Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 26, 2026

Improving IV Insulin Administration in a Community Hospital
Published on: June 11, 2012
Association Between Therapeutic Inertia and Future Hypoglycemia Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes
Helen Chen1,2,3,4, Lap Pui Chung5, Yutong Chen6
1Division of Nursing Science, School of Nursing, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Introduction:
Therapeutic inertia (TI), the failure to adjust therapy when HbA1c remains above- target, is a barrier to optimal glycemic control in type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study examined the association between TI and subsequent-year hypoglycemia visit, and whether continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) modifies this relationship.
Methods:
We analyzed electronic health records (2017-2023) from two Midwest US healthcare systems, including adults with T2D, at least one above-target HbA1c (>7% for ages 18-64; >8% for ages ≥65), and glucose-lowering prescriptions. TI was calculated annually as the percentage of above-target HbA1c results without prescription changes within 30 days. We fitted logistic regression models to examine whether high TI (>50%) was associated with subsequent-year hypoglycemia visits. An interaction term tested whether this association differed between those who used vs. did not use CGM.
Results:
Among 65,983 participants (mean age 56, 51% male, 75% White), mean HbA1c at last follow-up was 8.1% (ages 18-64) and 8.0% (ages ≥ 65). High TI was associated with 31% increased odds of hypoglycemia visit (OR=1.74; 95% CI: 1.61-1.88; p<0.001). Insulin users had threefold higher odds (OR=2.95; p<0.001). Medicare beneficiaries had 31% higher odds than Medicaid beneficiaries. Adults aged 18-44 years had more hypoglycemia visits compared to other age groups. Low CGM use (7%) limited the interpretation of interaction effects (95% CI: 0.47-1.1, p=0.12).
Conclusions:
In this cohort, high TI predicted hypoglycemia-visit. Further research is needed to understand TI drivers and how to balance improving glycemic control without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia.
Insights
Therapeutic inertia, failing to adjust diabetes treatment, increases hypoglycemia risk. Continuous glucose monitoring use did not significantly alter this association in the study.
Area of Science:
- Endocrinology
- Diabetes Management
- Clinical Research
Background:
- Therapeutic inertia (TI) hinders optimal glycemic control in type 2 diabetes (T2D).
- Understanding factors associated with TI and its consequences is crucial for effective diabetes management.
- The role of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in mitigating TI-related risks requires further investigation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To examine the association between therapeutic inertia and subsequent hypoglycemia visits in adults with T2D.
- To determine if continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) use modifies the relationship between therapeutic inertia and hypoglycemia risk.
Main Methods:
- Analysis of electronic health records (2017-2023) from two US healthcare systems.
- Inclusion criteria: adults with T2D, above-target HbA1c, and glucose-lowering prescriptions.
- Logistic regression models assessed the association between high TI (>50%) and hypoglycemia visits, with interaction analysis for CGM use.
Main Results:
- High therapeutic inertia was significantly associated with increased odds of hypoglycemia visits (OR=1.74).
- Insulin users and Medicare beneficiaries exhibited higher odds of hypoglycemia visits.
- Low continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) use (7%) limited the interpretation of its modifying effect on the TI-hypoglycemia association.
Conclusions:
- High therapeutic inertia is a predictor of hypoglycemia visits in type 2 diabetes.
- Further research is needed to identify TI drivers and optimize diabetes care to prevent hypoglycemia.
- Balancing glycemic control improvement with hypoglycemia risk reduction remains a key challenge in T2D management.
Related Concept Videos
Type II Diabetes II: Pathophysiology
Type II Diabetes I: Introduction
Hypoglycemia
Hypoglycemia and Glucagon
Diabetes Mellitus: Type 2 and Gestational
Type I Diabetes II: Pathophysiology
