Two weeks ago I had the honor of taking part in the Glycemic Outcomes Beyond A1C meeting in DC. There were many smart, well-informed diabetes professionals in the room and it was fascinating to hear their thoughts on this important topic. It was abundantly clear that CGM is an important part of diabetes management and it would make sense to use it in diabetes research across the board. It was also clear that consensus has been reached regarding CGM metrics and now it’s time to get them published and into practice.
I really like the idea of CGM being the next EKG. How cool would it be for clinicians, researchers and patients alike to understand the language of CGM and the numbers it produces and then use it for improved outcomes?
One thing that stood out to me was a comment about focusing on “time out of range” instead of “time in range” (blood glucose between 70 and 180). My heart sank when I heard that. Why would we ever focus on something negative when we have something positive to look at? I thought, “wow, that takes us back to the dark ages.” Focusing on time out of range is like marking highs and lows in RED and only talking about them.
What about focusing on strengths (see last week’s blog post) and what is working, and then figuring out how to duplicate that and make it happen more of the time? What about asking, “what did you do here” when looking at in-range numbers, rather than “what did you do wrong” when looking at highs or lows?
I think of diabetes management as closing the gap – spending as much time in range as possible. While I’m ok with using blood glucose data to make changes, I don’t agree with focusing on time out of range.