Patient-reported outcomes for an integrated real-time continuous glucose monitoring/insulin pump system

The diabetes management experiences questionnaire: Psychometric validation among adults with type 1 diabetes

AIMS

To examine the psychometric properties of the Diabetes Management Experiences Questionnaire (DME-Q). Adapted from the validated Glucose Monitoring Experiences Questionnaire, the DME-Q captures satisfaction with diabetes management irrespective of treatment modalities.

METHODS

The DME-Q was completed by adults with type 1 diabetes as part of a randomized controlled trial comparing hybrid closed loop (HCL) to standard therapy. Most psychometric properties were examined with pre-randomization data (n = 149); responsiveness was examined using baseline and 26-week follow-up data (n = 120).

RESULTS

Pre-randomization, participants' mean age was 44 ± 12 years, 52% were women. HbA1c was 61 ± 11 mmol/mol (7.8 ± 1.0%), diabetes duration was 24 ± 12 years and 47% used an insulin pump prior to the trial. A forced three-factor analysis revealed three expected domains, that is, 'Convenience', 'Effectiveness' and 'Intrusiveness', and a forced one-factor solution was also satisfactory. Internal consistency reliability was strong for the three subscales (α range = 0.74-0.84) and 'Total satisfaction'( α  = 0.85). Convergent validity was demonstrated with moderate correlations between DME-Q 'Total satisfaction' and diabetes distress (PAID: rs  = -0.57) and treatment satisfaction (DTSQ; rs  = 0.58). Divergent validity was demonstrated with a weak correlation with prospective/retrospective memory (PRMQ: rs  = -0.16 and - 0.13 respectively). Responsiveness was demonstrated, as participants randomized to HCL had higher 'Effectiveness' and 'Total satisfaction' scores than those randomized to standard therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The 22-item DME-Q is a brief, acceptable, reliable measure with satisfactory structural and construct validity, which is responsive to intervention. The DME-Q is likely to be useful for evaluation of new pharmaceutical agents and technologies in research and clinical settings.

Increasing Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use for Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic People With Type 1 Diabetes: Results From the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative Equity Study

Despite the benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), there is lower use of this technology among non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic people with type 1 diabetes compared with their non-Hispanic White counterparts. The T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative recruited five endocrinology centers to pilot an equity-focused quality improvement (QI) study to reduce racial inequities in CGM use. The centers used rapid QI cycles to test and expand interventions such as provider bias training, translation of CGM materials, provision of CGM education in multiple languages, screening for social determinants of health, and shared decision-making. After implementation of these interventions, median CGM use increased by 7% in non-Hispanic White, 12% in non-Hispanic Black, and 15% in Hispanic people with type 1 diabetes. The gap between non-Hispanic White and non-Hispanic Black patients decreased by 5%, and the gap between non-Hispanic White and Hispanic patients decreased by 8%.

Development and Validation of a Distress Measurement Related to Glucose Monitoring of Diabetes Patients

INTRODUCTION

Glucose monitoring-related problems affect the social and psychological distress experienced by patients with diabetes, and this distress leads to low compliance. Consequently, it is important to be able to comprehensively assess distress due to glucose monitoring in these patients. We have developed and validated a distress of self-glucose monitoring (DSGM) scale instrument to assess patient distress from glucose monitoring.

METHODS

Following an extensive literature review and qualitative study, we selected 21 items for assessing the DSGM, including physical, psychosocial, and process domains. We conducted a cross-sectional study in patients with insulin-treated diabetes aged 10-40 years at Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Korea, from April 2021 to September 2021. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were performed to confirm the structural validity of the DSGM scale. To confirm construct and criterion validity, we assumed that the Korean version of the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID-K) instrument, life interference, and stress due to glucose monitoring might moderately correlate with the total score and scores of all domains of the DSGM scale except for the physical domain.

RESULTS

Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the DSGM scale were 0.92, and Cronbach's alpha coefficients of the three subscales ranged from 0.69 to 0.92, indicating satisfactory internal consistency. The DSGM scale was evaluated using CFA, and the fit indices for this model were good. The PAID-K total score, life interference, and stress due to glucose monitoring were moderately correlated with the total score of the DSGM scale and with the scores of the psychosocial and process domains, and were weakly correlated with the score of the physical domain of the DSGM scale.

CONCLUSION

The DSGM scale is a valid and reliable tool to evaluate distress due to glucose monitoring in adults, adolescents, and children with diabetes.

Implicit Racial-Ethnic and Insurance-Mediated Bias to Recommending Diabetes Technology: Insights from T1D Exchange Multicenter Pediatric and Adult Diabetes Provider Cohort

Background: Despite documented benefits of diabetes technology in managing type 1 diabetes, inequities persist in the use of these devices. Provider bias may be a driver of inequities, but the evidence is limited. Therefore, we aimed to examine the role of race/ethnicity and insurance-mediated provider implicit bias in recommending diabetes technology. Method: We recruited 109 adult and pediatric diabetes providers across 7 U.S. endocrinology centers to complete an implicit bias assessment composed of a clinical vignette and ranking exercise. Providers were randomized to receive clinical vignettes with differing insurance and patient names as proxy for Racial-Ethnic identity. Bias was identified if providers: (1) recommended more technology for patients with an English name (Racial-Ethnic bias) or private insurance (insurance bias), or (2) Race/Ethnicity or insurance was ranked high (Racial-Ethnic and insurance bias, respectively) in recommending diabetes technology. Provider characteristics were analyzed using descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression. Result: Insurance-mediated implicit bias was common in our cohort (n = 66, 61%). Providers who were identified to have insurance-mediated bias had greater years in practice (5.3 ± 5.3 years vs. 9.3 ± 9 years, P = 0.006). Racial-Ethnic-mediated implicit bias was also observed in our study (n = 37, 34%). Compared with those without Racial-Ethnic bias, providers with Racial-Ethnic bias were more likely to state that they could recognize their own implicit bias (89% vs. 61%, P = 0.001). Conclusion: Provider implicit bias to recommend diabetes technology was observed based on insurance and Race/Ethnicity in our pediatric and adult diabetes provider cohort. These data raise the need to address provider implicit bias in diabetes care.

Making Diabetes Care Fit—Are We Making Progress?

The care of patients with diabetes requires plans of care that make intellectual, practical, and emotional sense to patients. For these plans to fit well, patients and clinicians must work together to develop a common understanding of the patient’s problematic human situation and co-create a plan of care that responds well to it. This process, which starts at the point of care, needs to continue at the point of life. There, patients work to fit the demands of their care plan along with the demands placed by their lives and loves. Thought in this way, diabetes care goes beyond the control of metabolic parameters and the achievement of glycemic control targets. Instead, it is a highly individualized endeavor that must arrive at a care plan that reflects the biology and biography of the patient, the best available research evidence, and the priorities and values of the patient and her community. It must also be feasible within the life of the patient, minimally disrupting those aspects of the patient life that are treasured and justify the pursuit of care in the first place. Patient-centered methods such as shared decision making and minimally disruptive medicine have joined technological advances, patient empowerment, self-management support, and expert patient communities to advance the fit of diabetes care both at the point of care and at the point of life.

Effects of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) represented a major breakthrough in the treatment of type 1 diabetes. The aim of the present meta-analysis is to assess the effect of continues glucose monitoring (CGM) and flash glucose monitoring (FGM), on glycemic control in type 1 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present analysis includes randomized clinical trials comparing CGM or FGM with SMBG, with a duration of at least 12 weeks, identified in Medline or clinicaltrials.gov. The principal endpoint was HbA1c at the end of the trial. A secondary endpoint was severe hypoglycemia. Mean and 95% confidence intervals for HbA1c and Mantel-Haenzel odds ratio [MH-OR] for severe hypoglycemia were calculated, using random effect models. A sensitivity analysis was performed using fixed effect models. In addition, the following secondary endpoints were explored, using the same methods: time in range, health-related quality of life, and treatment satisfaction. Separate analyses were performed for trials comparing CGM with SMBG, and those comparing CGM + CSII and SMBG + MDI and CGM-regulated insulin infusion system (CRIS) and CSII + SMBG.

RESULTS

CGM was associated with a significantly lower HbA1c at endpoint in comparison with SMBG (- 0.24 [- 0.34, - 0.13]%); CGM was associated with a significantly lower risk of severe hypoglycemia than SMBG. Treatment satisfaction and quality of life were not measured, or not reported, in the majority of studies. FGM showed a significant reduction in the incidence of mild hypoglycemia and an increased treatment satisfaction, but no significant results are shown in HbA1c. CGM + CSII in comparison with SMBG + MDI was associated with a significant reduction in HbA1c. Only two trials with a duration of at least 12 weeks compared a CRIS with SMBG + CSII; HbA1c between the two treatment arms was not statistically significant (difference in means: - 0.23 [- 0.91; 0.46]%; p = 0.52).

CONCLUSION

GCM compared to SMBG has showed a reduction in HbA1c and severe hypoglycemia in patient with type 1 diabetes. The comparison between CGM + CSII and SMBG + MDI showed a large reduction in HbA1c; it is conceivable that the effects of CSII + CGM on glycemic control additives. The only comparison available between FGM and SMBG was conducted in patients in good control.

Development and Psychometric Validation of the Novel Glucose Monitoring Experiences Questionnaire Among Adults with Type 1 Diabetes

Background: Glucose monitoring is an essential aspect of self-care for people with type 1 diabetes. With technologies developing rapidly, valid assessment of user experiences and satisfaction is needed. Our aim was to develop a novel measure: the Glucose Monitoring Experiences Questionnaire (GME-Q). Methods: Questionnaire design was informed by exploratory and cognitive debriefing interviews. The GME-Q was included in a large online survey enabling psychometric validation. Results: The interview sample included 17 adults (aged [mean ± SD] 46 ± 11 years, 53% women) with type 1 diabetes duration of 26 ± 14 years. The proposed conceptual framework included three domains: "Effectiveness", "Intrusiveness", and "Convenience", assessed with 25 items plus a single, overview item. The validation sample included 589 adults (aged 44 ± 15 years; 64% women) with type 1 diabetes (duration: 22 ± 14 years, self-monitoring blood glucose [SMBG] using finger-prick devices: median [IQR] 6 [4-7] daily checks). Questionnaire acceptability was indicated: 98% (n = 578) completion rate. After deleting 3 redundant items, principal components analysis supported a 22-item questionnaire with 3 domains ("Effectiveness" [9 items]; "Intrusiveness" [6 items]; "Convenience" [7 items]), accounting for 55% of variance, with good internal consistency reliability (α = 0.83-0.88). Subscales correlated significantly (r_s = ±0.44-0.66, P < 0.001) with the single, overview item, together explaining 51% of the total variance in the single item score. Associations with demographic and clinical characteristics supported convergent and discriminant validity. Conclusions: Overall, the 22-item GME-Q is a brief, acceptable, valid, and reliable measure of satisfaction with glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes using SMBG, and this needs to be assessed among those using continuous glucose monitoring.

RT-CGM in adults with type 1 diabetes improves both glycaemic and patient-reported outcomes, but independent of each other

AIMS

To examine in adults with type 1 diabetes (a) the effect of initiation of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) on glycaemic and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and (b) factors related to clinically relevant improvements and sustained device use.

METHODS

60 persons initiating RT-CGM completed questionnaires at device start and six months later. Demographics and clinical characteristics including (dis)continuation up until July 31st 2018 were obtained from medical records.

RESULTS

After six months, 54 adults were still using RT-CGM. Short-term discontinuation (10%) was mainly related to end of pregnancy (wish). Longer-term discontinuation in those with an initial non-pregnancy indication was related to changes in the medical condition and behavioural/psychological reasons. After six months, HbA_1c, diabetes-specific worries and self-efficacy improved (range d = |0.4|-|0.8|), while hypoglycaemia rate or awareness and more general distress did not change. More suboptimal scores at baseline were related to meaningful improvements in HbA_1c (≥10 mmol/mol; 0.9%) and PROs (≥0.5 SD). Changes in glycaemic variables and PROs were not related.

CONCLUSIONS

People with more suboptimal HbA_1c and PRO values appear to benefit most from RT-CGM. Given the lack of association between improvements in medical outcomes and PROs, both should be included in evaluations of RT-CGM therapy on an individual level.

Techniques of monitoring blood glucose during pregnancy for women with pre-existing diabetes

BACKGROUND

There are a number of ways of monitoring blood glucose in women with diabetes during pregnancy, with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) recommended as a key component of the management plan. No existing systematic reviews consider the benefits/effectiveness of different techniques of blood glucose monitoring on maternal and infant outcomes among pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes. The effectiveness of the various monitoring techniques is unclear. This review is an update of a review that was first published in 2014 and subsequently updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To compare techniques of blood glucose monitoring and their impact on maternal and infant outcomes among pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (1 November 2018), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing techniques of blood glucose monitoring including SMBG, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), automated telemedicine monitoring or clinic monitoring among pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes mellitus (type 1 or type 2). Trials investigating timing and frequency of monitoring were also eligible for inclusion. RCTs using a cluster-randomised design were eligible for inclusion but none were identified.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Data were checked for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

This review update includes a total of 12 trials (863) women (792 women with type 1 diabetes and 152 women with type 2 diabetes). The trials took place in Europe, the USA and Canada. Three of the 12 included studies are at low risk of bias, eight studies are at moderate risk of bias, and one study is at high risk of bias. Four trials reported that they were provided with the continuous glucose monitors free of charge or at a reduced cost by the manufacturer.Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus intermittent glucose monitoring, (four studies, 609 women)CGM may reduce hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (pre-eclampsia and pregnancy-induced hypertension) (risk ratio (RR) 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 to 0.85; 2 studies, 384 women; low-quality evidence), although it should be noted that only two of the four relevant studies reported data for this composite outcome. Conversely, this did not translate into a clear reduction for pre-eclampsia (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.08; 4 studies, 609 women, moderate-quality evidence). There was also no clear reduction in caesarean section (average RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.18; 3 studies, 427 women; I2 = 41%; moderate-quality evidence) or large-for-gestational age (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.26; 3 studies, 421 women; I2 = 70%; low-quality evidence) with CGM. There was not enough evidence to assess perinatal mortality (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.05 to 12.61, 71 infants, 1 study; low-quality evidence), or mortality or morbidity composite (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.06; 1 study, 200 women) as the evidence was based on single studies of low quality. CGM appears to reduce neonatal hypoglycaemia (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.93; 3 studies, 428 infants). Neurosensory disability was not reported.Other methods of glucose monitoringFor the following five comparisons, self-monitoring versus a different type of self-monitoring (two studies, 43 women); self-monitoring at home versus hospitalisation (one study, 100 women), pre-prandial versus post-prandial glucose monitoring (one study, 61 women), automated telemedicine monitoring versus conventional system (three studies, 84 women), and constant CGM versus intermittent CGM (one study, 25 women), it is uncertain whether any of the interventions has any impact on any of our GRADE outcomes (hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, caesarean section, large-for-gestational age) because the quality of the evidence was found to be very low. This was due to evidence largely being derived from single trials, with design limitations and limitations with imprecision (wide CIs, small sample sizes, and few events). There was not enough evidence to assess perinatal mortality and neonatal mortality and morbidity composite. Other important outcomes, such as neurosensory disability, were not reported in any of these comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Two new studies (406 women) have been incorporated to one of the comparisons for this update. Although the evidence suggests that CGM in comparison to intermittent glucose monitoring may reduce hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, this did not translate into a clear reduction for pre-eclampsia, and so this result should be viewed with caution. No differences were observed for other primary outcomes for this comparison. The evidence base for the effectiveness of other monitoring techniques analysed in the other five comparisons is weak and based on mainly single studies with very low-quality evidence. Additional evidence from large well-designed randomised trials is required to inform choices of other glucose monitoring techniques and to confirm the effectiveness of CGM.

A cluster randomised trial, cost-effectiveness analysis and psychosocial evaluation of insulin pump therapy compared with multiple injections during flexible intensive insulin therapy for type 1 diabetes: the REPOSE Trial

BACKGROUND

Insulin is generally administered to people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) using multiple daily injections (MDIs), but can also be delivered using infusion pumps. In the UK, pumps are recommended for patients with the greatest need and adult use is less than in comparable countries. Previous trials have been small, of short duration and have failed to control for training in insulin adjustment.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of pump therapy compared with MDI for adults with T1DM, with both groups receiving equivalent structured training in flexible insulin therapy.

DESIGN

Pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group cluster randomised controlled trial, including economic and psychosocial evaluations. After participants were assigned a group training course, courses were randomly allocated in pairs to either pump or MDI.

SETTING

Eight secondary care diabetes centres in the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with T1DM for > 12 months, willing to undertake intensive insulin therapy, with no preference for pump or MDI, or a clinical indication for pumps.

INTERVENTIONS

Pump or MDI structured training in flexible insulin therapy, followed up for 2 years. MDI participants used insulin analogues. Pump participants used a Medtronic Paradigm^® Veo^TM (Medtronic, Watford, UK) with insulin aspart (NovoRapid, Novo Nordisk, Gatwick, UK).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome - change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c) at 2 years in participants whose baseline HbA_1c was ≥ 7.5% (58 mmol/mol). Key secondary outcome - proportion of participants with HbA_1c ≤ 7.5% at 2 years. Other outcomes at 6, 12 and 24 months - moderate and severe hypoglycaemia; insulin dose; body weight; proteinuria; diabetic ketoacidosis; quality of life (QoL); fear of hypoglycaemia; treatment satisfaction; emotional well-being; qualitative interviews with participants and staff (2 weeks), and participants (6 months); and ICERs in trial and modelled estimates of cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

We randomised 46 courses comprising 317 participants: 267 attended a Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating course (132 pump; 135 MDI); 260 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, of which 235 (119 pump; 116 MDI) had baseline HbA_1c of ≥ 7.5%. HbA_1c and severe hypoglycaemia improved in both groups. The drop in HbA_1c% at 2 years was 0.85 on pump and 0.42 on MDI. The mean difference (MD) in HbA_1c change at 2 years, at which the baseline HbA_1c was ≥ 7.5%, was -0.24% [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.53% to 0.05%] in favour of the pump (p = 0.098). The per-protocol analysis showed a MD in change of -0.36% (95% CI -0.64% to -0.07%) favouring pumps (p = 0.015). Pumps were not cost-effective in the base case and all of the sensitivity analyses. The pump group had greater improvement in diabetes-specific QoL diet restrictions, daily hassle plus treatment satisfaction, statistically significant at 12 and 24 months and supported by qualitative interviews.

LIMITATION

Blinding of pump therapy was not possible, although an objective primary outcome was used.

CONCLUSION

Adding pump therapy to structured training in flexible insulin therapy did not significantly enhance glycaemic control or psychosocial outcomes in adults with T1DM.

RESEARCH PRIORITY

To understand why few patients achieve a HbA_1c of < 7.5%, particularly as glycaemic control is worse in the UK than in other European countries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN61215213.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 20. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Sensor Augmented Insulin Pump Therapy with Low-Glucose Suspend Feature in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Literature supports short-term efficacy and safety of Sensor Augmented Insulin Pump (SAP) therapy in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, no data are available showing long-term outcomes. Our study describes the long-term outcomes of SAP therapy with low-glucose suspend feature (SAP+LGS) in hypoglycemia in a Colombian population with T1D and hypoglycemia.

METHODS

A cohort study was conducted with T1D patients receiving SAP+LGS therapy who initiated this therapy because of hypoglycemia at San Ignacio University Hospital diabetes center in Bogotá, Colombia. Glycated hemoglobin (A1c) was assessed at least every 6 months, severe hypoglycemia (SH) and hypoglycemia unawareness (HU) incidence yearly. Adherence to therapy was also evaluated.

RESULTS

One hundred eleven patients were included in the analysis. Total daily insulin dose was reduced during follow-up (mean difference -0.22 U/kg; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.18 to -0.26; P < 0.001). A1c levels were reduced from a baseline value of 8.8% ± 1.9% to 7.5% ± 1.0% at 5 months (mean difference -1.3%; 95% CI -1.09 to -1.50; P < 0.001) and 7.1% ± 0.8% (mean difference -1.7%; 95% CI -1.59 to -1.90; P < 0.001) at the end of follow-up (47 months on average). The incidence of SH and HU episodes decreased significantly since the first year, and this effect was maintained over time (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

SAP+LGS therapy in T1D patients with hypoglycemia led to a significant and sustained decrease in A1c during long periods of follow-up, as well as a significant reduction in SH and HU. Future randomized clinical trials are desired.

Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion versus multiple daily injections in individuals with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The relative efficacy of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and multiple daily injections in individuals with type 1 diabetes is unclear. We sought to synthesize the existing evidence about the effect of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion on glycosylated hemoglobin, hypoglycemic events, and time spent in hypoglycemia compared to multiple daily injections. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus from January 2008 through November 2015 for randomized controlled trials that enrolled children or adults with type 1 diabetes. Trials identified in a previous systematic review and published prior to 2008 were also included. We included 25 randomized controlled trials at moderate risk of bias. Meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in glycosylated hemoglobin in patients treated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion compared to multiple daily injections (mean difference 0.37; 95 % confidence interval, 0.24-0.51). This effect was demonstrated in both children and adults. There was no significant difference in minor or severe hypoglycemic events. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion was associated with lower incidence of nocturnal hypoglycemia. There was no significant difference in the time spent in hypoglycemia. In children and adults with type 1 diabetes and compared to multiple daily injections, continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion is associated with a modest reduction in glycosylated hemoglobin. There was no difference in severe or minor hypoglycemia, but likely a lower incidence of nocturnal hypoglycemia with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion.

Integrated sensor-augmented pump therapy systems [the MiniMed® Paradigm™ Veo system and the Vibe™ and G4® PLATINUM CGM (continuous glucose monitoring) system] for managing blood glucose levels in type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

In recent years, meters for continuous monitoring of interstitial fluid glucose have been introduced to help people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) to achieve better control of their disease.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this project was to summarise the evidence on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the MiniMed(®) Paradigm™ Veo system (Medtronic Inc., Northridge, CA, USA) and the Vibe™ (Animas(®) Corporation, West Chester, PA, USA) and G4(®) PLATINUM CGM (continuous glucose monitoring) system (Dexcom Inc., San Diego, CA, USA) in comparison with multiple daily insulin injections (MDIs) or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), both with either self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) or CGM, for the management of T1DM in adults and children.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidance and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Diagnostic Assessment Programme manual. We searched 14 databases, three trial registries and two conference proceedings from study inception up to September 2014. In addition, reference lists of relevant systematic reviews were checked. In the absence of randomised controlled trials directly comparing Veo or an integrated CSII + CGM system, such as Vibe, with comparator interventions, indirect treatment comparisons were performed if possible.

METHODS

A commercially available cost-effectiveness model, the IMS Centre for Outcomes Research and Effectiveness diabetes model version 8.5 (IMS Health, Danbury, CT, USA), was used for this assessment. This model is an internet-based, interactive simulation model that predicts the long-term health outcomes and costs associated with the management of T1DM and type 2 diabetes. The model consists of 15 submodels designed to simulate diabetes-related complications, non-specific mortality and costs over time. As the model simulates individual patients over time, it updates risk factors and complications to account for disease progression.

RESULTS

Fifty-four publications resulting from 19 studies were included in the review. Overall, the evidence suggests that the Veo system reduces hypoglycaemic events more than other treatments, without any differences in other outcomes, including glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels. We also found significant results in favour of the integrated CSII + CGM system over MDIs with SMBG with regard to HbA1c levels and quality of life. However, the evidence base was poor. The quality of the included studies was generally low, often with only one study comparing treatments in a specific population at a specific follow-up time. In particular, there was only one study comparing Veo with an integrated CSII + CGM system and only one study comparing Veo with a CSII + SMBG system in a mixed population. Cost-effectiveness analyses indicated that MDI + SMBG is the option most likely to be cost-effective, given the current threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, whereas integrated CSII + CGM systems and Veo are dominated and extendedly dominated, respectively, by stand-alone, non-integrated CSII with CGM. Scenario analyses did not alter these conclusions. No cost-effectiveness modelling was conducted for children or pregnant women.

CONCLUSIONS

The Veo system does appear to be better than the other systems considered at reducing hypoglycaemic events. However, in adults, it is unlikely to be cost-effective. Integrated systems are also generally unlikely to be cost-effective given that stand-alone systems are cheaper and, possibly, no less effective. However, evidence in this regard is generally lacking, in particular for children. Future trials in specific child, adolescent and adult populations should include longer term follow-up and ratings on the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions scale at various time points with a view to informing improved cost-effectiveness modelling.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Registration Number CRD42014013764.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Assessing Insulin Delivery Device Satisfaction in Patients with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes

Over the past several decades, insulin treatment has changed drastically, not only with the development of further insulin analogs but also with the introduction of novel insulin delivery devices such as pumps and pens. In addition, adjunct devices such as continuous glucose monitors and sensor-augmented pumps have become increasingly used in clinical care, increasing the volume of information available to patients and providers. However, with the development of new devices it has become clear that along with the many benefits of these advances, the use of these devices can also present a burden to people with diabetes. For example, some patients report being overwhelmed by too much data when using continuous glucose monitors. Furthermore, there are concerns regarding the accuracy of some of these new devices, particularly for glucose monitoring. As a result, some patients may choose not to use available devices, despite the recognized benefits. Therefore, it is critical to understand how the various insulin delivery devices available currently and in the future affect patients in terms of their diabetes management and perceived burdens and to understand which patient characteristics may predict a lack of satisfaction with these devices. This critical gap in our knowledge is addressed in an article in this issue of the journal through the development of a questionnaire that allows for a better understanding of the impact of insulin delivery devices on quality of life and diabetes management among both type 1 diabetes and insulin-dependent type 2 diabetes patients. The novelty, as well as limitations, of this new instrument for the assessment of insulin delivery device satisfaction are discussed.

Are Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Appropriate Tools for Assessing Evolving Medical Device Technologies?

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMAs) provide unique insights into comparative effectiveness of diabetes treatments. However, use of these analyses may be inappropriate for assessing the value and utility of technologies that involve significant behavioral interventions and encompass rapidly evolving technologies such as real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM). The rapid evolution of RT-CGM, compared with the time required for publication of clinical studies used in SRMAs, may preclude differentiation between past and current generations of devices. In addition, the effect of performance and usability differences between the various commercial devices on possible clinical outcomes associated with the devices are often not clearly discussed, and many of the RT-CGM studies assessed in SRMAs do not provide adequate information regarding whether and/or to what degree study subjects and clinicians were trained to use the RT-CGM and utilize the data to adjust therapy. Although numerous clinical studies have shown that the glycemic benefit of RT-CGM is related to the frequency and duration of use, a disproportionate number of RT-CGM studies included in recent SRMAs are based on the results of the intention-to-treat analyses and do not consider this fundamental behavioral component in their conclusions. Given these limitations, the generalizability of SRMA conclusions may be limited, and findings from these reports may significantly underestimate the potential glycemic benefit of current and future devices, posing challenges for coverage and reimbursement. We reviewed the potential limitations of the recent Cochrane Collaboration report on CGM, focusing on the 12 studies that assessed RT-CGM use in adults, children/adolescents or both.

Development of a New Measure for Assessing Glucose Monitoring Device-Related Treatment Satisfaction and Quality of Life

BACKGROUND

Many different devices are available to patients to measure glucose levels, but there is no validated method to assess treatment satisfaction with glucose monitoring devices and its impact on quality of life and other patient-reported outcomes. To address this problem, we developed the Glucose Monitoring System Satisfaction Survey (GMSS). We describe the construction and validation of the GMSS and examine how key patient factors are associated with glucose device satisfaction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Items were developed from interviews with 15 adults with either type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) and 10 diabetes healthcare professionals, resulting in an initial pool of 42 items. Separate exploratory factor analyses (EFAs) were conducted with adults with T1D (n=254) and with insulin-using T2D (n=206). Construct validity was established with overall well-being (World Health Organization-5), diabetes distress (Diabetes Distress Scale), attitudes toward glucose monitoring (Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Obstacles scale), and the previously validated Blood Glucose Monitoring System Rating Questionnaire. Regression analyses examined associations between total scale satisfaction and demographics, diabetes status, and glucose monitor use.

RESULTS

The two EFAs resulted in two 15-item scales, one for T1D and one for T2D, and yielded four coherent and meaningful factors in each sample: three factors with the same items in common for both samples (Emotional Burden, Behavioral Burden, and Openness) and a fourth factor unique to each sample (Trust for T1D, Worthwhileness for T2D). The final EFA accounted for 66.5% of the variance in the T1D sample and 67.0% in the T2D sample. Validity was established by significant correlations with criterion variables.

CONCLUSIONS

The GMSS is a reliable, valid measure of glucose device satisfaction in its T1D form and in its insulin-using T2D form. It provides a comprehensive profile of sources of device satisfaction for use in clinical care and research.

Efficacy of real-time continuous glucose monitoring on glycaemic control and glucose variability in type 1 diabetic patients treated with either insulin pumps or multiple insulin injection therapy: a randomized controlled crossover trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in T1D patients treated with insulin pump therapy or multiple daily insulin therapy.

METHODS

Twenty adult patients (ten insulin pump therapy and ten multiple daily insulin) with poor glycaemic control (HbA1c  > 8.0%) were randomized into two groups for 6 months: the continuous glucose monitoring arm (using real-time continuous glucose monitoring) and the SMBG arm. After 2 months of wash-out, the participants crossed over. The primary outcome was HbA1c reduction. The secondary outcomes were hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia risk assessment (area under the curve < 70 mg/dL/day and AUC > 200 mg/dL/day, respectively) and glucose variability.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients (eight multiple daily insulin, six insulin pump therapy) used continuous glucose monitoring appropriately (at least 40% of the time). In these patients, the improvement in glycaemic control was more evident during the real-time continuous glucose monitoring period (7.76% ± 0.4 vs 8.54% ± 0.4, p < 0.05) than during the self-monitoring of blood glucose period (8.42% ± 0.4 vs 8.56% ± 0.5, p = 0.2). Better results with continuous glucose monitoring were observed in patients using multiple daily insulin with greater improvement in both glycaemic control (7.71% ± 0.2 vs 8.58% ± 0.2, p < 0.05) and glucose variability and with a marked reduction in the risk of both hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate use of real-time continuous glucose monitoring improved glycometabolic control in T1D patients. The effects of continuous glucose monitoring were more evident in patients under multiple daily insulin treatment, compared with insulin pump therapy. Glucose variability, in addition to glycaemic control, was improved in compliant diabetic patients.

Management of adult diabetic ketoacidosis

Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is a rare yet potentially fatal hyperglycemic crisis that can occur in patients with both type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus. Due to its increasing incidence and economic impact related to the treatment and associated morbidity, effective management and prevention is key. Elements of management include making the appropriate diagnosis using current laboratory tools and clinical criteria and coordinating fluid resuscitation, insulin therapy, and electrolyte replacement through feedback obtained from timely patient monitoring and knowledge of resolution criteria. In addition, awareness of special populations such as patients with renal disease presenting with DKA is important. During the DKA therapy, complications may arise and appropriate strategies to prevent these complications are required. DKA prevention strategies including patient and provider education are important. This review aims to provide a brief overview of DKA from its pathophysiology to clinical presentation with in depth focus on up-to-date therapeutic management.

Monthly use of a real-time continuous glucose monitoring system as an educational and motivational tool for poorly controlled type 1 diabetes adolescents

PURPOSE

Experience with the use of real-time continuous glucose monitoring systems (RT-CGMS) in teenagers with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is limited. We aimed to assess the possibility of glycaemic control improvement and to characterize the group of adolescents, who may gain long-term benefits from the use of the RT-CGMS.

METHODS

Forty T1DM patients, aged 14.6 ± 2.1 years, with diabetes duration 7.4 ± 3.6 years and initial HbA₁c 9.3 ± 1.5% were recruited. The analysis was based on one-month glucose sensors use, combined with the thorough family support. Patients were analysed in groups according to baseline HbA₁c: below and above 7.5%, and 10.0%. Comparison between patients with or without improvement in HbA₁c after 3-month follow-up was also performed. Patients' satisfaction based on the questionnaire was assessed.

RESULTS

HbA₁c level in entire study group decreased after three months, from 9.3 ± 1.0% to 8.8 ± 1.6% (P<0.001). In the group with HbA1c improvement, reduction was the highest: 9.0 ± 1.3% vs. 8.0 ± 1.2% (P<0.001). Only the group with initial HbA₁c>10% did not achieve significant improvement: 11.2 ± 0.5% vs. 10.9 ± 1.1 (P=0.06). In satisfaction questionnaire the lowest scores (negative opinion) were reported by group of patients with initial HbA₁c above 10%, while the highest scores (positive opinion) were found in the group with improvement of HbA₁c after 3 month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Short-term use of CGMS RT, united with satisfaction questionnaire, performed in poorly controlled teenagers with T1DM, can be useful in defining the group of young patients, who can benefit from long-term CGMS RT use in metabolic control improvement.

A systematic review of patient-reported measures of burden of treatment in three chronic diseases

Background

Burden of treatment refers to the workload of health care and its impact on patient functioning and well-being. There are a number of patient-reported measures that assess burden of treatment in single diseases or in specific treatment contexts. A review of such measures could help identify content for a general measure of treatment burden that could be used with patients dealing with multiple chronic conditions. We reviewed the content and psychometric properties of patient-reported measures that assess aspects of treatment burden in three chronic diseases, ie, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure.

Methods

We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid PsycINFO, and EBSCO CINAHL through November 2011. Abstracts were independently reviewed by two people, with disagreements adjudicated by a third person. Retrieved articles were reviewed to confirm relevance, with patient-reported measures scrutinized to determine consistency with the definition of burden of treatment. Descriptive information and psychometric properties were extracted.

Results

A total of 5686 abstracts were identified from the database searches. After abstract review, 359 full-text articles were retrieved, of which 76 met our inclusion criteria. An additional 22 articles were identified from the references of included articles. From the 98 studies, 57 patient-reported measures of treatment burden (full measures or components within measures) were identified. Most were multi-item scales (89%) and assessed treatment burden in diabetes (82%). Only 15 measures were developed using direct patient input and had demonstrable evidence of reliability, scale structure, and multiple forms of validity; six of these demonstrated evidence of sensitivity to change. We identified 12 content domains common across measures and disease types.

Conclusion

Available measures of treatment burden in single diseases can inform derivation of a patient-centered measure of the construct in patients with multiple chronic conditions. Patients should take part in developing the measure to ensure salience and relevance.

Comparative analysis of the efficacy of continuous glucose monitoring and self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) have been proven effective in improving hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and in reducing hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). It is not clear, however, if CGM provides further efficacy and safety benefits beyond SMBG in the management of T1DM.

METHODS

MEDLINE (1966-November 2009), COCHRANE REGISTRY (all years), and EMBASE (1980-November 2009), and article bibliographies were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of CGM in patients with T1DM, with clinical outcomes, including HbA1c and hypoglycemia and/or hyperglycemia.

RESULTS

Fourteen RCTs met eligibility criteria [n = 1188 patients, 97.4% with T1DM, age 29.0 ± 14.3 years, diabetes duration 11.7 ± 7.0 years, and baseline HbA1c 8.3 ± 0.8% (mean ± standard deviation)]. Compared with SMBG, the use of CGM was associated with a greater reduction in HbA1c [-0.3% (confidence interval: 0.4, -0.2), p < .0001]. The number of hypoglycemic events was not significantly different between the CGM and SMBG groups (0.52 ± 0.52 versus 0.52 ± 0.63 events/day, p = .5), but duration of hypoglycemia was shorter for the CGM group (75 ± 39 versus 89 ± 19 min/day), with an incremental reduction of hypoglycemia duration of -15.2 min/day, p < .0001. Continuous glucose monitoring also resulted in a shorter duration of hyperglycemia than SMBG (172 ± 125 versus 217 ± 152 min/day, p = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of CGM is associated with improvement in metabolic control in T1DM, with significant short- and long-term reductions in HbA1c and reduction in the duration of periods of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia versus SMBG.

Beneficial effect of real-time continuous glucose monitoring system on glycemic control in type 1 diabetic patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVE

Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) provides detailed information on glucose patterns and trends, thus allowing the patients to manage their diabetes more effectively.

DESIGN

The aim of this study was to explore the potential beneficial effects of the use of RT-CGM on diabetes management compared with self blood glucose measurement (SBGM) in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched through by two independent investigators for RCTs concerning the use of RT-CGM in patients with T1DM. Only studies with a similar insulin regimen in the experimental and control groups were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs (n=948) met the inclusion criteria. Combined data from all studies showed better HbA1c reduction in subjects using RT-CGM compared with those using SBGM (mean difference (MD) -0.25; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): from -0.34 to -0.17; P<0.001). Patients treated with insulin pump and RT-CGM had a lower HbA1c level compared with subjects managed with insulin pump and SBGM (four RCTs, n=497; MD -0.26; 95% CI: from -0.43 to -0.10; P=0.002). The benefits of applying RT-CGM were not associated with an increasing rate of major hypoglycemic episodes. The use of RT-CGM for over 60-70% of time was associated with a significant lowering of HbA1c.

CONCLUSIONS

RT-CGM is more beneficial than SBGM in reducing HbA1c in patients with type 1 diabetes. Further studies are needed to evaluate the efficacy of this system in the pediatric population, especially in very young children.

Patient satisfaction and barriers to initiating real-time continuous glucose monitoring in early pregnancy in women with diabetes

AIM

To evaluate self-reported satisfaction and barriers to initiating real-time continuous glucose monitoring in early pregnancy among women with pregestational diabetes.

METHODS

Fifty-four women with Type 1 diabetes and 14 women with Type 2 diabetes were offered continuous glucose monitoring for 6 days at median 9 (range 6-14) gestational weeks and were asked to answer a semi-structured questionnaire on patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Median HbA1c was 49 (range 34-86) mmol/mol) [6.6 (5.3-10.0) %] and duration of diabetes was 12 (0.5-37) years. Continuous glucose monitoring was used for 6 (0.5-7) days, with 43 (65%) women using continuous glucose monitoring for at least 5 days. The women experienced 2.7 (0-12) alarms per 24 h, of which approximately one third was technical alarms and one third disturbed their sleep. Sixteen women (24%) reported discomfort with continuous glucose monitoring during daytime and twelve (18%) during sleep. Many women reported improved diabetes understanding (52%) and would recommend continuous glucose monitoring to others (83%). Twenty-four patients (36%) had continuous glucose monitoring removed earlier than planned ( before the intended 6 days of initial monitoring). Ten women (15%) did not wish to use continuous glucose monitoring again in pregnancy. Main causes behind early removal of continuous glucose monitoring were self-reported skin irritation, technical problems and continuous glucose monitoring inaccuracy. No differences were found in continuous glucose monitoring use, inconvenience or compliance with respect to diabetes type.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of pregnant women with diabetes found real-time continuous glucose monitoring useful and the intervention was equally tolerated regardless of diabetes type. Nevertheless, continuous glucose monitoring was frequently removed earlier than planned, primarily because of skin irritation, technical problems and inaccuracy.

Health-related quality of life and treatment satisfaction in the Sensor-Augmented Pump Therapy for A1C Reduction 3 (STAR 3) trial

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and treatment satisfaction in sensor-augmented pump therapy (SAPT) compared with optimal conventional therapy-multiple daily injection (MDI) therapy with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG)-in adults and children with type 1 diabetes and children's caregivers. Patient acceptance of new therapies is essential to their adoption and effective use.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

STAR 3, a randomized 12-month clinical trial, compared SAPT with MDI+SMBG in 485 adult and pediatric patients. Within- and between-treatment arm changes in generic HRQOL, diabetes-specific HRQOL (fear of hypoglycemia), and treatment satisfaction were assessed (significance criterion P<0.01).

RESULTS

In adults, children, and caregivers, there were no significant between-arm changes in generic HRQOL: SF-36 Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary scores in adults and the PedsQL Physical Health Summary and Psychosocial Health Summary scores in children or caregivers. Diabetes-specific HRQOL (Hypoglycemia Fear Survey Worry and Behavior subscale scores) improved more in SAPT than in MDI adults. Hypoglycemia Behavior scores improved more in SAPT caregivers. Key treatment satisfaction measures (Insulin Delivery System Rating Questionnaire measures of Convenience, Efficacy, and Overall Preference) improved more in SAPT adults, children, and caregivers (all P<0.001); all exceeded the criterion for minimal detectable difference.

CONCLUSIONS

In the first-ever large-scale study of SAPT compared with optimal conventional therapy, SAPT had significant advantages for hypoglycemia fear in adults and caregivers and for treatment satisfaction in adults, children, and caregivers.

Continuous glucose monitoring systems for type 1 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Self-monitoring of blood glucose is essential to optimise glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes mellitus. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems measure interstitial fluid glucose levels to provide semi-continuous information about glucose levels, which identifies fluctuations that would not have been identified with conventional self-monitoring. Two types of CGM systems can be defined: retrospective systems and real-time systems. Real-time systems continuously provide the actual glucose concentration on a display. Currently, the use of CGM is not common practice and its reimbursement status is a point of debate in many countries.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of CGM systems compared to conventional self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in patients with diabetes mellitus type 1.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL for the identification of studies. Last search date was June 8, 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing retrospective or real-time CGM with conventional self-monitoring of blood glucose levels or with another type of CGM system in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Primary outcomes were glycaemic control, e.g. level of glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes were adverse events and complications, CGM derived glycaemic control, death and costs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected the studies, assessed the risk of bias and performed data-extraction. Although there was clinical and methodological heterogeneity between studies an exploratory meta-analysis was performed on those outcomes the authors felt could be pooled without losing clinical merit.

MAIN RESULTS

The search identified 1366 references. Twenty-two RCTs meeting the inclusion criteria of this review were identified. The results of the meta-analyses (across all age groups) indicate benefit of CGM for patients starting on CGM sensor augmented insulin pump therapy compared to patients using multiple daily injections of insulin (MDI) and standard monitoring blood glucose (SMBG). After six months there was a significant larger decline in HbA1c level for real-time CGM users starting insulin pump therapy compared to patients using MDI and SMBG (mean difference (MD) in change in HbA1c level -0.7%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.8% to -0.5%, 2 RCTs, 562 patients, I(2)=84%). The risk of hypoglycaemia was increased for CGM users, but CIs were wide and included unity (4/43 versus 1/35; RR 3.26, 95% CI 0.38 to 27.82 and 21/247 versus 17/248; RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.29). One study reported the occurrence of ketoacidosis from baseline to six months; there was however only one event. Both RCTs were in patients with poorly controlled diabetes.For patients starting with CGM only, the average decline in HbA1c level six months after baseline was also statistically significantly larger for CGM users compared to SMBG users, but much smaller than for patients starting using an insulin pump and CGM at the same time (MD change in HbA1c level -0.2%, 95% CI -0.4% to -0.1%, 6 RCTs, 963 patients, I(2)=55%). On average, there was no significant difference in risk of severe hypoglycaemia or ketoacidosis between CGM and SMBG users. The confidence interval however, was wide and included a decreased as well as an increased risk for CGM users compared to the control group (severe hypoglycaemia: 36/411 versus 33/407; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.62, 4 RCTs, I(2)=0% and ketoacidosis: 8/411 versus 8/407; RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.36 to 2.40, 4 RCTs, I(2)=0%).Health-related quality of life was reported in five of the 22 studies. In none of these studies a significant difference between CGM and SMBG was found. Diabetes complications, death and costs were not measured.There were no studies in pregnant women with diabetes type 1 and in patients with hypoglycaemia unawareness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence for the effectiveness of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) use in children, adults and patients with poorly controlled diabetes. The largest improvements in glycaemic control were seen for sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy in patients with poorly controlled diabetes who had not used an insulin pump before. The risk of severe hypoglycaemia or ketoacidosis was not significantly increased for CGM users, but as these events occurred infrequent these results have to be interpreted cautiously.There are indications that higher compliance of wearing the CGM device improves glycosylated haemoglobin A1c level (HbA1c) to a larger extent. 

Continuous glucose monitoring: coming of age?

In a recent issue of the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, an Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline on Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) was published, co-sponsored by the European Society of Endocrinology. Such a guideline is a necessary step in the maturation of any new technology. This commentary tries to delineate where we stand some 10 years after the first retrospective CGM device entered the market from a European perspective.

Closed-loop glucose control: psychological and behavioral considerations

Since 2000, the diabetes community has witnessed tremendous technological advances that have revolutionized diabetes management. Currently, closed-loop glucose control (CLC) systems, which link continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and continuous glucose monitoring, are the newest, cutting edge technology aimed at reducing glycemic variability and improving daily management of diabetes. Although advances in knowledge and technology in the treatment of diabetes have improved exponentially, adherence to diabetes regimens remains complex and often difficult to predict. Human factors, such as patient perceptions and behavioral self-regulation, are central to adherence to prescribed regimens, as well as to adoption and utilization of diabetes technology, and they will continue to be crucial as diabetes management evolves. Thus, the aims of this article are three-fold: (1) to review psychological and behavioral factors that have influenced adoption and utilization of past technologies, (2) to examine three theoretical frameworks that may help in conceptualizing relevant patient factors in diabetes management, and (3) to propose patient-selection factors that will likely affect future CLC systems.

Use of integrated real-time continuous glucose monitoring/insulin pump system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: a 3-year follow-up study

BACKGROUND

Insulin pumps and real-time continuous glucose monitoring devices have recently been combined into the sensor-augmented pump (SAP) system. The objective of this study was the evaluation of the clinical use of SAP in a large series of children with type 1 diabetes using insulin pump therapy.

METHODS

A questionnaire was administered in all pediatric diabetologic centers in Italy; data were analyzed only regarding patients 18 years old or younger and using SAP for 6 months or more.

RESULTS

Among all patients using an insulin pump, 129 (13.5 ± 3.8 years old, with a disease duration of 6.3 ± 3.4 years) have been using SAP for 1.4 ± 0.7 years. Four hundred ninety-three patients (12.9 ± 3.4 years old, with a disease duration of 6.2 ± 3.3 years) using conventional insulin pump therapy for 1.7 ± 0.5 years have been evaluated as the control group. After 0.5-3 years of using SAP or conventional insulin pump therapy, glycosylated hemoglobin significantly improved (8.0 ± 1.5% vs. 7.4 ± 0.8% [P = 0.002] and 8.0 ± 1.6% vs. 7.7 ± 1.1% [P = 0.006], respectively); the improvement was higher with SAP (P = 0.005). Insulin requirement showed a significant decrease only in SAP patients (0.88 ± 0.25 vs. 0.7 ± 0.23 U/kg/day, P = 0.003). Body mass index did not change during the observation period. No diabetic ketoacidosis episodes were observed during the follow-up, and severe hypoglycemia significantly decreased in SAP patients (P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

The increased availability of continuous glucose sensors is likely to have a significant impact on pediatric diabetes therapy and education in the near future. In daily settings, patients using SAP can achieve a better control than patients using conventional insulin pump.

Crossing the technology divide: practical strategies for transitioning patients from multiple daily insulin injections to sensor-augmented pump therapy

PURPOSE

To describe the benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) systems compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) and multiple daily injection (MDI) therapy; to assess the benefits of sensor-augmented pump therapy (SAPT) in patients with type 1 diabetes; and to present an evidence-based practical protocol for introducing SAPT in patients with no prior pump or CGM experience.

CONCLUSION

Continuous glucose monitoring and CSII have advantages over SMBG and MDI, respectively, in terms of A1C and hypoglycemia reduction. The Sensor-Augmented Pump Therapy for A1C Reduction (STAR) 3 trial demonstrated that initiating both CGM and CSII in selected adult and pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes unable to meet glycemic goals with intensive insulin injection therapy significantly improved glucose control. In all subjects using SAPT, A1C levels fell rapidly from baseline to 3 months and remained significantly lower than among subjects in the SMBG+MDI group for 1 year. A distinguishing feature of the STAR 3 study was its stepwise protocol for systematizing education and self-management support using Web-based training modules and therapy management software. The demonstrated strengths of this education protocol recommend it as a model for implementing SAPT in the broader population of patients with type 1 diabetes who have not achieved their glycemic goals with optimized MDI therapy.

Validation of measures of satisfaction with and impact of continuous and conventional glucose monitoring

BACKGROUND

The evaluation of patient-reported outcomes (e.g. impact, satisfaction) is important in trials of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). We evaluated psychometric properties of the CGM Satisfaction Scale (CGM-SAT) and the Glucose Monitoring Survey (GMS).

METHODS

CGM-SAT is a 44-item scale on which patients (n=224) or parents (n=102) rated their experience with CGM over the prior 6 months. GMS is a 22-item scale on which patients (n=447) or parents (n=221) rated the blood glucose monitoring system they were using (home glucose meter with or without CGM) at baseline and 6 months.

RESULTS

The alpha coefficient for the CGM-SAT was > or = 0.94 for all respondents and for the GMS was > or = 0.84 for all respondents at baseline and 6 months. Parent-youth agreement was 0.52 for the CGM-SAT at 6 months and 0.24 and 0.20 for the GMS at baseline and 6 months for the Standard Care Group, respectively. Test-retest reliability of the GMS at 6 months for controls was r=0.76 for adult patients, 0.63 for pediatric patients, and 0.43 for parents. Factor analysis isolated measurement factors for the CGM-SAT labeled Benefits of CGM and Hassles of CGM, accounting for 33% and 9% of score variance, respectively. For the GMS, two factors emerged: Glucose Control and Social Complications, accounting for 28% and 9% of variance, respectively. Significant correlations of CGM-SAT with frequency of CGM use between 6 months and baseline and GMS with frequency of conventional daily self-monitoring of blood glucose at baseline support their convergent validity.

CONCLUSIONS

The CGM-SAT and GMS are reliable and valid measures of patient-reported CGM outcomes.

Psychosocial factors associated with use of continuous glucose monitoring

AIMS

To identify psychosocial factors associated with the use of continuous glucose monitoring by adults with Type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Twenty adult patients (aged 45 +/- 15 years, diabetes duration 25 +/- 19 years, 50% female) followed at our site in the multi-centre Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation continuous glucose monitoring trial were divided into three groups: Glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) Responders who demonstrated an improvement in glycaemic control with continuous glucose monitoring (baseline HbA(1c)> or = 7.0%, HbA(1c) reduction greater than or equal to 0.5%), Hypoglycaemia Responders (baseline HbA(1c) < 7.0%) who demonstrated decreased time < 3.9 mmol/l while remaining within target HbA(1c), and HbA(1c) Non-Responders (baseline HbA(1c)> or = 7.0%, HbA(1c) reduction less than 0.5%). Subjects participated in semi-structured interviews focusing on their psychosocial experiences with continuous glucose monitoring.

RESULTS

Three major themes were identified that differentiated Responders (including both the HbA(1c) and Hypoglycaemia groups) from Non-Responders: (i) coping with frustrations-Responders used self-controlled rather than emotions-based coping when faced with continuous glucose monitoring frustrations; (ii) use of information-Responders used retrospective pattern analysis, not just minute-by-minute data analysis, in glycaemic management; (iii) 'significant other'/spousal involvement-Responders endorsed interest, encouragement and participation by their loved ones. Both Responders and Non-Responders expressed body image concerns when wearing continuous glucose monitoring devices.

CONCLUSIONS

This qualitative study points to the importance of coping skills, retrospective review of data, and 'significant other' involvement in the effective use of continuous glucose monitoring. These findings will inform clinical initiatives to improve patient selection and training in the use of this new technology and have served as the basis for development of quantitative surveys to be used in clinical practice.

Pascal's wager: combining continuous glucose monitoring and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion

Pascal's Wager is a suggestion posed by the French Philosopher, Blaise Pascal, that even though the existence of God cannot be determined through reason, a person should wager that God exists because he or she has everything to gain and nothing to lose. In the area of consideration here, the optimum experimental trial of the combined use of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and real-time continuous glucose monitoring in free-living individuals with type 1 diabetes providing rock-solid evidence of clinical benefit has not been performed. Nevertheless, there is considerable enthusiasm for combining the technologies among healthcare professionals, patients, and manufacturers based on the belief that this approach to diabetes care must be beneficial beyond the available evidence (i.e., reason).

Effect of technosphere inhaled insulin on quality of life and treatment satisfaction

AIMS

This randomized controlled trial assessed the impact of Technosphere insulin (MannKind Corp., Valencia, CA) delivered via the MedTone inhaler (MannKind Corp.) on quality of life and treatment satisfaction in adults with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Subjects were 119 insulin-naive subjects with starting hemoglobin A1c >6.5%: 58 in the active inhaled insulin arm and 61 in the inhaled placebo arm (67% male; mean age 55 years; mean duration of diagnosed diabetes 7 years). Subjects completed a measure of health-related quality of life (the SF-36) and a measure of treatment satisfaction (the Insulin Treatment Questionnaire [ITQ]) before starting insulin treatment and approximately 12 weeks later. The ITQ assesses Diabetes Worries, Perceptions of Insulin Therapy, and Inhaler Performance.

RESULTS

There was no significant change in any SF-36 factor or Diabetes Worries during the trial in either arm, and there were no significant between-arm differences in change on any of these measures. Perceptions of Insulin Therapy improved significantly during the trial in the active medication arm (effect size for composite measure = 0.56, P = 0.002) but not in the placebo arm; there were no significant between-arm differences in change. The majority of subjects gave positive ratings of Inhaler Performance on all items (median = 93% positive ratings).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study treatment with inhaled Technosphere insulin was well tolerated, clinically efficacious, and associated with positive patient-reported outcomes, including improved attitudes toward insulin therapy and high treatment satisfaction. This treatment strategy was implemented without a negative impact on health-related quality of life or worries about diabetes.

Treatment satisfaction and quality of life for an integrated continuous glucose monitoring/insulin pump system compared to self-monitoring plus an insulin pump

BACKGROUND

Little is known about how the most advanced technology affects treatment satisfaction and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in adults with diabetes. This study was designed to assess treatment satisfaction and HRQOL among users of an integrated real-time (RT) continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)/continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) system compared with those using self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) with CSII.

METHODS

Participants were 311 adult respondents to an Internet survey, 162 using RT-CGM/CSII, 149 using SMBG + CSII (median age 43 years; type 1 diabetes 94%; diabetes duration >15 years 61%; median insulin use 15 years). Respondents completed instruments assessing glucose monitoring system and insulin delivery system convenience, interference, burden, glucose control efficacy, cost satisfaction, overall satisfaction, and treatment preference, as well as quality of life (diabetes-related worries, social burden, and psychological well-being). Real-time CGM/CSII users also assessed specific elements of the RT-CGM/CSII system. Group differences were assessed using analysis of covariance controlling for respondent characteristics.

RESULTS

The RT-CGM/CSII group gave significantly better ratings than the SMBG + CSII group for their glucose monitoring system's glucose control efficacy, overall satisfaction, desire to switch, and willingness to recommend, and significantly worse ratings for interference with daily activities. The RT-CGM/CSII group gave significantly better ratings than the SMBG + CSII group for their insulin delivery system's convenience and glucose control efficacy, overall satisfaction, desire to switch, and willingness to recommend. Real-time CGM/CSII users gave positive ratings of all system features.

CONCLUSIONS

Users of the integrated RT-CGM/CSII system reported more benefits of treatment, higher treatment satisfaction and quality of life, and greater preference for this system than SMBG + CSII users.

Glycaemic impact of patient-led use of sensor-guided pump therapy in type 1 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of patient-led sensor-guided pump management on glycaemic control, and compare the effect with that of standard insulin pump therapy.

METHODS

An open multicentre parallel randomised controlled trial was conducted at five tertiary diabetes centres. Participants aged 13.0-40.0 years with well-controlled type 1 diabetes were randomised 1:1 to either study group for 3 months. Randomisation was carried out using a central computer-generated schedule. Participants in the intervention group used sensor-guided pump management; no instructive guidelines in interpreting real-time data were provided ('patient-led' use). Participants in the control group continued their original insulin pump regimen. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and HbA(1c) level were used to assess outcomes. The primary outcome was the difference in the proportion of time in the target glycaemic range during the 3 month study period (derived from CGM, target range 4-10 mmol/l). Secondary outcomes were difference in HbA(1c), time in hypoglycaemic (< or =3.9 mmol/l) and hyperglycaemic (> or =10.1 mmol/l) ranges and glycaemic variability.

RESULTS

Sixty-two participants were recruited and randomised; 5/31 and 2/31 withdrew from intervention and control groups, respectively, leaving 26/31 and 29/31 for the intention-to-treat analyses. When adjusted for baseline values, the mean end-of-study HbA(1c) was 0.43% lower in the intervention group compared with the control group (95% CI 0.19 to 0.75%; p = 0.009). No difference was observed in CGM-derived time in target (measured difference 1.72; 95% CI -5.37 to 8.81), hypoglycaemic (0.54; 95% CI -3.48 to 4.55) or hyperglycaemic (-2.18; 95% CI -10.0 to 5.69) range or in glycaemic variability (-0.29; 95% CI -0.34 to 0.28). Within the intervention group, HbA(1c) was 0.51% lower in participants with sensor use > or =70% compared with participants with sensor use <70% (95% CI -0.98 to -0.04, p = 0.04). Five episodes of device malfunction occurred.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Individuals established on insulin pump therapy can employ sensor-guided pump management to improve glycaemic control. An apparent dose-dependent effect of sensor usage was noted; however, frequent use of this technology (> or =70%) was not universally acceptable.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12606000049572

The integrated MiniMed Paradigm REAL-Time insulin pump and glucose monitoring system: implications for improved patient outcomes

The MiniMed Paradigm REAL-Time system (Medtronic Diabetes, Northridge, CA) was launched in 2006 and integrates real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with an insulin delivery device. The perceived advantages of such a system include the ability for patients to view and be alerted of glucose information in real-time and affords them a method to adjust insulin delivery in response to these data. Moreover, glucose, insulin, and meal information stored in the system can be uploaded by the patient to a computer using the web-based CareLink Personal Therapy Management software, or similarly by their Health Care Professional (HCP) using CareLink Pro software. The Paradigm REAL-Time system offers two distinct capabilities over conventional multiple daily injection therapy with self-monitoring of blood glucose, mainly the abilities to observe and react to glucose changes in a timely and appropriate manner using the Bolus Wizard calculator feature of the pump and to retrospectively review integrated glucose sensing and insulin delivery data. Retrospective review of uploaded data allows patients and HCPs the opportunity to modify insulin therapy and to potentially improve glycemic control without the use of a traditional glucose diary. When using CGM, the review of CareLink data can highlight interactions among meals, insulin delivery, and resulting glucose levels and supports an overall assessment of glycemic control as well as aid in the adjustment of insulin therapy regimens. Although the Paradigm REAL-Time system does not automatically adjust insulin delivery based on sensor glucose data in its current embodiment, this integrated system forms the basic platform for future generations of products in which the sensor will modify insulin dosing in semi- and ultimately fully closed-loop modalities.