Vnitr Lek 2022, 68(5):315-323 | DOI: 10.36290/vnl.2022.066

Time in range: new parameter to evaluate blood glucose control

Milan Flekač
3. interní klinika VFN a 1. LF UK v Praze

Continuous glucose monitoring became more common in everyday clinical practice. New parameters have been created as a standard for assessing the degree of control for people with diabetes and can be used more clearly than glycated haemoglobin. The new parameter time in range represents a significant benefit not only for diabetologists, but also an important tool to help the patients in their daily lives with diabetes.

Keywords: target values, glucose profile analysis, diabetes control, continuous glucose monitoring, time in range.

Accepted: August 4, 2022; Published: August 22, 2022  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Flekač M. Time in range: new parameter to evaluate blood glucose control. Vnitr Lek. 2022;68(5):315-323. doi: 10.36290/vnl.2022.066.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. American Diabetes Association. 7. Diabetes technology: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes 2019. Diabetes Care. 2019;42(Suppl.1):S71-S80. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    2. Nathan DM, Genuth S, Lachin J et al. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long‑term complications in insulin‑dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:977-986. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    3. UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Intensive blood‑glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). Lancet. 1998;352:837-853. Go to original source...
    4. Holman RR, Paul SK, Bethel MA, Matthews DR, Neil HAW. 10-year follow‑up of intensive glucose control in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1577-1589. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    5. Beck RW, Connor CG, Mullen DM et al. The fallacy of average: how using HbA1c alone to assess glycemic control can be misleading. Diabetes Care. 2017;40:994-999. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    6. Rodbard D. Glucose variability: a review of clinical applications and research developments. Diabetes technology & therapeutics. 2018 Jun 1;20(S2):S2-5. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    7. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Health Information Center. Sickle cell trait & other hemoglobinopathies & diabetes (for providers) [Internet]. Available from https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health‑information/ diagnostic‑tests/sickle‑cell‑trait‑hemoglobinopathies in diabetes. Accessed 12 January 201838. Bry L, Chen PC, Sacks DB. Effects of hemoglobin variants and chemically modified derivatives on assays for glycohemoglobin. Clin Chem. 2001;47:153-163.
    8. Ford ES, Cowie CC, Li C, Handelsman Y et al. Iron‑deficiency anemia, non iron‑deficiency anemia and HbA1c among adults in the US. J Diabetes. 2011;3:67-73. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    9. Nielsen LR, Ekbom P, Damm P et al. HbA1c levels are significantly lower in early and late pregnancy. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:1200-1201. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    10. Petrie JR, Peters AL, Bergenstal RM et al. Improving the clinical value and utility of CGM Systems: issues and recommendations: a joint statement of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association Diabetes Technology Working Group. Diabetes Care. 2017;40:1614-1621. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    11. Battelino T, Danne T, Bergenstal RM et al. Clinical Targets for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data Interpretation: Recommendations From the International Consensus on Time in Range. Diabetes Care. 2019 Aug;42(8):1593-1603. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    12. Vigersky RA, McMahon C. The Relationship of Hemoglobin A1C to Time‑in‑Range in Patients with Diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019 Feb;21(2):81-85. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    13. Bergenstal RM, Beck RW, Close KL et al. Glucose Management Indicator (GMI): A New Term for Estimating A1C From Continuous Glucose Monitoring. Diabetes Care. 2018 Nov;41(11):2275-2280. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    14. Beck RW, Bergenstal RM, Riddlesworth TD, et al. Validation of Time in Range as an Outcome Measure for Diabetes Clinical Trials. Diabetes Care. 2019 Mar;42(3):400-405. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    15. Polonsky WH, Hessler D. What are the quality of life‑related benefits and losses associated with real‑time continuous glucose monitoring? A survey of current users. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013 Apr;15(4):295-301. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    16. El Malahi A, Van Elsen M, Charleer S et al. Relationship Between Time in Range, Glycemic Variability, HbA1c, and Complications in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022 Jan 18;107(2):e570-e581. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    17. Lu J, Ma X, Zhou J et al. Association of Time in Range, as Assessed by Continuous Glucose Monitoring, With Diabetic Retinopathy in Type 2 Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2018 Nov;41(11):2370-2376. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    18. Johnson ML, Martens TW, Criego AB, Carlson AL, Simonson GD, Bergenstal RM. Utilizing the Ambulatory Glucose Profile to Standardize and Implement Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Clinical Practice. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019 Jun;21(S2):S217-S225. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    19. Riddlesworth TD, Beck RW, Gal RL et al. Optimal Sampling Duration for Continuous Glucose Monitoring to Determine Long‑Term Glycemic Control. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018 Apr;20(4):314-316. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    20. Goldenberg RM, Aroda VR, Billings LK et al. Effect of insulin degludec versus insulin glargine U100 on time in range: SWITCH PRO, a crossover study of basal insulin‑treated adults with type 2 diabetes and risk factors for hypoglycaemia. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2021 Nov;23(11):2572-2581. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    21. Danne T, Axel Schweitzer M, Keuthage W et al. Impact of Fast‑Acting Insulin Aspart on Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Using Intermittent‑Scanning Continuous Glucose Monitoring Within a Real‑World Setting: The GoBolus Study. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021 Mar;23(3):203-212. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...

    Return to the content


    Vnitřní lékařství

    Madam, Sir,
    please be aware that the website on which you intend to enter, not the general public because it contains technical information about medicines, including advertisements relating to medicinal products. This information and communication professionals are solely under §2 of the Act n.40/1995 Coll. Is active persons authorized to prescribe or supply (hereinafter expert).
    Take note that if you are not an expert, you run the risk of danger to their health or the health of other persons, if you the obtained information improperly understood or interpreted, and especially advertising which may be part of this site, or whether you used it for self-diagnosis or medical treatment, whether in relation to each other in person or in relation to others.

    I declare:

    1. that I have met the above instruction
    2. I'm an expert within the meaning of the Act n.40/1995 Coll. the regulation of advertising, as amended, and I am aware of the risks that would be a person other than the expert input to these sites exhibited

    No
    Yes

    If your statement is not true, please be aware
    that brings the risk of danger to their health or the health of others.