Quantitative assessment of dietary intake in adults with Type 1 diabetes following flexible insulin therapy education with an active promotion of dietary freedom

Effects of a low-carbohydrate diet in adults with type 1 diabetes management: A single arm non-randomised clinical trial

Public interest in low-carbohydrate (LC) diets for type 1 diabetes (T1D) management has increased. This study compared the effects of a healthcare professional delivered LC diet compared to habitual diets higher in carbohydrates on clinical outcomes in adults with T1D. Twenty adults (18-70 yrs) with T1D (≥6 months duration) with suboptimal glycaemic control (HbA1c>7.0% or >53 mmol/mol) participated in a 16-week single arm within-participant, controlled intervention study involving a 4-week control period following their habitual diets (>150 g/day of carbohydrates) and a 12-week intervention period following a LC diet (25-75 g/day of carbohydrates) delivered remotely by a registered dietitian. Glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c -primary outcome), time in range (blood glucose: 3.5-10.0 mmol/L), frequency of hypoglycaemia (<3.5 mmol/L), total daily insulin, and quality of life were assessed before and after the control and intervention periods. Sixteen participants completed the study. During the intervention period, there were reductions in total dietary carbohydrate intake (214 to 63 g/day; P<0.001), HbA1c (7.7 to 7.1% or 61 to 54 mmol/mol; P = 0.003) and total daily insulin use (65 to 49 U/day; P<0.001), increased time spent in range (59 to 74%; P<0.001), and improved quality of life (P = 0.015), with no significant changes observed during the control period. Frequency of hypoglycaemia episodes did not differ across timepoints, and no episodes of ketoacidosis or other adverse events were reported during the intervention period. These preliminary findings suggest that a professionally supported LC diet may lead to improvements in markers of blood glucose control and quality of life with reduced exogenous insulin requirements and no evidence of increased hypoglycaemia or ketoacidosis risk in adults with T1D. Given the potential benefits of this intervention, larger, longer-term randomised controlled trials are warranted to confirm these findings. Trial Registration: https://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12621000764831.aspx.

Healthcare professionals' opinions regarding health coaching for patients with diabetes: A pilot exploration in Indonesia

Background

Diabetes management is applied for the entire patients' lives, so it requires lifelong sustainable self-management actions to have a positive impact. Integrated care as coaching intervention is considered a program that facilitates and supports patients in managing diabetes more effectively and optimally. However, there are limited studies regarding this program in Indonesia.

Objective

This study aimed to explore the opinions of healthcare professionals concerning the importance of health coaching for patients with diabetes in Indonesia.

Methods

An invitation letter via email was distributed individually to participants from the three provinces of Java, Indonesia, between June and August 2020. The open-ended questions that consist of two sections were developed to explore the matter related to health coaching for patients with diabetes. A descriptive analysis of the participants' answers was used to explain the data comprehensively and accurately reveal the complete information.

Results

A total of seven healthcare professionals from four professions participated in the study. Based on healthcare professionals' opinions, this study revealed that the most common reason health coaching needs to be implemented is related to self-management in dealing with diabetes. Health coaching as a tailored-intervention strategy in diabetes self-management requires a multidisciplinary approach and considers the local wisdom to achieve the expected goals in all aspects of patients' lives. Thus, health coaching as an integral part of diabetes self-management is considered an appropriate program to cope with this problem.

Conclusion

Health coaching for patients with diabetes is useful and reasonable to implement among patients with appropriate strategies, especially in Indonesia and beyond.

Carbohydrate restriction for diabetes: rediscovering centuries-old wisdom

Carbohydrate restriction, used since the 1700s to prolong survival in people with diabetes, fell out of favor after the discovery of insulin. Despite costly pharmacological and technological developments in the last few decades, current therapies do not achieve optimal outcomes, and most people with diabetes remain at high risk for micro- and macrovascular complications. Recently, low-carbohydrate diets have regained popularity, with preliminary evidence of benefit for body weight, postprandial hyperglycemia, hyperinsulinemia, and other cardiometabolic risk factors in type 2 diabetes and, with more limited data, in type 1 diabetes. High-quality, long-term trials are needed to assess safety concerns and determine whether this old dietary approach might help people with diabetes attain clinical targets more effectively, and at a lower cost, than conventional treatment.

The beneficial short-term effects of a high-protein/low-carbohydrate diet on glycaemic control assessed by continuous glucose monitoring in patients with type 1 diabetes

AIM

To compare the effects of three different but isocaloric dietary patterns, high-protein/low-carbohydrate (HPD) with 20% of calories as carbohydrates, Mediterranean/low glycaemic index (MED) with 40% carbohydrates, and a reference diet (REF) with 50% carbohydrates, in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a randomized crossover study, 15 patients with T1D were assigned to the three dietary patterns for three separate weeks, with 7-day washout periods in between. Continuous glucose monitoring was applied during the intervention periods. The primary outcome was glycaemic control, as measured by the percentage of time patients spent within the euglycaemic range (TIR_{70-140   mg/dl} ). Other key glycaemic metrics were also investigated as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

TIR_70-140 was not statistically different between HPD, MED and REF (p = .105). Pairwise analysis revealed a statistically significant difference between HPD and REF at the .05 level, which was not retained after applying Bonferroni correction (54.87% ± 14.11% vs. 48.33% ± 13.72%; p = .018). During the HPD period, 11 out of 15 participants spent more time within TIR_70-140 compared with either the REF or MED. The HPD performed significantly better than the REF in terms of TIR_70-180 (74.33% ± 12.85% vs. 67.53% ± 12.73%; p = .012), glycaemic variability (coefficient of variation: 36.18% ± 9.30% vs. 41.48% ± 8.69%; p = .016) and time spent in the hypoglycaemic range (TBR_{70   mg/dl} ; median: 12, IQR: 16 vs. median: 14, IQR: 20; p = .007), whereas no statistically significant differences were observed between MED and HPD or REF.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with REF and MED, an HPD plan may have a positive impact on glycaemic control in patients with T1D. During the HPD, patients spent a shorter time in hypoglycaemia and exhibited lower glycaemic variability.

The impact of using a closed-loop system on food choices and eating practices among people with Type 1 diabetes: a qualitative study involving adults, teenagers and parents

AIMS

We explored whether, how and why moving onto and using a hybrid day-and-night closed-loop system affected people's food choices and dietary practices to better understand the impact of this technology on everyday life and inform recommendations for training and support given to future users.

METHODS

Twenty-four adults, adolescents and parents were interviewed before commencing use of the closed-loop system and following its 3-month use. Data were analysed thematically and longitudinally.

RESULTS

While participants described preparing and/or eating similar meals to those consumed prior to using a closed-loop, many described feeling more normal and less burdened by diabetes in dietary situations. Individuals also noted how the use of this technology could lead to deskilling (less precise carbohydrate counting) and less healthy eating (increased snacking and portion sizes and consumption of fatty, energy-dense foods) because of the perceived ability of the system to deal with errors in carbohydrate counting and address small rises in blood glucose without a corrective dose needing to be administered.

CONCLUSIONS

While there may be quality-of-life benefits to using a closed-loop, individuals might benefit from additional nutritional and behavioural education to help promote healthy eating. Refresher training in carbohydrate counting may also be necessary to help ensure that users are able to undertake diabetes management in situations where the technology might fail or that they take a break from using it.

Low-carbohydrate diets for type 1 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review

Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune condition characterised by pancreatic beta cell destruction and absolute insulin deficiency. The strongest predictor of diabetes complications is glycaemic control and achieving HbA1c ≤ 7.0% is the primary management target. However, standard treatment appears to be lacking and adjunctive strategies require consideration. A systematic review was conducted to examine the effect of low-carbohydrate diets on type 1 diabetes management. Four databases were searched from inception until 28 March 2017: MEDLINE; CINAHL; Cochrane Library; and EMBASE. All primary studies containing a methods section (excluding cross-sectional) were included. Reports had to quantitatively measure the effect(s) of a dietary intervention or observed intake over at least two weeks where carbohydrate is below 45% total energy in adults and/or children with type 1 diabetes. The primary outcome was HbA1c and secondary outcomes were severe hypoglycaemia, total daily insulin, BMI, quality of life and mean daily glucose. Seventy-nine full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and nine were included (two randomised controlled trials, four pre-post interventions, two case-series, one case-report). Eight studies reported a mean change in HbA1c with a low-carbohydrate diet. Of these, four reported a non-significant change (P ≥ 0.05) and three reported statistically significant reductions (P < 0.05). Two studies reported severe hypoglycaemia, five reported total insulin, three reported BMI, and one reported blood glucose. Due to the significant heterogeneity of included studies, an overall effect could not be determined. This review presents all available evidence on low-carbohydrate diets for type 1 diabetes and suggests an urgent need for more primary studies.