"It Is Definitely a Game Changer": A Qualitative Study of Experiences with In-home Overnight Closed-Loop Technology Among Adults with Type 1 Diabetes

Safety of User-Initiated Intensification of Insulin Delivery Using Cambridge Hybrid Closed-Loop Algorithm

OBJECTIVE

Many hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems struggle to manage unusually high glucose levels as experienced with intercurrent illness or pre-menstrually. Manual correction boluses may be needed, increasing hypoglycemia risk with overcorrection. The Cambridge HCL system includes a user-initiated algorithm intensification mode ("Boost"), activation of which increases automated insulin delivery by approximately 35%, while remaining glucose-responsive. In this analysis, we assessed the safety of "Boost" mode.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from closed-loop studies involving young children (1-7 years, n = 24), children and adolescents (10-17 years, n = 19), adults (≥24 years, n = 13), and older adults (≥60 years, n = 20) with type 1 diabetes. Outcomes were calculated per participant for days with ≥30 minutes of "Boost" use versus days with no "Boost" use. Participants with <10 "Boost" days were excluded. The main outcome was time spent in hypoglycemia <70 and <54 mg/dL.

RESULTS

Eight weeks of data for 76 participants were analyzed. There was no difference in time spent <70 and <54 mg/dL between "Boost" days and "non-Boost" days; mean difference: -0.10% (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.28 to 0.07; P = .249) time <70 mg/dL, and 0.03 (-0.04 to 0.09; P = .416) time < 54 mg/dL. Time in significant hyperglycemia >300 mg/dL was 1.39 percentage points (1.01 to 1.77; P < .001) higher on "Boost" days, with higher mean glucose and lower time in target range (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of an algorithm intensification mode in HCL therapy is safe across all age groups with type 1 diabetes. The higher time in hyperglycemia observed on "Boost" days suggests that users are more likely to use algorithm intensification on days with extreme hyperglycemic excursions.

Improved Satisfaction While Maintaining Safety and High Time in Range (TIR) With a Medtronic Investigational Enhanced Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop (e-AHCL) System

OBJECTIVE

To determine feasibility and compare acceptance of an investigational Medtronic enhanced advanced hybrid closed-loop (e-AHCL) system in adults with type 1 diabetes with earlier iterations.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This nonrandomized three-stage (12 weeks each) exploratory study compared e-AHCL (Bluetooth-enabled MiniMed 780G insulin pump with automatic data upload [780G] incorporating an updated algorithm; calibration-free all-in-one disposable sensor; 7-day infusion set) preceded by a run-in (non-Bluetooth 780G [670G V4.0 insulin pump] requiring manual data upload; Guardian Sensor 3 [GS3] requiring calibration; 3-day infusion set), stage 1 (780G; GS3; 3-day infusion set), and stage 2 (780G; calibration-free Guardian Sensor 4; 3-day infusion set). Treatment satisfaction was assessed by Diabetes Technology Questionnaire (DTQ)-current (primary outcome) and other validated treatment satisfaction tools with glucose outcomes by continuous glucose monitoring metrics.

RESULTS

Twenty-one of 22 (11 women) participants (baseline HbA1c 6.7%/50 mmol/mol) completed the study. DTQ-current scores favored e-AHCL (123.1 [17.8]) versus run-in (101.6 [24.2]) and versus stage 1 (110.6 [20.8]) (both P < 0.001) but did not differ from stage 2 (119.4 [16.0]; P = 0.271). Diabetes Medication System Rating Questionnaire short-form scores for "Convenience and Efficacy" favored e-AHCL over run-in and all stages. Percent time in range 70-180 mg/dL was greater with e-AHCL versus run-in and stage 2 (+2.9% and +3.6%, respectively; both P < 0.001). Percent times of <70 mg/dL for e-AHCL were significantly lower than run-in, stage 1, and stage 2 (-0.9%, -0.6%, and -0.5%, respectively; all P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

e-AHCL was feasible. User satisfaction increased compared with earlier Medtronic HCL iterations without compromising glucose control.

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.

Patient experiences of continuous glucose monitoring and sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy for diabetes: A systematic review of qualitative studies

AIMS

Blood glucose control is central to the management of diabetes, and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) improves glycemic control. We aimed to describe the perspectives of people with diabetes using CGM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review of qualitative studies.

RESULTS

Fifty-four studies involving 1845 participants were included. Six themes were identified: gaining control and convenience (reducing pain and time, safeguarding against complications, achieving stricter glucose levels, and sharing responsibility with family); motivating self-management (fostering ownership, and increasing awareness of glycemic control); providing reassurance and freedom (attaining peace of mind, and restoring social participation); developing confidence (encouraged by the endorsement of others, gaining operational skills, customizing settings for ease of use, and trust in the device); burdened with device complexities (bewildered by unfamiliar technology, reluctant to rely on algorithms, overwhelmed by data, frustrated with malfunctioning and inaccuracy, distressed by alerts, and bulkiness of machines interfering with lifestyle); and excluded by barriers to access (constrained by cost, lack of suppliers).

CONCLUSIONS

CGM can improve self-management and confidence in patients managing diabetes. However, the technical issues, uncertainty in readings, and cost may limit the uptake. Education and training from the health professionals may help to reduce the practical and psychological burden for better patient outcomes.

Participant Experiences of Low-Dose Empagliflozin Use as Adjunct Therapy to Hybrid Closed Loop: Findings From a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Very few patient-reported outcomes have been published in regard to opinions of individuals with type 1 diabetes concerning adjunctive therapy. The aim of this subanalysis was to qualitatively and quantitatively assess the thoughts and experiences of participants with type 1 diabetes who have used low doses of empagliflozin as an adjunct to hybrid closed-loop therapy.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were performed with adult participants who completed a double-blinded, crossover, randomized controlled trial using low-dose empagliflozin as an adjunct to hybrid closed-loop therapy. Participant experiences were captured through qualitative and quantitative methods. A descriptive analysis was performed using a qualitative approach; attitudes toward relevant topics were extracted from interview transcripts.

RESULTS

Twenty-four participants were interviewed; 15 (63%) perceived differences between interventions despite blinding, due to glycemic control or side effects. Advantages that arose were better glycemic control, in particular postprandially, requiring less insulin, and ease of use. Disadvantages were thought to be adverse effects, increased incidence of hypoglycemia, and increased pill burden. Thirteen (54%) participants were interested in using low-dose empagliflozin beyond the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Many participants had positive experiences with low-dose empagliflozin as an adjunct to the hybrid closed-loop therapy. A dedicated study with unblinding would be beneficial to better characterize patient-reported outcomes.

"Empowering Us": A Community-Led Survey of Real-World Perspectives of Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Pumps and Continuous Glucose Monitoring to Manage Their Glucose Levels

OBJECTIVE

To conduct an Australian community-led survey of adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D), identifying priorities for, and barriers to, optimal use of advanced glucose management technologies.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A 30-question online survey of current or past users of insulin pump therapy (IPT), real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM), or intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM) explored perceptions regarding device design, access, education, outcomes, and support.

RESULTS

Between November 2021 and January 2022, surveys were completed by 3,380 participants (age [mean±SD] 45±16 years; 62% female; 20±14 years diabetes), with 55%, 82%, and 55% reporting experience with IPT, RT-CGM, and isCGM, respectively. Overall, most considered diabetes technology '(extremely) important' for maintaining target glucose levels (98%) and reducing hypoglycaemia severity and frequency (93%). For most, technology contributed positively to emotional well-being (IPT 89%; RT-CGM 91%; isCGM 87%), which was associated with device effectiveness in maintaining glucose in range, comfort, and convenience. Barriers included affordability (IPT 68%; RT-CGM 81%; isCGM 69%) and insufficient information for informed choices about device suitability (IPT 39%; RT-CGM 41%; isCGM 36%).

CONCLUSIONS

Technology is perceived by adults with T1D as important for managing glycaemia and emotional well-being. Modifiable barriers to use include affordability, and information regarding device suitability.

Impact of glycaemic technologies on quality of life and related outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes: A narrative review

AIMS

To explore the association between the use of glycaemic technologies and person-reported outcomes (PROs) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

METHODS

We included T1D and technology publications reporting on PROs since 2014. Only randomised controlled trials and cohort studies that used validated PRO measures (PROMs) were considered.

RESULTS

T1D studies reported on a broad range of validated PROMs, mainly as secondary outcome measures. Most studies examined continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM), and the role of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), including sensor-augmented CSII and closed loop systems. Generally, studies demonstrated a positive impact of technology on hypoglycaemia-specific and diabetes-specific PROs, including reduced fear of hypoglycaemia and diabetes distress, and greater satisfaction with diabetes treatment. In contrast, generic PROMs (including measures of health/functional status, emotional well-being, depressive symptoms, and sleep quality) were less likely to demonstrate improvements associated with the use of glycaemic technologies. Several studies showed contradictory findings, which may relate to study design, population and length of follow-up. Differences in PRO findings were apparent between randomised controlled trials and cohort studies, which may be due to different populations studied and/or disparity between trial and real-world conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

PROs are usually assessed as secondary outcomes in glycaemic technology studies. Hypoglycaemia-specific and diabetes-specific, but not generic, PROs show the benefits of glycaemic technologies, and deserve a more central role in future studies as well as routine clinical care.

Qualitative Study of User Experiences with Loop, an Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery System

Background: Loop is an open-source automated insulin delivery (AID) system, used by more than 9,000 people with type 1 diabetes. Understanding the pros and cons of Loop use may help improve disease management and support population level innovation. Methods: Focus groups revealed 72 new and existing users' perspectives on Loop uptake, use, and persistence. A subsample of participants from a mixed-methods, observational cohort study shared first-hand accounts of their experiences using Loop. Participants were predominately white (95%), male (50%), privately insured (94%), and reported annual household income ≥$100K (73%) and education exceeding a bachelor's degree (87%) with a mean HbA1c of 6.6% ± 0.8%. Data were analyzed and synthesized by a multidisciplinary team. Results: Participants detailed their experiences with (1) Loop technical support and troubleshooting, (2) decreased mental/behavioral burden, (3) technical issues with parts of the system, (4) glycemic control, (5) personalizing settings, and (6) providers while using Loop. Decreased burden was the most endorsed benefit defined by less worry, stress, and cognitive effort and less time spent on diabetes management tasks. Participants highlighted the benefits of Loop overnight and their introduction to "Loop communities" during use. The most discussed challenges involved technical issues. A range of provider attitudes and knowledge about Loop complicated users' clinical experiences and disclosure. Conclusions: This sample of new and experienced Loop users reported benefits to quality of life and glycemic control that outweighed challenges of setting up system components, customizing the system to suit one's lifestyle and habits, and adjusting system settings. Challenges related to system setup and calibrating settings are remediable and, if addressed, may better serve Loop users. Users reported feeling empowered by the customizability of and the educational effects facilitated by the open-source AID system. Loop helped users learn more about their chronic illness and physiology in an acceptable format. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT03838900.

Parents' experiences of using a hybrid closed-loop system (CamAPS FX) to care for a very young child with type 1 diabetes: Qualitative study

AIMS

To explore parents' experiences of using a hybrid closed-loop system (CamAPS FX) when caring for a very young child (aged 1-7 years) with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Interviews with n = 33 parents of 30 children who used the system during a randomised controlled trial. Data analysis used a descriptive thematic approach.

RESULTS

While some parents were initially reticent about handing control to the system, all reported clinical benefits to using the technology, having to do less diabetes-related work and needing less clinical input over time. Parents welcomed opportunities to enhance the system's efficacy (using Ease-off and Boost functions) as required. Parents described how the system's automated glucose control facilitated more normality, including sleeping better, worrying less about their child, and feeling more confident and able to outsource care. Parents also described more normality for the child (alongside better sleep, mood and concentration, and lessened distress) and siblings. Parents liked being able to administer insulin using a smartphone, but suggested refinements to device size and functionality.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a hybrid closed-loop system in very young children can facilitate greater normality and may result in a lessened demand for health professionals' input. Systems may need to be customised for very young children.

Emotional and Physical Health Impact in Children and Adolescents and their Caregivers Using Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery: Qualitative Analysis of Lived Experiences. (Preprint)

Background

Given the limitations in the access and license status of commercially developed automated insulin delivery (AID) systems, open-source AID systems are becoming increasingly popular among people with diabetes, including children and adolescents.

Objective

This study aimed to investigate the lived experiences and physical and emotional health implications of children and their caregivers following the initiation of open-source AID, their perceived challenges, and sources of support, which have not been explored in the existing literature.

Methods

Data were collected through 2 sets of open-ended questions from a web-based multinational survey of 60 families from 16 countries. The narratives were thematically analyzed, and a coding framework was identified through iterative alignment.

Results

A range of emotions and improvements in quality of life and physical health were reported, as open-source AID enabled families to shift their focus away from diabetes therapy. Caregivers were less worried about hypoglycemia at night and outside their family homes, leading to increased autonomy for the child. Simultaneously, the glycemic outcomes and sleep quality of both the children and caregivers improved. Nonetheless, the acquisition of suitable hardware and technical setup could be challenging. The #WeAreNotWaiting community was the primary source of practical and emotional support.

Conclusions

Our findings show the benefits and transformative impact of open-source AID and peer support on children with diabetes and their caregivers and families, where commercial AID systems are not available or suitable. Further efforts are required to improve the effectiveness and usability and facilitate access for children with diabetes, worldwide, to benefit from this innovative treatment.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/15368

Open-source automated insulin delivery: international consensus statement and practical guidance for health-care professionals

Open-source automated insulin delivery systems, commonly referred to as do-it-yourself automated insulin delivery systems, are examples of user-driven innovations that were co-created and supported by an online community who were directly affected by diabetes. Their uptake continues to increase globally, with current estimates suggesting several thousand active users worldwide. Real-world user-driven evidence is growing and provides insights into safety and effectiveness of these systems. The aim of this consensus statement is two-fold. Firstly, it provides a review of the current evidence, description of the technologies, and discusses the ethics and legal considerations for these systems from an international perspective. Secondly, it provides a much-needed international health-care consensus supporting the implementation of open-source systems in clinical settings, with detailed clinical guidance. This consensus also provides important recommendations for key stakeholders that are involved in diabetes technologies, including developers, regulators, and industry, and provides medico-legal and ethical support for patient-driven, open-source innovations.

Amelioration of user experiences and glycaemic outcomes with an Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop System in a real-world clinical setting

AIMS

Automation in diabetes technology is rapidly evolving. The aim was to evaluate the real-world glycemic outcomes and user acceptance after 3 months of using the Medtronic 780G Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop (AHCL) system.

METHODS

A prospective analysis was performed. A glucose target of 100 mg/dl and an active insulin time of 2 h were set. Capillary HbA1c, 2-week of pump and sensor data and several satisfaction questionnaire scores were compared at baseline and after 3 months of using the AHCL system.

RESULTS

52 subjects were selected (age: 43 ± 12 years, sex: 73% female, diabetes duration: 27 ± 11 years, higher education: 31%). Time in range (TIR) 70-180 mg/dl increased from 67.3 ± 13.6% to 80.1 ± 7.5% and time >180 mg/dl and >250 mg/dl were reduced (16.8 ± 8.4 vs 29.4 ± 15.1%, 2.7 ± 3.0% vs 6.9 ± 7.8%, respectively) (all p < 0.001), while time in hypoglycaemia remained below recommended targets. Time in Auto-Mode and sensor use were 94 ± 10% and 90 ± 11%, respectively. Auto-correction boluses represented 29 ± 12% of bolus insulin. Fear of hypoglycaemia, diabetes quality of life, sleep quality and satisfaction with the monitoring system improved after 3 months.

CONCLUSION

The real-world use of the AHCL system Medtronic 780G provides an 80.1% TIR 70-180 mg/dl with minimal hypoglycaemia and an increased level of patient satisfaction.

Parents' experiences of caring for a young child with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and synthesis of qualitative evidence

AIMS

To synthesise the qualitative evidence on parents' experiences of caring for a child aged ≤8 years with type 1 diabetes to identify: the challenges they encounter; their views about support received; ways in which support could be improved; and, directions for future research.

METHODS

We searched Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases to identify qualitative studies reporting parents' views and experiences of caring for a child with type 1 diabetes aged ≤8 years. Key analytical themes were identified using thematic synthesis.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included. The synthesis resulted in the generation of two overarching themes. Monopolisation of life describes the all-encompassing impact diabetes could have on parents due to the constant worry they experienced and the perceived need for vigilance. It describes how parents' caring responsibilities could affect their wellbeing, relationships and finances, and how a lack of trusted sources of childcare and a desire to enable a 'normal' childhood constrained personal choices and activities. However, use of diabetes technologies could lessen some of these burdens. Experiences of professional and informal support describes how encounters with healthcare professionals, while generally perceived as helpful, could lead to frustration and anxiety, and how connecting with other parents caring for a child with type 1 diabetes provided valued emotional and practical support.

CONCLUSIONS

This synthesis outlines the challenges parents encounter, their views about support received and ways in which support might be improved. It also highlights significant limitations in the current literature and points to important areas for future research, including how sociodemographic factors and use of newer diabetes technologies influence parents' diabetes management practices and experiences. PROSPERO: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42019128710.

Real-World Patient Experience of Long-Term Hybrid Closed-Loop Insulin Pump Use

OBJECTIVES

Understanding of patient experiences and adaptations to hybrid closed-loop (HCL) pumps beyond the confines of short-term clinical trials is needed to inform best practices surrounding this emerging technology. We investigated long-term, real-world patient experiences with HCL technology.

METHODS

In semistructured interviews, 21 adults with type 1 diabetes at a single Canadian tertiary diabetes centre discussed their transition to use of Medtronic MiniMed 670G auto-mode. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed iteratively to identify emerging themes.

RESULTS

Participants' mean age was 50±13 years, 12 of the 21 participants were female, baseline glycated hemoglobin (A1C) was 7.9±1.0% and auto-mode duration was 9.3±4.6 months. Three had discontinued auto-mode. Most participants praised auto-mode for reducing hypoglycemia, stabilizing glucose overnight and improving A1C, while also reporting frustration with frequency of alarms and user input, sensor quality and inadequate response to hyperglycemia. Participants with the highest baseline A1Cs (8.8% to 9.8%) tended to report immense satisfaction and trust in auto-mode, meeting their primary expectations of improved glycemic control. In contrast, participants with controlled diabetes (A1C <7.5%) had hoped to offload active management, but experienced significant cognitive and emotional labour associated with relinquishing control during suboptimal auto-mode performance. Participants were commonly aware of workarounds to "trick" the pump, and almost all participants with A1C <7.5% tried at least 1 workaround.

CONCLUSIONS

In the real-world setting, patients' goals and satisfaction with auto-mode appeared to vary considerably with their baseline diabetes control. Patients with the most suboptimal glycemic control described the greatest benefits and easiest adaptation process, challenging commonly held assumptions for patient selection for pump therapy.

Six Months of Hybrid Closed-Loop Versus Manual Insulin Delivery With Fingerprick Blood Glucose Monitoring in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized, Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate glycemic and psychosocial outcomes with hybrid closed-loop (HCL) versus user-determined insulin dosing with multiple daily injections (MDI) or insulin pump (i.e., standard therapy for most adults with type 1 diabetes).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Adults with type 1 diabetes using MDI or insulin pump without continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) were randomized to 26 weeks of HCL (Medtronic 670G) or continuation of current therapy. The primary outcome was masked CGM time in range (TIR; 70-180 mg/dL) during the final 3 weeks.

RESULTS

Participants were randomized to HCL (n = 61) or control (n = 59). Baseline mean (SD) age was 44.2 (11.7) years, HbA_1c was 7.4% (0.9%) (57 [10] mmol/mol), 53% were women, and 51% used MDI. HCL TIR increased from (baseline) 55% (13%) to (26 weeks) 70% (10%) with the control group unchanged: (baseline) 55% (12%) and (26 weeks) 55% (13%) (difference 15% [95% CI 11, 19]; P < 0.0001). For HCL, HbA_1c was lower (median [95% CI] difference -0.4% [-0.6, -0.2]; -4 mmol/mol [-7, -2]; P < 0.0001) and diabetes-specific positive well-being was higher (difference 1.2 [95% CI 0.4, 1.9]; P < 0.0048) without a deterioration in diabetes distress, perceived sleep quality, or cognition. Seventeen (9 device-related) versus 13 serious adverse events occurred in the HCL and control groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In adults with type 1 diabetes, 26 weeks of HCL improved TIR, HbA_1c, and their sense of satisfaction from managing their diabetes compared with those continuing with user-determined insulin dosing and self-monitoring of blood glucose. For most people living with type 1 diabetes globally, this trial demonstrates that HCL is feasible, acceptable, and advantageous.

Advanced Diabetes Management Using Artificial Intelligence and Continuous Glucose Monitoring Sensors

Wearable continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) sensors are revolutionizing the treatment of type 1 diabetes (T1D). These sensors provide in real-time, every 1-5 min, the current blood glucose concentration and its rate-of-change, two key pieces of information for improving the determination of exogenous insulin administration and the prediction of forthcoming adverse events, such as hypo-/hyper-glycemia. The current research in diabetes technology is putting considerable effort into developing decision support systems for patient use, which automatically analyze the patient's data collected by CGM sensors and other portable devices, as well as providing personalized recommendations about therapy adjustments to patients. Due to the large amount of data collected by patients with T1D and their variety, artificial intelligence (AI) techniques are increasingly being adopted in these decision support systems. In this paper, we review the state-of-the-art methodologies using AI and CGM sensors for decision support in advanced T1D management, including techniques for personalized insulin bolus calculation, adaptive tuning of bolus calculator parameters and glucose prediction.

Health professionals' views about who would benefit from using a closed-loop system: a qualitative study

AIM

To explore health professionals' views about who would benefit from using a closed-loop system and who should be prioritized for access to the technology in routine clinical care.

METHODS

Health professionals (n = 22) delivering the Closed Loop from Onset in type 1 Diabetes (CLOuD) trial were interviewed after they had ≥ 6 months' experience supporting participants using a closed-loop system. Data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Interviewees described holding strong assumptions about the types of people who would use the technology effectively prior to the trial. Interviewees described changing their views as a result of observing individuals engaging with the closed-loop system in ways they had not anticipated. This included educated, technologically competent individuals who over-interacted with the system in ways which could compromise glycaemic control. Other individuals, who health professionals assumed would struggle to understand and use the technology, were reported to have benefitted from it because they stood back and allowed the system to operate without interference. Interviewees concluded that individual, family and psychological attributes cannot be used as pre-selection criteria and, ideally, all individuals should be given the chance to try the technology. However, it was recognized that clinical guidelines will be needed to inform difficult decisions about treatment allocation (and withdrawal), with young children and infants being considered priority groups.

CONCLUSIONS

To ensure fair and equitable access to closed-loop systems, prejudicial assumptions held by health professionals may need to be addressed. To support their decision-making, clinical guidelines need to be made available in a timely manner.

What Training, Support, and Resourcing Do Health Professionals Need to Support People Using a Closed-Loop System? A Qualitative Interview Study with Health Professionals Involved in the Closed Loop from Onset in Type 1 Diabetes (CLOuD) Trial

Background: We explored health professionals' views about the training, support, and resourcing needed to support people using closed-loop technology in routine clinical care to help inform the development of formal guidance. Methods: Interviews were conducted with health professionals (n = 22) delivering the Closed Loop from Onset in Type 1 Diabetes (CLOuD) trial after they had ≥6 months' experience of supporting participants using a closed-loop system. Data were analyzed descriptively. Results: Interviewees described how, compared with other insulin regimens, teaching and supporting individuals to use a closed-loop system could be initially more time-consuming. However, they also noted that after an initial adjustment period, users had less need for initiating contact with the clinical team compared with people using pumps or multiple daily injections. Interviewees highlighted how a lessened need for ad hoc clinical input could result in new challenges; specifically, they had fewer opportunities to reinforce users' diabetes knowledge and skills and detect potential psychosocial problems. They also observed heightened anxiety among some parents due to the constant availability of data and unrealistic expectations about the system's capabilities. Interviewees noted that all local diabetes teams should be empowered to deliver closed-loop system care, but stressed that health professionals supporting closed-loop users in routine care will need comprehensive technology training and standardized clinical guidance. Conclusion: These findings constitute an important starting point for the development of formal guidance to support the rollout of closed-loop technology. Our recommendations, if actioned, will help limit the potential additional burden of introducing closed-loop systems in routine clinical care and help inform appropriate user education and support.

Evidence on User-Led Innovation in Diabetes Technology (The OPEN Project): Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

Background

Digital innovations in health care have traditionally followed a top-down pathway, with manufacturers leading the design and production of technology-enabled solutions and those living with chronic conditions involved only as passive recipients of the end product. However, user-driven open-source initiatives in health care are becoming increasingly popular. An example is the growing movement of people with diabetes, who create their own “Do-It-Yourself Artificial Pancreas Systems” (DIYAPS).

Objective

The overall aim of this study is to establish the empirical evidence base for the clinical effectiveness and quality-of-life benefits of DIYAPS and identify the challenges and possible solutions to enable their wider diffusion.

Methods

A research program comprising 5 work packages will examine the outcomes and potential for scaling up DIYAPS solutions. Quantitative and qualitative methodologies will be used to examine clinical and self-reported outcome measures of DIYAPS users. The majority of members of the research team live with type 1 diabetes and are active DIYAPS users, making Outcomes of Patients’ Evidence With Novel, Do-It-Yourself Artificial Pancreas Technology (OPEN) a unique, user-driven research project.

Results

This project has received funding from the European Commission’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program, under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Action Research and Innovation Staff Exchange. Researchers with both academic and nonacademic backgrounds have been recruited to formulate research questions, drive the research process, and disseminate ongoing findings back to the DIYAPS community and other stakeholders.

Conclusions

The OPEN project is unique in that it is a truly patient- and user-led research project, which brings together an international, interdisciplinary, and intersectoral research group, comprising health care professionals, technical developers, biomedical and social scientists, the majority of whom are also living with diabetes. Thus, it directly addresses the core research and user needs of the DIYAPS movement. As a new model of cooperation, it will highlight how researchers in academia, industry, and the patient community can create patient-centric innovation and reduce disease burden together.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/15368

Use of remote monitoring with continuous glucose monitoring in young children with Type 1 diabetes: the parents' perspective

AIM

Remote monitoring with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in children with Type 1 diabetes mellitus has recently become available, but little is known about caregivers' experiences of its use, particularly in younger children. The aim of this study was to explore parents' everyday experiences of using this technology.

METHODS

The parents of children with Type 1 diabetes diagnosed for > 1 year, aged 2-12 years were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview. Interviews were the second phase of a randomized cross-over study using standard insulin therapy with or without CGM and remote monitoring for two 3-month periods. Open-ended questions were used to explore parents' real-life experiences of the remote monitoring and CGM system. Interviews were analysed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Five themes related to remote monitoring emerged: (i) impact on sleep quality for the parents, (ii) peace of mind, (iii) impact on anxiety, (iv) freedom and confidence for the parents and children, and (v) impact on relationships. Furthermore, parents reported on themes related to CGM in general, such as better understanding of how to manage and control their child's diabetes and experiences related to physical or technical aspects.

CONCLUSION

Overall, parents of primary school children reported that using remote monitoring and CGM was a mostly beneficial experience. However, negative aspects within the themes were also reported. These findings will help to provide a structure to discuss parent and child expectations and provide targeted education at the start of using remote monitoring and CGM.

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.

Assessing patient-reported outcomes for automated insulin delivery systems: the psychometric properties of the INSPIRE measures

AIM

Participants in clinical trials assessing automated insulin delivery systems report perceived benefits and burdens that reflect their experiences and may predict their likelihood of uptake and continued use of this novel technology. Despite the importance of understanding their perspectives, there are no available validated and reliable measures assessing the psychosocial aspects of automated insulin delivery systems. The present study assesses the initial psychometric properties of the INSPIRE measures, which were developed for youth and adults with Type 1 diabetes, as well as parents and partners.

METHODS

Data from 292 youth, 159 adults, 150 parents of youth and 149 partners of individuals recruited from the Type 1 Diabetes Exchange Registry were analysed. Participants completed INSPIRE questionnaires and measures of quality of life, fear of hypoglycaemia, diabetes distress, glucose monitoring satisfaction. Exploratory factor analysis assessed factor structures. Associations between INSPIRE scores and other measures, HbA_1c , and technology use assessed concurrent and discriminant validity.

RESULTS

Youth, adult, parent and partner measures assess positive expectancies of automated insulin delivery systems. Measures range from 17 to 22 items and are reliable (α = 0.95-0.97). Youth, adult and parent measures are unidimensional; the partner measure has a two-factor structure (perceptions of impact on partners versus the person with diabetes). Measures showed concurrent and discriminant validity.

CONCLUSIONS

INSPIRE measures assessing the positive expectancies of automated insulin delivery systems for youth, adults, parents and partners have meaningful factor structures and are internally consistent. The developmentally sensitive INSPIRE measures offer added value as clinical trials test newer systems, systems become commercially available and clinicians initiate using these systems.

Broadening the Debate About Post-trial Access to Medical Interventions: A Qualitative Study of Participant Experiences at the End of a Trial Investigating a Medical Device to Support Type 1 Diabetes Self-Management

Increasing ethical attention and debate is focusing on whether individuals who take part in clinical trials should be given access to post-trial care. However, the main focus of this debate has been upon drug trials undertaken in low-income settings. To broaden this debate, we report findings from interviews with individuals (n = 24) who participated in a clinical trial of a closed-loop system, which is a medical device under development for people with type 1 diabetes that automatically adjusts blood glucose to help keep it within clinically recommended ranges. Individuals were recruited from UK sites and interviewed following trial close-out, at which point the closed-loop had been withdrawn. While individuals were stoical and accepting of the requirement to return the closed-loop, they also conveyed varying degrees of distress. Many described having relaxed diabetes management practices while using the closed-loop and having become deskilled as a consequence, which made reverting back to pre-trial regimens challenging. Participants also described unanticipated consequences arising from using a closed-loop. As well as deskilling, these included experiencing psychological and emotional benefits that could not be sustained after the closed-loop had been withdrawn and participants reevaluating their pre- and post-trial life in light of having used a closed-loop and now perceiving this life much more negatively. Participants also voiced frustrations about experiencing better blood glucose control using a closed-loop and then having to revert to using what they now saw as antiquated and imprecise self-management tools. We use these findings to argue that ethical debates about post-trial provisioning need to be broadened to consider potential psychological and emotional harms, and not just clinical harms, that may result from withdrawal of investigated treatments. We also suggest that individuals may benefit from information about potential nonclinical harms to help make informed decisions about trial participation.

Patient Values and Preferences Regarding Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion and Artificial Pancreas in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Data

OBJECTIVE

We produced, through a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative evidence, a synthesis of the issues of importance (values and preferences) to adult patients with type 1 diabetes regarding treatment with automated insulin delivery systems.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO from the inception of each database through September 2018. We included studies examining patient values and preferences for outcomes related to continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion or artificial pancreas treatment. We compiled structured summaries of the results and assessed the relative importance of each outcome. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment Development, and Evaluation) and CERQual (Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approaches provided the structure for the evaluation of the quality of evidence and confidence in the findings. A mixed-methods result-based convergent design provided the structure for integration and presentation of results.

RESULTS

We reviewed 1665 unique citations; 19 studies (8 quantitative and 11 qualitative) proved eligible. Glycemic control is the key attribute that drives patients' preference. Reduction of glycemic variability and decreased incidence of hypoglycemia and chronic complications proved of intermediate importance and were ranked similarly to components of treatment burden, including the size and appearance of devices, cost, ease of use, and the embarrassment of public use.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinician guidance may play a crucial role in determining patient values and preferences (for instance, patients' priority in glucose control rather than avoiding diabetic complications). Our results provide guidance for clinicians in discussing preferred insulin delivery systems with patients with type 1 diabetes.

Participants' Experiences of, and Views About, Daytime Use of a Day-and-Night Hybrid Closed-Loop System in Real Life Settings: Longitudinal Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE

To explore individuals' experiences of daytime use of a day-and-night hybrid closed-loop system, their information and support needs, and their views about how future systems could be improved.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Twenty-four adults, adolescents, and parents were interviewed before using a hybrid day-and-night closed-loop system and 3 months later, data were analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

Participants praised the closed loop's ability to respond to high and low blood glucose in ways which extended beyond their own capabilities and to act as a safety net and mop up errors, such as when a mealtime bolus was forgotten or unplanned activity was undertaken. Participants also described feeling less burdened by diabetes as a consequence and more able to lead flexible, spontaneous lives. Contrary to their initial expectations, and after trust in the system had been established, most individuals wanted opportunities to collaborate with the closed loop to optimize its effectiveness. Such individuals expressed a need to communicate information, such as when routines changed or to indicate different intensities of physical activity. While individuals valued frequent contact with staff in the initial month of use, most felt that their long-term support needs would be no greater than when using an insulin pump.

CONCLUSIONS

While participants reported substantial benefits to using the closed loop during the day, they also identified ways in which the technology could be refined and education and training tailored to optimize effective use. Our findings suggest that mainstreaming this technology will not necessarily lead to increased demands on clinical staff.

Effect of 6 months of hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery in adults with type 1 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Manual determination of insulin dosing largely fails to optimise glucose control in type 1 diabetes. Automated insulin delivery via closed-loop systems has improved glucose control in short-term studies. The objective of the present study is to determine the effectiveness of 6 months' closed-loop compared with manually determined insulin dosing on time-in-target glucose range in adults with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This open-label, seven-centre, randomised controlled parallel group clinical trial will compare home-based hybrid closed-loop versus standard diabetes therapy in Australia. Adults aged ≥25 years with type 1 diabetes using intensive insulin therapy (via multiple daily injections or insulin pump, total enrolment target n=120) will undertake a run-in period including diabetes and carbohydrate-counting education, clinical optimisation and baseline data collection. Participants will then be randomised 1:1 either to 26 weeks of MiniMed 670G hybrid closed-loop system therapy (Medtronic, Northridge, CA, USA) or continuation of their current diabetes therapy. The hybrid closed-loop system delivers insulin automatically to address basal requirements and correct to target glucose level, while bolus doses for meals require user initiation and carbohydrate estimation. Analysis will be intention to treat, with the primary outcome time in continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) target range (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) during the final 3 weeks of intervention. Secondary outcomes include: other CGM parameters, HbA_1c, severe hypoglycaemia, psychosocial well-being, sleep, cognition, electrocardiography, costs, quality of life, biomarkers of vascular health and hybrid closed-loop system performance. Semistructured interviews will assess the expectations and experiences of a subgroup of hybrid closed-loop users.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has Human Research Ethics Committee approval. The study will be conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice. Results will be disseminated at scientific conferences and via peer-reviewed publications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12617000520336; Pre-results.