Abstract:Background: Diabetes mellitus is a common medical complication of pregnancy, and its treatment is complex. Recent years have seen an increase in the application of mobile health tools and advanced technologies, such as remote patient monitoring, with the aim of improving care for diabetes mellitus in pregnancy. Previous studies of these technologies for the treatment of diabetes in pregnancy have been small and have not clearly shown clinical benefit with implementation. Objective: Remote patient monitoring allows clinicians to monitor patients' health data (such as glucose values) in near real-time, between office visits, to make timely adjustments to care. Our objective was to determine if using remote patient monitoring for the management of diabetes in pregnancy leads to an improvement in maternal and neonatal outcomes. Study design: This was a retrospective cohort study of pregnant patients with diabetes mellitus managed by the maternal-fetal medicine practice at one academic institution between October 2019 and April 2021. This practice transitioned from paper-based blood glucose logs to remote patient monitoring in February 2020. Remote patient monitoring options included (1) device integration with Bluetooth glucometers that automatically uploaded measured glucose values to the patient's Epic MyChart application or (2) manual entry in which patients manually logged their glucose readings into their MyChart application. Values in the MyChart application directly transferred to the patient's electronic health record for review and management by clinicians. In total, 533 patients were studied. We compared 173 patients managed with paper logs to 360 patients managed with remote patient monitoring (176 device integration and 184 manual entry). Our primary outcomes were composite maternal morbidity (which included third- and fourth-degree lacerations, chorioamnionitis, postpartum hemorrhage requiring transfusion, postpartum hysterectomy, wound infection or separation, venous thromboembolism, and maternal admission to the intensive care unit) and composite neonatal morbidity (which included umbilical cord pH <7.00, 5 minute Apgar score <7, respiratory morbidity, hyperbilirubinemia, meconium aspiration, intraventricular hemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis, sepsis, pneumonia, seizures, hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, shoulder dystocia, trauma, brain or body cooling, and neonatal intensive care unit admission). Secondary outcomes were measures of glycemic control and the individual components of the primary composite outcomes. We also performed a secondary analysis in which the patients who used the two different remote patient monitoring options (device integration vs manual entry) were compared. Chi-square, Fisher's exact, 2-sample t, and Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare the groups. A result was considered statistically significant at P<.05. Results: Maternal baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the remote patient monitoring and paper groups aside from a slightly higher baseline rate of chronic hypertension in the remote patient monitoring group (6.1% vs 1.2%; P=.011). The primary outcomes of composite maternal and composite neonatal morbidity were not significantly different between the groups. However, remote patient monitoring patients submitted more glucose values (177 vs 146; P=.008), were more likely to achieve glycemic control in target range (79.2% vs 52.0%; P<.0001), and achieved the target range sooner (median, 3.3 vs 4.1 weeks; P=.025) than patients managed with paper logs. This was achieved without increasing in-person visits. Remote patient monitoring patients had lower rates of preeclampsia (5.8% vs 15.0%; P=.0006) and their infants had lower rates of neonatal hypoglycemia in the first 24 hours of life (29.8% vs 51.7%; P<.0001). Conclusion: Remote patient monitoring for the management of diabetes mellitus in pregnancy is superior to a traditional paper-based approach in achieving glycemic control and is associated with improved maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Integrated Strategies to Support Diabetes Technology in Pregnancy

Technology advances in diabetes pregnancy: right technology, right person, right time

Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Diabetes Management During Pregnancy: Evidence, Practical Tips, and Common Pitfalls

A Diabetes Pregnancy Technology Roadmap: The 2023 Norbert Freinkel Award Lecture

Updates in the Management of Type 1 Diabetes in Pregnancy

Type 1 Diabetes and Pregnancy: Challenges in Glycemic Control and Maternal–Fetal Outcomes

Impact of Remote Monitoring Technologies for Assisting Patients With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review

Strengths and Limitations of Achieving a Tight Glycemic Control

Supporting self-management in women with pre-existing diabetes in pregnancy: a mixed-methods sequential comparative case study

Use of continuous glucose monitoring and hybrid closed‐loop therapy in pregnancy

Management of type 1 diabetes in pregnancy: update on lifestyle, pharmacological treatment, and novel technologies for achieving glycaemic targets

Automated Insulin Delivery in Women With Pregnancy Complicated by Type 1 Diabetes

Glycemic variability and indices of glycemic control among pregnant women with type 1 diabetes (T1D) based on the use of continuous glucose monitoring share technology

Optimizing Patient Outcomes in Pregnancy: What Continuous Glucose Monitoring Metrics Should We Be Aiming For?

How pregnant women with diabetes experience telemonitoring of the fetal heart rate - An interview study

Identifying Mobile Health Technology Experiences and Preferences of Low-Income Pregnant Women with Diabetes

Remote patient monitoring for management of diabetes mellitus in pregnancy is associated with improved maternal and neonatal outcomes

Continuous glucose monitoring in pregnancy

From Standard of Care to Emerging Innovations: Navigating the Evolution of Pharmacological Treatment of Gestational Diabetes

Clinical Effectiveness of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Pregnancies Affected by Type 1 Diabetes

Practical Considerations for Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Patients with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus