Skip to main content

Abstract: Utilization of a CGM-based Dashboard to Identify At-Risk Patients with Type 1 Diabetes (T1D)

Katie Noland1; Britaney Spartz1; Emily DeWit1, Mark Clements1; Rachel Dixon1; Jaimie Contreras1; Gayla Kutzli1; Andie Kaminsky1; Katelyn Evans1; Jude El Buri1

1Children's Mercy Kansas City Kansas City, Missouri, USA

kenoland@cmh.edu

Background/Objective: A continuous glucose monitor (CGM)-based population health dashboard, created by researchers at Stanford University, was adapted and adopted by Children's Mercy. The dashboard flags patients with T1D meeting clinician-defined risk criteria: extreme lows >2%, no alerts, lows >4%, >15% drop-in time-in-range (TIR), TIR <65%, extreme highs >10%, >15% drop in wear time, insufficient data, extreme highs >3%. It enables clinicians to identify patients in high-risk categories for additional support between standard-of-care visits.

Methods: We implemented the dashboard using Power BI and conducted four PDSA cycles targeting biomarker-based risk groups. Families received a one-time phone call or were scheduled for a series of problem-solving calls.

Results: Figure 1 shows the results of telephone outreach across four PDSA cycles. 33% of patients were flagged based on out-of-date CGM data, had already transitioned to adult care, or had time in range >80% despite meeting other risk biomarkers. These issues affecting efficient workflow and patient acceptability were addressed after Cycle 2. Subsequently, 0% of patients who were reviewed in the dashboard were affected by these issues. Overall, families were more engaged in making insulin changes at the point of contact than when scheduling a series of future remote contacts.

Conclusions: A CGM-based risk dashboard may help clinicians identify patients who would benefit from proactive outreach between in-clinic visits, but families may be difficult to reach by phone, and some families may not perceive that they need help. Future work should seek to overcome these barriers.

Keywords: CGM, diabetes, population health management

Figure 1: Proportion of individuals identified as high-risk in the CGM risk dashboard who (A) were reached by telephone, (B) declined assistance, and (C) either scheduled future remote patient monitoring visits (QI staff phone calls) or accepted immediate assistance (Clinic staff phone calls).