Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes and Impaired Awareness of Hypoglycemia: Also Effective in Patients with Psychological Distress?

Utility and precision evidence of technology in the treatment of type 1 diabetes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The greatest change in the treatment of people living with type 1 diabetes in the last decade has been the explosion of technology assisting in all aspects of diabetes therapy, from glucose monitoring to insulin delivery and decision making. As such, the aim of our systematic review was to assess the utility of these technologies as well as identify any precision medicine-directed findings to personalize care.

METHODS

Screening of 835 peer-reviewed articles was followed by systematic review of 70 of them (focusing on randomized trials and extension studies with ≥50 participants from the past 10 years).

RESULTS

We find that novel technologies, ranging from continuous glucose monitoring systems, insulin pumps and decision support tools to the most advanced hybrid closed loop systems, improve important measures like HbA1c, time in range, and glycemic variability, while reducing hypoglycemia risk. Several studies included person-reported outcomes, allowing assessment of the burden or benefit of the technology in the lives of those with type 1 diabetes, demonstrating positive results or, at a minimum, no increase in self-care burden compared with standard care. Important limitations of the trials to date are their small size, the scarcity of pre-planned or powered analyses in sub-populations such as children, racial/ethnic minorities, people with advanced complications, and variations in baseline glycemic levels. In addition, confounders including education with device initiation, concomitant behavioral modifications, and frequent contact with the healthcare team are rarely described in enough detail to assess their impact.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review highlights the potential of technology in the treatment of people living with type 1 diabetes and provides suggestions for optimization of outcomes and areas of further study for precision medicine-directed technology use in type 1 diabetes.

High diabetes-specific distress among adults with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia despite widespread use of sensor technology

AIMS

Impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IAH) has been associated with increased diabetes distress and use of sensor technology can reduce diabetes distress. The aim of this study was to examine diabetes-specific distress (emotions, cognitions, behaviours) in relation to IAH status and use of glucose sensors in people with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Individuals with type 1 diabetes from an academic diabetes outpatient clinic completed the Clarke questionnaire (to assess hypoglycaemic awareness), Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID-5), Hypoglycaemia Fear Survey-II (HFS-II), Attitudes to Awareness of Hypoglycaemia Survey (A2A), Nijmegen Clinical Screening Instrument Survey (NCSI) and Hyperglycaemia Avoidance Scale (HAS).

RESULTS

Of the 422 participants (51.9% male, diabetes duration 30 [16-40] years, HbA1c 60 ± 11 mmol/mol [7.6 ± 1.0%], 351 [88.2%] used a glucose sensor; 82 [19.4%]) had IAH. Compared to individuals with normal awareness, those with IAH more often had PAID-5 scores ≥8 (35.4% vs. 21.5%, p = 0.008) and higher scores on all HFS-II subscores (total [40.2 ± 21.5 vs. 27.9 ± 17.2, p < 0.001]), HFS-II behaviour (18.5 ± 10.0 vs. 15.1 ± 8.0, p = 0.005), HFS-II worry (21.8 ± 13.5 vs. 12.7 ± 10.9, p < 0.001), HAS worries (17.5 ± 7.3 vs. 14.3 ± 7.0, p < 0.001) and NCSI hypoglycaemia items. HAS behaviour, A2A and NCSI hyperglycaemia scores did not differ between individuals with or without IAH. Restricting the analyses to individuals using a glucose sensor did not materially change the results.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes-specific distress remains a major problem among individuals with type 1 diabetes, particularly those with IAH, despite the widespread use of (intermittently scanned) sensor technology. Further studies are needed to examine strategies to lower diabetes-specific distress in individuals with IAH.

Prevalence and contributing factors of impaired awareness of hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis

AIMS

To conduct a systematic review to summarize the definition, measurement tools, prevalence, and contributing factors of impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

A reproducible search strategy was used to identify factors affecting IAH in T2DM in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, PsycINFO, and CINAHL from inception until 2022. Literature screening, quality evaluation, and information extraction were performed independently by 2 investigators. A meta-analysis of prevalence was performed using Stata 17.0.

RESULTS

The pooled prevalence of IAH in patients with T2DM was 22% (95%CI:14-29%). Measurement tools included the Gold score, Clarke's questionnaire, and the Pedersen-Bjergaard scale. IAH in T2DM was associated with sociodemographic factors (age, BMI, ethnicity, marital status, education level, and type of pharmacy patients visited), clinical disease factors (disease duration, HbAlc, complications, insulin therapy regimen, sulfonylureas use, and the frequency and severity of hypoglycemia), and behavior and lifestyle (smoking and medication adherence).

CONCLUSION

The study found a high prevalence of IAH in T2DM, with an increased risk of severe hypoglycemia, suggesting that medical workers should take targeted measures to address sociodemographic factors, clinical disease, and behavior and lifestyle to reduce IAH in T2DM and thus reduce hypoglycemia in patients.

Effect of diabetes technologies on the fear of hypoglycaemia among people living with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Fear of hypoglycaemia (FOH) significantly disrupts the daily management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and increases the risk of complications. Recent technological advances can improve glucose metrics and reduce hypoglycaemia frequency, yet their impact on FOH is unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) aimed to synthesize the current literature to understand the impact of diabetes technologies on FOH in T1D.

Methods

In this SRMA, we searched PubMed, Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception up to May 21st, 2023 for studies assessing the effect of using real-time or intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitors (rtCGM or isCGM); insulin pumps (CSII); and their combinations on FOH as the primary outcome, measured using the Hypoglycaemia Fear Survey (HFS; including total, worries [HFS-W], and behaviours [HFS-B] scores), in non-pregnant adults with T1D. Data was extracted by the first and second authors. Results were pooled using a random-effects model based on study design (RCT and non-RCT), with subgroup analysis based on the type of technology, reported change in hypoglycaemia frequency, and duration of use. Risk of bias was evaluated with Cochrane and Joanna Briggs Institute tools. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021253618.

Findings

A total of 51 studies (n = 8966) were included, 22 of which were RCTs. Studies on rtCGM and CSII reported lower FOH levels with ≥8 weeks of use. Studies on CSII and rtCGM combinations reported lower FOH levels after ≥13 weeks of automated insulin delivery (AID) use or 26 weeks of sensor-augmented pump (SAP) use. The meta-analysis showed an overall lower FOH with technologies, specifically for the HFS-W subscale. The RCT meta-analysis showed lower HFS-W scores with rtCGM use (standard mean difference [95%CI]: -0.14 [-0.23, -0.05], I2 = 0%) and AID (-0.17 [-0.33, -0.01], I2 = 0%). Results from non-RCT studies show that SAP users (-0.33 [-0.38, -0.27], I2 = 0%) and rtCGM users (-0.38 [-0.61, -0.14], I2 = 0%) had lower HFS-W.

Interpretation

We found consistent, yet small to moderate, effects supporting that diabetes technologies (specifically rtCGM, SAP, and AID) may reduce hypoglycaemia-related worries in adults with T1D. Current literature, however, has limitations including discrepancies in baseline characteristics and limited, mainly descriptive, statistical analysis. Thus, future studies should assess FOH as a primary outcome, use validated surveys, and appropriate statistical analysis to evaluate the clinical impacts of technology use beyond just glucose metrics.

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Ltd.

Real-World Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) Systems Among Adolescents and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: Reduced Burden, but Little Interest in Data Analysis

BACKGROUND

Since 2016, German health insurance companies reimburse continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems for persons with insulin-dependent diabetes, leading to a tremendous increase of CGM use. This study assessed the use of CGM, the satisfaction with, and the data analysis behavior among young people.

METHODS

During a diabetes camp for young people from all over Germany, participants anonymously answered a questionnaire on their method of glucose monitoring, satisfaction and quality of CGM use, HbA1c, and diabetes distress (Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale [PAID]-5).

RESULTS

A total of 308 participants (age 21.4 ± 3.5 years; 73% female; diabetes duration 10.1 ± 5.9 years) completed the questionnaire. Approximately, 25% used self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), 46% intermittent-scanning continuous glucose monitoring (iscCGM), and 30% real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM). Mean HbA1c was slightly, but not significantly, higher among SMBG users compared with CGM users (8.0% ± 1.9% vs. 7.7% ± 1.4%; P = .791). Diabetes distress was not associated with the method of glucose monitoring (SMBG 5.6 vs. iscCGM 6.2 vs. rtCGM 6.5; P = .386). Overall, satisfaction with CGM use was very high; 98% of the CGM users reported better well-being with CGM compared with previous SMBG use. Only 19% of CGM users reported regular data analyses; their HbA1c was lower compared with other CGM users (7.2% ± 1.2% vs. 7.7% ± 1.4%; P = .039).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large sample of young people, 75% were using a CGM system. Treatment satisfaction was very high, but CGM use was not associated with reduced diabetes distress or better glycemic control. However, young people who regularly analyzed their CGM data reported lower HbA1c levels.

Fear of hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 and 2 diabetes: a systematic review

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To summarize and thematize fear of hypoglycemia (FOH) in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) to provide a theoretical basis for the development of effective interventions.

BACKGROUND

FOH is common in this population and can reduce quality of life(QOL) and adversely impact upon diabetes self-care management.

DESIGN

a systematic review METHODS: Articles published between 2000 and 2019 were searched in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and three Chinese databases (CNKI, Wan-fang data and VIP). Eligible articles were selected using the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The quality of all articles finally included was evaluated by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal tools.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies from 8654 papers were included. The sample size of each study ranged from 48 to 3812 subjects. FOH negatively impacted QOL, particularly psychosocial functioning, daily life and sleep quality.

CONCLUSIONS

FOH is a common and serious problem for patients, leading to poor QOL. It has been suggested that psychological concerns, QOL and effective countermeasures in individuals with T1D and T2D should be taken seriously. Advanced technology should be evaluated for its benefits before being used by patients.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The review highlights that FOH negatively impacts QOL, including psychosocial factors, daily life and sleep quality. Healthcare providers should develop targeted and professional assessment tools for FOH and QOL for patients with T2D, especially for patients who are about 60 years old. Advanced technology should be evaluated for its benefits before being used by patients.

Insulinpumpe, kontinuierliche und kapilläre Glukosemessung bei Kindern, Jugendlichen und Erwachsenen mit Diabetes mellitus: Daten des DPV-Registers zwischen 1995 und 2019

Ziel dieser Beobachtungsstudie ist die Beschreibung der aktuellen Nutzung von Diabetestechnologien bei Patienten/-innen mit Diabetes mellitus.

Methode Auswertung von Daten des DPV-Registers zur Nutzung der Insulinpumpentherapie (CSII), kontinuierlicher Glukosemessung (CGM) und der Selbstmessung der Blutglukose (SMBG) aus 497 teilnehmenden Zentren in Deutschland, Österreich, Luxemburg und der Schweiz zwischen 1995 und 2019. Die Daten wurden bei Patienten/-innen mit Diabetes Typ 1 (Alter ≥ 0,5 Jahre) für 5 Altersgruppen ausgewertet. Zusätzlich wurden aktuelle (zwischen 2017 und 2019) Geschlechtsunterschiede in der Verwendung von Diabetestechnologie bei Typ-1-Patienten/-innen untersucht, ebenso wie die Nutzung von Insulinpumpen und CGM für Patienten/-innen mit Insulintherapie bei Typ-2-DM, bei zystischer Fibrose (CFRD), bei anderen Pankreaserkrankungen, neonatalem Diabetes und Maturity Onset Diabetes of the Young (MODY).

Ergebnisse Es zeigte sich bei Patienten/-innen mit Diabetes Typ 1 ein Anstieg der CSII-Nutzung von 1995 bis 2019 von 1 % auf 55 % (2019: < 6 Jahre: 89 %; 6–< 12 Jahre: 67 %; 12–< 18 Jahre: 52 %; 18–< 25 Jahre: 48 %; ≥ 25 Jahre: 34 %). Die CGM-Nutzung erhöhte sich ab 2016 bis 2019 von 9 % auf 56 % (2019: 67 %; 68 %; 61 %; 47 %; 19 % der jeweiligen Altersgruppe). Die SMBG nahmen von 1995 bis 2015 insbesondere in den jüngeren Altersgruppen zu, gefolgt von einem Rückgang seit dem Jahr 2016 (Alle Patienten: 1995: 3,3/Tag; 2016: 5,4/Tag; 2019: 3,8/Tag). Weibliche Patienten mit Typ-1-Diabetes führten häufiger eine CSII und mehr SMBG als männliche Patienten durch (56 %/48 %, jeweils p-Wert: < 0,0001), während sich bei der CGM-Nutzung keine signifikanten Unterschiede zeigten.

Zwischen 2017 und 2019 erfolgte eine Nutzung von Insulinpumpen und CGM bei neonatalem Diabetes (CSII 87 %; CGM 38 %), bei MODY (CSII 14 %; CGM 28 %) und bei CFRD (CSII 18 %; CGM 22 %). CGM und CSII wurden dagegen nur selten von Menschen mit Insulintherapie und Diabetes Typ 2 (CSII < 1 %; CGM 1 %) und bei anderen Pankreaserkrankungen (CSII 3 %; CGM 4 %) genutzt.

Schlussfolgerung Moderne Diabetestechnologien werden derzeit insbesondere von pädiatrischen Patienten/-innen mit Diabetes Typ 1, aber auch von Menschen mit neonatalem Diabetes breit genutzt, von Patienten/-innen mit MODY und CFRD sowie Erwachsenen mit Diabetes Typ 1 in etwas geringerem Maße mit ansteigendem Trend. Dagegen sind diese Technologien in der Therapie des Typ-2-Diabetes und bei anderen Pankreaserkrankungen zurzeit nur wenig verbreitet.

Health anxiety and illness-related fears across diverse chronic illnesses: A systematic review on conceptualization, measurement, prevalence, course, and correlates

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic diseases commonly report fears of illness or symptoms recurring or worsening. These fears have been addressed from an illness-specific perspective (e.g., fear of cancer recurrence), a generic illness perspective (e.g., fear of progression), and a psychiatric perspective (DSM-5 illness anxiety disorder and somatic symptom disorder). The broader concept of health anxiety (HA) can also be applied to patients with a chronic disease. This review was conducted to investigate the conceptual, theoretical, measurement-overlap, and differences between these distinct perspectives. We also aimed to summarize prevalence, course, and correlates of these fears in different chronic illnesses.

METHODS

We used PsycINFO, PubMED, CINAHL, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and PSYNDEX to conduct a systematic review of studies pertaining to these fears in chronic illness published from January 1996 to October 2017. A total of 401 articles were retained.

RESULTS

There were commonalities across different conceptualizations and diseases: a high prevalence of clinical levels of fears (>20%), a stable course over time, and a deleterious impact on quality of life. Reviewed studies used definitions, models, and measures that were illness-specific, with only a minority employing a psychiatric perspective, limiting cross-disease generalizability. There appears to be some applicability of DSM-5 disorders to the experience of fear of illness/symptoms in patients with a chronic illness. While conceptualizing HA on a continuum ranging from mild and transient to severe may be appropriate, there is a lack of agreement about when the level of fear becomes 'excessive.' The definitions, models, and measures of HA across chronic illnesses involve affective, cognitive, behavioral, and perceptual features.

CONCLUSIONS

The concept of HA may offer a unifying conceptual perspective on the fears of illness/symptoms worsening or returning commonly experienced by those with chronic disease.

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.