20, vertical sleeve gastrectomy, S135
S146, S147, S149, S150–S151, S154, VERTIS CV trial, S178, S179, S180
S21, S22, S25, S31, S33, S34 S161, S168, S168–S169, S169–S170,
two-step strategy, for GDM, S34–S335 Veterans Affairs Diabetes Trial (VADT), S101,
S208, S222 S102, S103, S218
type 1 diabetes, S8, S9, S12, S13 initial therapy, S119, S238
A1C and cardiovascular disease outcomes vildagliptin, S149
insulin pump use in, S119 vitamin D supplementation, S44, S72, S76, S131
in, S103