Background and objectives. There is a bidirectional relationship between SARS-CoV-2 infection and diabetes mellitus (DM), as people with DM are more vulnerable, and SARS-CoV-2 infections worsen the prognosis in these patients. The main purpose of the study was to evaluate the application validity of the ISARIC-4C score in patients confirmed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Materials and Methods. The study included 159 patients previously known to have type 2 DM and confirmed positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. We analyzed the concordance between the clinical evaluation of the patients and the ISARIC-4C score. Results. The mortality rate in hospitalized patients was 25.15%. The mortality risk was higher for ISARIC-4C values >14 than in the opposite group (63.93% vs. 31.24%; p < 0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) of the mortality score was 0.875 (95% CI: 0.820–0.930; p < 0.001), correctly classifying 77.36% of the cohort. A cut-off value of >14 had a sensitivity of 87.80% (95% CI: 87.66–87.93), specificity 73.72% (95% CI: 73.48–73.96), positive predictive value 53.73% (95% CI: 53.41–54.04), and negative predictive value 94.56% (95% CI: 94.5–94.62). The Cox regression model showed that the length of hospitalization (LH) was significantly influenced by body mass index, lung impairment, and aspartate aminotransferase, increasing the hazards, while lower HbA1c and lower SatO2 significantly decreased the hazards. Conclusions. ISARIC-4C score estimates the likelihood of clinical deterioration and the mortality risk in patients hospitalized with type 2 DM and positive for SARS-CoV-2, being useful in assessing the prognosis from the onset, as well as in developing therapeutic strategies.

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has brought major changes not only at the economic and social level but especially in the medical system. Objective To evaluate the impact of COVID-19 lockdown on the quality of glycemic control in Romanian patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Material and Method Our study group included 102 Romanian volunteers’ patients with T1DM from both urban and rural areas. Data were collected during an interview, based on a structured questionnaire with multiple-choice questions about diabetes management during lockdown, how they interact with their diabetologist, how they accessed the treatment and what other factors influenced their diabetes management during the lockdown. Results Blood glucose levels were significantly higher in the MDII group as a consequence of delayed administration of insulin corrections due to inadequate insulin dosing (60% vs 31.81%; χ 2 = 5.51, p = 0.018). In addition, insulin pump users had improved response to stress and anxiety (ie, additional therapeutic safety being provided by use of insulin pump; in some devices, blood glucose being continuously monitored, leading to premature detection of important blood glucose excursions) compared to insulin pen users ( χ 2 = 5.09, p = 0.024). In the context of hypoglycemia, we observed that in the pen MDII group, more users have administered an excess of insulin, compared with the pump users (80% vs 45.45%; χ 2 = 10.34; p = 0.001). Conclusion A lower impact of COVID-19 lockdown on glycemic control was observed in patients with T1DM treated using insulin pumps compared to patients with T1DM who administered their insulin using insulin pens. Telemedicine and online consultations have brought significant improvements in diseases management. Stress, emotions, and anxiety were among the main reasons that led to increases in blood sugar levels, suggesting that the psychological impact may have long-term complications.