Time in Range

[MikeyBikey]

One consultant said that setting 10.0 as my upper In Range limit was being harsh on myself. Well now mate I have achieved 86% IR - my best ever week! 🙂 be Funnily the odd hypo hasn't figured!

How's everyone else doing?

 

[Rob Oldfield]

I thought that 3.9 to 10 were the standard settings and this document seems to back that up. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng...n-adults-with-type-1-diabetes-pdf-11013435182

Might be interesting to know where your consultant has got the idea from? Seems to me that it makes sense to have a standard range to give a clear idea of where someone is. Little point getting 99.9% TIR if you've got it set at 2 - 20.

 

[Bruce Stephens]

One consultant said that setting 10.0 as my upper In Range limit was being harsh on myself.

That sounds confused. 3.9-10.0 is the standard. Perhaps there's a confusion with alarms? A high alarm of 10.0 is questionable. Or maybe a confusion with how we regard the range: it's not something we're trying (well, not very hard) to stay inside all the time.

 

[SimonP]

I thought that 3.9 to 10 were the standard settings and this document seems to back that up. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng...n-adults-with-type-1-diabetes-pdf-11013435182

Might be interesting to know where your consultant has got the idea from? Seems to me that it makes sense to have a standard range to give a clear idea of where someone is. Little point getting 99.9% TIR if you've got it set at 2 - 20.

Perhaps it's more to do with avoiding potential burnout in the patient - the consultants can set their own range when they view the data?

 

[Bruce Stephens]

Perhaps it's more to do with avoiding potential burnout in the patient - the consultants can set their own range when they view the data?

I presume that's the case, but the usual way to do that is to be OK with a lower result for the TIR rather than changing the range itself. With most CGMs I think that's likely to work better just because they don't have that big a range: if you had a range 3.9-14.0 I'm just not sure it's going to be as accurate in reporting that.

(In any case for Libre 2 the software (on phone or reader) doesn't allow setting the range outside 3.9-10.0 so the suggestion doesn't make sense. You can set a narrower range, but not one that includes values below 3.9 or above 10.0.)

 

[Rob Oldfield]

(In any case for Libre 2 the software (on phone or reader) doesn't allow setting the range outside 3.9-10.0 so the suggestion doesn't make sense. You can set a narrower range, but not one that includes values below 3.9 or above 10.0.)

True, but you can change to a wider range on the LibreView site. (Though the idea of doing that still doesn't make sense to me.)

 

[Satan’s little helper]

(In any case for Libre 2 the software (on phone or reader) doesn't allow setting the range outside 3.9-10.0 so the suggestion doesn't make sense. You can set a narrower range, but not one that includes values below 3.9 or above 10.0.)

Looks like they can. But not the alarm levels in the app? (Settings then report settings.

 

[Bruce Stephens]

Looks like they can. But not the alarm levels in the app? (Settings then report settings.

View attachment 28286

That's confirming what I said: you can set the range to (say) 4.5-9.2, but you can't set it to 3.9-12.0 or 3.5-10.0.

 

[Satan’s little helper]

That's confirming what I said: you can set the range to (say) 4.5-9.2, but you can't set it to 3.9-12.0 or 3.5-10.0.

Slopes off in embarrassment. Just noticed you’re right. I’m used the flexibility of the 3rd party app.
Librelink I only have notifications set for a lost signal. Even with the 3rd party apk I have the high turned off.

 

[Bruce Stephens]

I’m used the flexibility of the 3rd party app.

Yes, Juggluco lets me set whatever values I want.

I wonder if LibreLink (and the reader) have those limits partly (or entirely) because of the lack of range for the sensors themselves, so they (and the regulators) knew that allowing a wider range just wouldn't give useful results consistently given the limitations of the sensors?

Even with the 3rd party apk I have the high turned off.

I have mine set at 15.0, because once I get there I really want to do something (because I forgot to take my last bolus or messed something else up).

 

[everydayupsanddowns]

Well done @MikeyBikey

That’s really impressive.

You’ve moved into the Partha Kar “stop it you absolute beast” category

https://forum.diabetes.org.uk/boards/threads/hi.108977/#post-1304236

 

[Satan’s little helper]

Yes, Juggluco lets me set whatever values I want.

I wonder if LibreLink (and the reader) have those limits partly (or entirely) because of the lack of range for the sensors themselves, so they (and the regulators) knew that allowing a wider range just wouldn't give useful results consistently given the limitations of the sensors?

I have mine set at 15.0, because once I get there I really want to do something (because I forgot to take my last bolus or messed something else up).

Librelink, I keep exclusively for my team? It does tally up for me when if I go Vhigh. (Meter use to check.)
It’s any lows that prolong for me with the libre.

I keep my eye on the levels with my 3rd party app & on screen display. (Which needs very little calibration.) Then pending on what I have onboard bolus wise (if it hits 12.) act accordingly for me. With the aid on my trusty meter.)
I wouldn’t disagree with 15mmol. lol, normally when I actually catch something going skew?

 

[nonethewiser]

Usually get around 80% TIR which am happy with, very occasionally step into 90% & do get odd day with 100% in range, tbh don't get obsessed with figures as perfection just isn't possible.