Cited by 26Hyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patientsDiabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Treatment and Management

Results from a randomized trial of intensive glucose management using CGM versus usual care in hospitalized adults with type 2 diabetes: the TIGHT study

Open access
Hirsch, Irl B., Draznin, Boris, Buse, John B., Raghinaru, Dan, Spanbauer, Charles, Umpierrez, Guillermo E., Ullal, Jagdeesh, Jones, Morgan S. +102 more·2025·Diabetes Care

Abstract

Objective To evaluate whether continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) could assist providers in intensifying glycemic management in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes. Research design and methods At six academic hospitals, adults with type 2 diabetes hospitalized in a non-intensive care setting were randomly assigned to either standard therapy with glucose target 140-180 mg/dL (standard group) or intensive therapy with glucose target 90-130 mg/dL guided by CGM (intensive group). The primary outcome was mean glucose measured with CGM (blinded in standard group), and the key secondary outcome was CGM glucose Results For the 110 participants included in the primary analysis, mean ± SD age was 61 ± 12 years and mean HbA1c was 8.9 ± 2.3% (73.8 ± 1.6 mmol/mol). During the study, CGM-measured mean glucose was 170 mg/dL for the intensive group (n = 60) vs. 175 mg/dL for the standard group (n = 50; risk-adjusted difference -7 mg/dL, 95% CI -19 to 5; P = 0.25). Only 7% of the intensive group achieved the mean glucose target range of 90-130 mg/dL. CGM readings Conclusions The study's glucose management approach using CGM did not improve glucose levels compared with standard glucose management in the non-intensive care unit hospital setting. A glucose target of 90-130 mg/dL may not be realistic in the current environment of insulin management in the hospital.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/dc24-1779

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A recent multicenter randomized clinical trial did not show a benefit of using CGM over POC monitoring for insulin adjustment in individuals with type 2 diabetes hospitalized for noncritical illness.

    “However, a recent multicenter randomized clinical trial did not show a benefit of using CGM over POC monitoring for insulin adjustment in individuals with type 2 diabetes hospitalized for noncritical illness (53).”
  • Both groups in that trial achieved similar mean blood glucose levels (170 ± 32 vs. 175 ± 33 [P = 0.25]) with similarly low levels of hypoglycemia.

    “Both groups achieved similar mean blood glucose levels (170 ± 32 vs. 175 ± 33 [P = 0.25]) with similarly low levels of hypoglycemia.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hirsch, I. B., Draznin, B., Buse, J. B., Raghinaru, D., Spanbauer, C., Umpierrez, G. E., Ullal, J., Jones, M. S., Low Wang, C. C., Spanakis, E. K., Chao, J. H., Sibayan, J., Kollman, C., Zabala, Z. E., Moazzami, B., Reynolds, S. L., Ferrara, W., Fulghum, K., Kass, A., Armstrong, C., Gilani, F., Seggelke, S., Churchill, J., Monye, J. O., Choe, M. Y., Scott, W., Baran, J. D., Bais, R., Khakpour, D., Pasquel, F. J., Davis, G. M., Vellanki, P., Kershaw, E. E., Gligorijevic, N., Goley, A., Garg, A., Alexander, B., Matson, B. C., Diner, J., Klein, K. R., Adair, W. B., Choksi, P., Huang, M., Vinh, J., Singh, L. G., Beck, R. W., TIGHT RCT Study Group, Spanakis, E. K., Choe, M. Y., Monye, J. O., Scott, W., Churchill, J., Singh, L. G., Umpierrez, G. E., Pasquel, F. J., Davis, G. M., Zabala, Z. E., Moazzami, B., Vellanki, P., Low Wang, C. C., Draznin, B., Seggelke, S., Adair, W. B., Choksi, P., Huang, M., Vinh, J., Graham, P., Jones, M. S., Fulghum, K., Buse, J. B., Donahue, C., Kass, A., Matson, B. C., Ravulapally, S., Armstrong, C., Fraser, R., Alexander, B., Diner, J., Garg, A., Goley, A., Hudson, V., Gilani, F., Klein, K. R., Morba, C., Velez, C., Te Vazquez, J., Ullal, J., Kershaw, E. E., Gligorijevic, N., Reynolds, S. L., Ferrara, W., Henry, A., Rial, E., Chao, J. H., Bais, R., Khakpour, D., Baran, J., Hirsch, I. B., Beck, R., Sibayan, J., Davis, J., Kollman, C., Raghinaru, D., Spanbauer, C., McNabb, D., Guzzetta, R., Ubas, C., Lingvay, I., Weinstock, R., & McGill, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • 4Jaeb Center for Health Research, Tampa, FL
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2024-11-21
Volume
48
Issue
1
Pages
118-124
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W4404582813
Cited by
26
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 15
FWCI
8.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Dexcom Inc
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Hyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patients
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
continuous glucose monitoring, tight glycemic control, type 2 diabetes, hospitalized patients, hypoglycemia, insulin management, mean blood glucose
MeSH terms
Glycemic Control, Aged, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Hospitalization, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Male, Middle Aged, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review