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

Adult's Lived Experience Using the Insulin-Only Bionic Pancreas

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to assess adults' perspectives after using the insulin-only Bionic Pancreas (BP) during a 13-week pivotal trial. Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems show promise in improving glycemic outcomes and reducing disease burden for those with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D). Understanding the lived experience of those using the BP can help to inform education and uptake of AID devices.

METHODS

Adults ages 19 to 75 (n = 40) participated in age-specific focus groups (19-25, 26-40, 41-64, and 65+) exploring their experiences, thoughts, and feelings about using the BP. Three authors analyzed the focus group data using a hybrid thematic approach.

RESULTS

Qualitative analysis of focus groups revealed 14 sub-themes falling into four major themes (diabetes burden, managing glucose levels, daily routine, and user experience). Although participants' overall experience was positive, some reported struggles related to managing out-of-range glucose levels and challenges with the system responding to unique meal schedules and exercise regimens.

CONCLUSION

This study captures patient perspectives regarding their experiences with a new AID system. Patient voice can inform device development and educational approaches for people with T1D. Identifying which patients may benefit the most from wearing this system may facilitate patient/clinician discussions regarding insulin delivery systems that best meet their individualized needs and expectations that may support device uptake and continued use.

Psychosocial Aspects of Diabetes Technologies: Commentary on the Current Status of the Evidence and Suggestions for Future Directions

Diabetes technologies, including continuous glucose monitors, insulin pumps, and automated insulin delivery systems offer the possibility of improving glycemic outcomes, including reduced hemoglobin A1c, increased time in range, and reduced hypoglycemia. Given the rapid expansion in the use of diabetes technology over the past few years, and touted promise of these devices for improving both clinical and psychosocial outcomes, it is critically important to understand issues in technology adoption, equity in access, maintaining long-term usage, opportunities for expanded device benefit, and limitations of the existing evidence base. We provide a brief overview of the status of the literature-with a focus on psychosocial outcomes-and provide recommendations for future work and considerations in clinical applications. Despite the wealth of the existing literature exploring psychosocial outcomes, there is substantial room to expand our current knowledge base to more comprehensively address reasons for differential effects, with increased attention to issues of health equity and data harmonization around patient-reported outcomes.

Automating insulin delivery through pump and continuous glucose monitoring connectivity: Maximizing opportunities to improve outcomes

The development of automated insulin delivery (AID) systems, which connect continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems with algorithmic insulin delivery from an insulin pump (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion, [CSII]), has led to improved glycaemia and quality of life benefits in those with insulin-treated diabetes. This review summarizes the benefits gained by the connectivity between insulin pumps and CGM devices. It details the technical requirements and advances that have enabled this, and highlights the clinical and user benefits of such systems. Clinical trials and real-world outcomes from the use of AID systems in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) will be the focus of this article; outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and other diabetes subtypes will also be discussed. We also detail the limitations of current technological approaches for connectivity between insulin pumps and CGM devices. While recognizing the barriers, we discuss opportunities for the future.

Closed-Loop Therapy and Sleep in Young People Newly Diagnosed With T1D and Their Parents

BACKGROUND

A diagnosis of type 1 diabetes in a young person can create vulnerability for sleep. Historically it has been rare for young people to be offered a closed-loop system soon after diagnosis meaning that studies examining sleep under these circumstances in comparison with standard treatment have not been possible. In this study, we examine sleep in young people (and their parents) who were provided with hybrid closed-loop therapy at diagnosis of type 1 diabetes versus those who receive standard treatment over a 2-year period.

METHODS

The sample comprised 97 participants (mean age = 12.0 years; SD = 1.7) from a multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel trial, where young people were randomized to either hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery or standard care at diagnosis. Sleep was measured using actigraphy and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) in the young people, and using the PSQI in parents.

RESULTS

Sleep in young people using hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery did not differ significantly compared with those receiving standard care (although there were nonsignificant trends for better sleep in the closed-loop group for 4 of the 5 sleep actigraphy measures and PSQI). Similarly, there were nonsignificant differences for sleep between the groups at 24 months (with mixed direction of effects).

CONCLUSIONS

This study assessed for the first time sleep in young people using a closed-loop system soon after diagnosis. Although sleep was not significantly different for young people using closed-loop insulin delivery as compared with those receiving standard care, the direction of effects of the nonsignificant results indicates a possible tendency for better sleep quality in the hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery group at the beginning of the treatment.

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.

Lived Experience of Fully Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes

Introduction: The Closing the Loop in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes (CLEAR) randomized crossover study compared a novel fully closed-loop insulin delivery system with no carbohydrate entry or mealtime bolusing (CamAPS HX), with standard insulin pump therapy and glucose sensor in adults with type 1 diabetes and suboptimal glycemic outcomes. This qualitative substudy aimed to understand the psychosocial impact of using the fully automated system. Materials and Methods: Adults participating in the CLEAR study were invited to take part in a virtual semistructured interview after they had completed 8 weeks using the fully closed-loop system. Recruitment continued until there was adequate representation and data saturation occurred. Interviews were anonymized and transcribed for in-depth thematic analysis using an inductive-deductive approach. Study participants were also asked to complete questionnaires assessing diabetes distress, hypoglycemia confidence, and closed-loop treatment satisfaction. Results: Eleven participants (eight male and three female; age range 26-66 years) were interviewed. After an initial adjustment period, interviewees reported enjoying a reduction in diabetes burden, freed-up mental capacity, and improved mood. All were happy with overnight glycemic outcomes, with the majority reporting benefits on sleep. Although experiences of postprandial glucose outcomes varied, all found mealtimes easier and less stressful, particularly when eating out. Negatives raised by participants predominantly related to the insulin pump hardware, but some also reported increased snacking and challenges around resuming carbohydrate counting at trial closeout. Conclusions: In adults with type 1 diabetes, use of a fully closed-loop insulin delivery system had significant quality-of-life benefits and provided a welcome break from the day-to-day demands of living with diabetes. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04977908.

Real-world lived experience of older adults with type 1 diabetes after an automated insulin delivery trial

AIMS

First-generation closed-loop automated insulin delivery improves glycaemia and psychosocial outcomes among older adults with type 1 diabetes in clinical trials. However, no study has previously assessed real-world lived experience of older adults using closed-loop therapy outside a trial environment.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with older adults who were pre-existing insulin pump users and previously completed the OldeR Adult Closed-Loop (ORACL) randomised trial. Interviews focused on perceptions of diabetes technology use, and factors influencing decisions regarding continuation.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight participants, mean age 70 years (SD 5), were interviewed at median 650 days (IQR 608-694) after their final ORACL trial visit. At interview, 23 participants (82%) were still using a commercial closed-loop system (requiring manual input for prandial insulin bolus doses). Themes discussed in interviews relating to closed-loop system use included sustained psychosocial benefits, cost and retirement considerations and usability frustrations relating to sensor accuracy and system alarms. Of the five participants who had discontinued, reasons included cost, continuous glucose monitoring-associated difficulties and usability frustrations. Cost was the largest consideration regarding continued use; most participants considered the increased ease of diabetes management to be worth the associated costs, though cost was prohibitive for some.

CONCLUSIONS

Almost 2 years after completing a closed-loop clinical trial, closed-loop automated insulin delivery remains the preferred type 1 diabetes therapy for the majority of older adult participants. Chronological age is not a barrier to real-world successful use of diabetes technology. Identifying age-related barriers, and solutions, to diabetes technology use among older adults is warranted.

Time and change: a typology for presenting research findings in qualitative longitudinal research

BACKGROUND

Qualitative longitudinal research (QLR) is an emerging methodology used in health research. The method literature states that the change in a phenomenon through time should be the focus of any QLR study, but in empirical studies, the analysis of changes through time is often poorly described, and the emphasis on time/change in the findings varies greatly. This inconsistency might depend on limitations in the existing method literature in terms of describing how QLR studies can present findings. The aim of this study was to develop and describe a typology of alternative approaches for integrating time and/or change in QLR findings.

METHODS

In this method study, we used an adapted scoping review design. Articles were identified using EBSCOhost. In total, methods and results sections from 299 QLR articles in the field of health research were analyzed with inspiration from content analysis.

RESULTS

We constructed a typology of three types and seven subtypes. The types were based on the underlying structural principles of how time/change was presented: Type A) Findings have a low utilization of longitudinal data, Type B) Findings are structured according to chronological time, and Type C) Findings focus on changes through time. These types differed in 1) the way the main focus was on time, change or neither; 2) the level of interpretation in the findings; and 3) how theoretical understandings of time/change were articulated in the articles. Each type encompassed two or three subtypes that represented distinct approaches to the aim and results presentation of QLR findings.

CONCLUSIONS

This method study is the first to describe a coherent and comprehensive typology of alternative approaches for integrating time/change into QLR findings in health research. By providing examples of various subtypes that can be used for results presentations, it can help researchers make informed decisions suitable to their research intent.

Listening to Women: Experiences of Using Closed-Loop in Type 1 Diabetes Pregnancy

Introduction: Recent high-profile calls have emphasized that women's experiences should be considered in maternity care provisioning. We explored women's experiences of using closed-loop during type 1 diabetes (T1D) pregnancy to inform decision-making about antenatal rollout and guidance and support given to future users. Methods: We interviewed 23 closed-loop participants in the Automated insulin Delivery Among Pregnant women with T1D (AiDAPT) trial after randomization to closed-loop and ∼20 weeks later. Data were analyzed thematically. Results: Women described how closed-loop lessened the physical and mental demands of diabetes management, enabling them to feel more normal and sleep better. By virtue of spending increased time-in-range, women also worried less about risks to their baby and being judged negatively by health care professionals. Most noted that intensive input and support during early pregnancy had been crucial to adjusting to, and developing confidence in, the technology. Women emphasized that attaining pregnancy glucose targets still required ongoing effort from themselves and the health care team. Women described needing education to help them determine when, and how, to intervene and when to allow the closed-loop to operate without interference. All women reported more enjoyable pregnancy experiences as a result of using closed-loop; some also noted being able to remain longer in paid employment. Conclusions: Study findings endorse closed-loop use in T1D pregnancy by highlighting how the technology can facilitate positive pregnancy experiences. To realize fully the benefits of closed-loop, pregnant women would benefit from initial intensive oversight and support together with closed-loop specific education and training. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT04938557.

User experiences during the transition to calibration-free sensors with remote monitoring while using automated insulin delivery - a qualitative study

Introduction

To evaluate the experiences of patients with type 1 diabetes following transition from a calibration-requiring to a calibration-free sensor and remote monitoring in the context of using automated insulin delivery (AID).

Research design and methods

Fifteen participants aged 7-65 years with type 1 diabetes participating in a longitudinal study used a Medtronic® advanced hybrid closed loop (AHCL) device with initially calibration-requiring then calibration-free sensors. Qualitative interviews were conducted ≥20 weeks following use of the calibration-requiring and ≥4 weeks after use of the calibration-free sensors/remote monitoring. Thematic analysis was used to identify key themes and subthemes.

Results

At baseline, mean diabetes duration was 14.5 years ( ± 10.9), mean Hba1c 54.8 mmol/mol ( ± 10.2) (7.2 ± 0.9%) and Time in range 75.4% ( ± 11.6). Participants reported a progressive improvement in digital and lifestyle integration, and device trust following transition to calibration-free sensors with remote monitoring potential. They also reported a reduced need for capillary glucose, increased device satisfaction and trust, and reduced burden of diabetes care. Negative aspects reported included periodic early sensor loss, and for some, impaired integration with mobile devices.

Conclusion

Transitioning to calibration-free sensors with remote monitoring while using AHCL was associated with better user experience, including perceptions of improved quality of life and a reduced burden of diabetes care. Appropriate expectation setting, training, and ongoing support allow for the optimal user experience while using AHCL.

Clinical trial registration

https://www.anzctr.org.au, identifier ACTRN12621000360819.

Healthcare professionals' views about how pregnant women can benefit from using a closed-loop system: Qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Interest is growing in how closed-loop systems can support attainment of within-target glucose levels amongst pregnant women with type 1 diabetes. We explored healthcare professionals' views about how, and why, pregnant women benefitted from using the CamAPS FX system during the AiDAPT trial.

METHODS

We interviewed 19 healthcare professionals who supported women using closed-loop during the trial. Our analysis focused on identifying descriptive and analytical themes relevant to clinical practice.

RESULTS

Healthcare professionals highlighted clinical and quality-of-life benefits to using closed-loop in pregnancy; albeit, they attributed some of these to the continuous glucose monitoring component. They emphasised that the closed-loop was not a panacea and that, to gain maximum benefit, an effective collaboration between themselves, the woman and the closed-loop was needed. Optimal performance of the technology, as they further noted, also required women to interact with the system sufficiently, but not excessively; a requirement that they felt some women had found challenging. Even where healthcare professionals felt that this balance was not achieved, they suggested that women had still benefitted from using the system. Healthcare professionals reported difficulties predicting how specific women would engage with the technology. In light of their trial experiences, healthcare professionals favoured an inclusive approach to closed-loop rollout in routine clinical care.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare professionals recommended that closed-loop systems be offered to all pregnant women with type 1 diabetes in the future. Presenting closed-loop systems to pregnant women and healthcare teams as one pillar of a three-party collaboration may help promote optimal use.

A Systematic Review of Commercial Hybrid Closed-Loop Automated Insulin Delivery Systems

INTRODUCTION

Several different forms of automated insulin delivery systems (AID systems) have recently been developed and are now licensed for type 1 diabetes (T1D). We undertook a systematic review of reported trials and real-world studies for commercial hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems.

METHODS

Pivotal, phase III and real-world studies using commercial HCL systems that are currently approved for use in type 1 diabetes were reviewed with a devised protocol using the Medline database.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine studies were included in the systematic review (19 for 670G; 8 for 780G; 11 for Control-IQ; 14 for CamAPS FX; 4 for Diabeloop; and 3 for Omnipod 5). Twenty were real-world studies, and 39 were trials or sub-analyses. Twenty-three studies, including 17 additional studies, related to psychosocial outcomes and were analysed separately.

CONCLUSIONS

These studies highlighted that HCL systems improve time In range (TIR) and arouse minimal concerns around severe hypoglycaemia. HCL systems are an effective and safe option for improving diabetes care. Real-world comparisons between systems and their effects on psychological outcomes require further study.

Lived experience of older adults with type 1 diabetes using closed-loop automated insulin delivery in a randomised trial

AIM

To explore the lived experience of older adults with type 1 diabetes using closed-loop automated insulin delivery, an area previously receiving minimal attention.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with adults aged 60 years or older with long-duration type 1 diabetes who participated in a randomised, open-label, two-stage crossover trial comparing first-generation closed-loop therapy (MiniMed 670G) versus sensor-augmented pump therapy. Interview recordings were transcribed, thematically analysed and assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-one older adults participated in interviews after using closed-loop therapy. Twenty were functionally independent, without frailty or major cognitive impairment; one was dependent on caregiver assistance, including for diabetes management. Quality of life benefits were identified, including improved sleep and reduced diabetes-related psychological burden, in the context of experiencing improved glucose levels. Gaps between expectations and reality of closed-loop therapy were also experienced, encountering disappointment amongst some participants. The cost was perceived as a barrier to continued closed-loop access post-trial. Usability issues were identified, such as disruptive overnight alarms and sensor inaccuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

The lived experience of older adults without frailty or major cognitive impairment using first-generation closed-loop therapy was mainly positive and concordant with glycaemic benefits found in the trial. Older adults' lived experience using automated insulin delivery beyond trial environments requires exploration; moreover, the usability needs of older adults should be considered during future device development.

Consensus Recommendations for the Use of Automated Insulin Delivery Technologies in Clinical Practice

The significant and growing global prevalence of diabetes continues to challenge people with diabetes (PwD), healthcare providers, and payers. While maintaining near-normal glucose levels has been shown to prevent or delay the progression of the long-term complications of diabetes, a significant proportion of PwD are not attaining their glycemic goals. During the past 6 years, we have seen tremendous advances in automated insulin delivery (AID) technologies. Numerous randomized controlled trials and real-world studies have shown that the use of AID systems is safe and effective in helping PwD achieve their long-term glycemic goals while reducing hypoglycemia risk. Thus, AID systems have recently become an integral part of diabetes management. However, recommendations for using AID systems in clinical settings have been lacking. Such guided recommendations are critical for AID success and acceptance. All clinicians working with PwD need to become familiar with the available systems in order to eliminate disparities in diabetes quality of care. This report provides much-needed guidance for clinicians who are interested in utilizing AIDs and presents a comprehensive listing of the evidence payers should consider when determining eligibility criteria for AID insurance coverage.

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.

Adolescents' and their parents' experiences of using a closed-loop system to manage type 1 diabetes in everyday life: qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Type 1 diabetes can have life-shattering consequences for adolescents and parents. A closed-loop system is a cutting-edge technology which automatically regulates glucose to reduce the burden of diabetes management. We explored adolescents' and parents' experiences of using this technology to understand how it affects their biographies and everyday lives.

METHODS

In-depth interviews with 18 adolescents newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes and 21 parents after ≥12 months experience using closed-loop technology. Data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Participants reported very few disruptions to their lives when using a closed-loop. Reports of family conflict were minimal as the closed-loop enabled dietary flexibility and glucose levels to be checked effortlessly. Adolescents described doing 'normal' activities without worrying about high/low glucose, and parents reported allowing them to do so unsupervised because the closed-loop would regulate their glucose and keep them safe. Some adolescents expressed concerns about the visibility of components and, to avoid stigma, described curtailing activities such as swimming. Participants described how the closed-loop enabled adolescents to be in control of, or create distance from, diabetes.

DISCUSSION

The closed-loop has life-enhancing consequences for both adolescents and parents and helps to reduce the biographical disruption of type 1 diabetes in this age group.

Hybrid closed-loop therapy with a first-generation system increases confidence and independence in diabetes management in youth with type 1 diabetes

AIM

Hybrid closed-loop (HCL) therapy improves glycaemic control in adolescents with type 1 diabetes; however, little is known about their lived experience using these systems. The aim of this study was to explore the lived experiences of youth with type 1 diabetes using HCL therapy, and their parents, to provide insight into their lived experiences.

METHODS

Adolescents and young adults aged 12-25 years, who used Medtronic MiniMed™ 670G HCL system during a 6-month randomised clinical trial, and their parents, were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview at the end of the study. Open-ended questions were used to explore the lived experiences of families using HCL. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis to determine the main themes.

RESULTS

In all, 17 young people with type 1 diabetes mean ± SD age: 17.5 ± 4.2 years, diabetes duration: 11.0 ± 4.9 years and HbA_1c 64 ± 9 mmol/mol (8.0 ± 0.8%) and 10 parents were interviewed. Three themes were identified: (1) 'Developing confidence and trust in the system', (2) 'Reduction in anxiety' and (3) 'Issues with device'. They reported a positive experience using HCL, with improvements in glucose levels and increased independence with diabetes management. However, frustration around the number of alarms and notifications associated with the system were also identified as issues.

CONCLUSION

Both youth and parents acknowledged the benefits of this first-generation HCL system in improving glycaemic outcomes and in providing flexibility and independence. These lived experiences provide valuable information in the introduction and provision of targeted education with HCL therapy.

Real-world prospective observational single-centre study: Hybrid closed loop improves HbA1c, time-in-range and quality of life for children, young people and their carers

Hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems are characterised by integrating continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with insulin pumps which automate insulin delivery via specific algorithms and user-initiated insulin delivery. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of HCLs on Hba1c, time-in-range (TIR), time in hypoglycaemia, fear of hypoglycaemia, sleep and quality of life measure in children and young people (CYP) with T1D and their carers. Data on HbA1c, TIR and hypoglycaemia frequency were reviewed at baseline prior to starting HCL and 3 months after commencement. As part of clinical care, all patients and carers were provided with key education on the use of the HCL system by trained diabetes healthcare professionals. CYP aged 12 years and above independently completed the validated Hypoglycaemia Fear Survey (HFS). Parents of patients <12 were asked to complete a modified version of the HFS-Parent (HFS-P) survey. There were 39 CYP (22 men) with T1D included with a mean age of 11.8 ± 4.4 at commencement of HCL. Median duration of diabetes was 3.8 years (interquartile range 1.3-6.0). There were 55% of patients who were prepubertal at the time of HCL commencement. 91% were on the Control-IQ system and 9% on the CamAPS FX system. HCL use demonstrated significant improvements at 3 months in the following: HbA1c in mmol/mol (63.0 vs. 56.6, p = 0.03), TIR (50.5 vs. 67.0, p = 0.001) and time in hypoglycaemia (4.3% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.004). HFS scores showed improved behaviour (34.0 vs. 27.5.9, p = 0.02) and worry (40.2 vs. 31.6, p = 0.03), and HFS-P scores also showed improved behaviour (p < 0.001) and worry (p = 0.01). Our study shows that HCL at 3 months improves glucose control, diabetes management and quality of life measures such as fear and worry of hypoglycaemia for CYP and carers.

Barriers and Facilitators to Diabetes Device Adoption for People with Type 1 Diabetes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Diabetes technology (insulin pumps, continuous glucose monitoring, automated insulin delivery systems) has advanced significantly and provides benefits to the user. This article reviews the current barriers to diabetes device adoption and sustained use, and outlines the known and potential facilitators for increasing and sustaining device adoption.

RECENT FINDINGS

Barriers to diabetes device adoption continue to exist at the system-, provider-, and individual-level. Known facilitators to promote sustained adoption include consistent insurance coverage, support for providers and clinics, structured education and support for technology users, and device user access to support as needed (e.g., through online resources). Systemic barriers to diabetes device adoption persist while growing evidence demonstrates the increasing benefits of newest devices and systems. There are ongoing efforts to develop evidence-based structured education programs to support device adoption and sustained use.

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.

The Psychological Implications of Automated Insulin Delivery Systems in Type 1 Diabetes Care

Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems have brought important glycemic benefits to type 1 diabetes management. The present paper provides an overview of their psychological implications. Trials and real-world observational studies report improvements in diabetes-specific quality of life, with qualitative work describing reduced management burden, increased flexibility and improved relationships. Not all experiences are positive, however, evidenced by dropping algorithm use soon after device initiation. Apart from finance and logistics, reasons for discontinuation include technology frustrations, wear-related issues and unmet glycemic and work load expectations. New challenges include distrust in proper AID functioning, overreliance and deskilling, compensatory behaviors to override or trick the system and optimize time in range, and concerns related to wearing multiple devices on the body. Research efforts may focus on incorporating a diversity perspective, updating existing person-reported outcome measures according to new technology developments, addressing implicit or explicit health professional bias in technology access, examining the merits of incorporating stress reactivity in the AID algorithm, and developing concrete approaches for psychological counseling and support related to technology use. An open dialogue with health professionals and peers about expectations, preferences and needs may foster the collaboration between the person with diabetes and the AID system.

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.

AiDAPT: automated insulin delivery amongst pregnant women with type 1 diabetes: a multicentre randomized controlled trial - study protocol

Background

Pregnant women with type 1 diabetes strive for tight glucose targets (3.5-7.8 mmol/L) to minimise the risks of obstetric and neonatal complications. Despite using diabetes technologies including continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), insulin pumps and contemporary insulin analogues, most women struggle to achieve and maintain the recommended pregnancy glucose targets. This study aims to evaluate whether the use of automated closed-loop insulin delivery improves antenatal glucose levels in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes.

Methods/design

A multicentre, open label, randomized, controlled trial of pregnant women with type 1 diabetes and a HbA1c of ≥48 mmol/mol (6.5%) at pregnancy confirmation and ≤ 86 mmol/mol (10%) at randomization. Participants who provide written informed consent before 13 weeks 6 days gestation will be entered into a run-in phase to collect 96 h (24 h overnight) of CGM glucose values. Eligible participants will be randomized on a 1:1 basis to CGM (Dexcom G6) with usual insulin delivery (control) or closed-loop (intervention). The closed-loop system includes a model predictive control algorithm (CamAPS FX application), hosted on an android smartphone that communicates wirelessly with the insulin pump (Dana Diabecare RS) and CGM transmitter. Research visits and device training will be provided virtually or face-to-face in conjunction with 4-weekly antenatal clinic visits where possible. Randomization will stratify for clinic site. One hundred twenty-four participants will be recruited. This takes into account 10% attrition and 10% who experience miscarriage or pregnancy loss. Analyses will be performed according to intention to treat. The primary analysis will evaluate the change in the time spent in the target glucose range (3.5-7.8 mmol/l) between the intervention and control group from 16 weeks gestation until delivery. Secondary outcomes include overnight time in target, time above target (> 7.8 mmol/l), standard CGM metrics, HbA1c and psychosocial functioning and health economic measures. Safety outcomes include the number and severity of ketoacidosis, severe hypoglycaemia and adverse device events.

Discussion

This will be the largest randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of closed-loop insulin delivery during type 1 diabetes pregnancy.

Trial registration

ISRCTN 56898625 Registration Date: 10 April, 2018.

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

Recent advances in closed-loop insulin delivery

Since the discovery of insulin 100 years ago, we have seen considerable advances across diabetes therapies. The more recent advent of glucose-responsive automated insulin delivery has started to revolutionise the management of type 1 diabetes in children and adults. Evolution of closed-loop insulin delivery from research to clinical practice has been rapid, and multiple systems are now commercially available. In this review, we summarise key evidence on currently available closed-loop systems and those in development. We comment on dual-hormone and do-it-yourself systems, as well as reviewing clinical evidence in special populations such as very young children, older adults and in pregnancy. We identify future directions for research and barriers to closed-loop adoption, including how these might be addressed to ensure equitable access to this novel therapy.

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.

Youth and parent preferences for an ideal AP system: It is all about reducing burden

BACKGROUND

As new diabetes technologies improve to better manage glucose levels, users' priorities for future technologies may shift to prioritize burden reduction and ease of use. We used qualitative methods to explore youth and parent desired features of an "ideal" artificial pancreas (AP) system.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with 39 youth, ages 10-25 years, and 44 parents. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Youth (79% female, 82% non-Hispanic white) were (M ± SD) ages 17.0 ± 4.7 years, with diabetes for 9.4 ± 4.9 years, and HbA1c of 8.4 ± 1.1%; 79% were pump-treated and 82% used CGM. Of parents, 91% were mothers and 86% were non-Hispanic white. Participants suggested various ways in which an ideal AP system could reduce physical and emotional burdens of diabetes. Physical burdens could be reduced by lessening user responsibilities to manage glucose for food and exercise, and wear or carry devices. Emotional burden could be reduced by mitigating negative emotional reactions to sound and frequency of alerts, while increasing feelings of normalcy. Youth and parents differed in their suggestions to reduce emotional burden. Participants suggested features that would improve glycemia, but nearly always in the context of how the feature would directly reduce their diabetes-specific burden.

CONCLUSIONS

Although participants expressed interest in improving glucose levels, the pervasive desire among suggested features of an ideal AP system was to minimize the burden of diabetes. Understanding and addressing users' priorities to reduce physical and emotional burden will be necessary to enhance uptake and maintain use of future AP systems.

Expect the unexpected: Adolescent and pre-teens' experience of diabetes technology self-management

OBJECTIVE

Only 17% of adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) are currently meeting their glycemic targets despite advances in diabetes technologies. Self-management behaviors and challenges specific to use of diabetes technologies are insufficiently studied in adolescents. We aimed to describe the experience of diabetes technology self-management, including facilitators and barriers, among preteens/adolescents with low and high A1C.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Youth (10-18 years of age) with T1D who use insulin pump therapy were recruited from the larger quantitative cohort of a mixed methods study for participation in semi-structured qualitative interviews. Maximum variability sampling was used to recruit youth with A1C <7.5% (n = 5) and A1C >9% (n = 5). Participants' personal insulin pump and continuous glucose monitoring data were downloaded and served as a visual reference. Interviews were analyzed using a qualitative descriptive approach.

RESULTS

Participants were 50% female with a median age of 14.9 years and 80% used CGM. The sample was predominantly white (90.0%). Analysis produced four major themes, Bad Day, Expect the Unexpected, Nighttime Dependence, and Unpredictability, It's Really a Team and interconnecting subthemes. Youth characterized ''Bad Days'' as those requiring increased diabetes focus and self-management effort. The unpredictability (''Expect the Unexpected'') of glucose outcomes despite attention to self-management behaviors was considerable frustration.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes devices such as insulin pumps are complex machines that rely heavily on individual proficiency, surveillance, and self-management behaviors to achieve clinical benefit. Our findings highlight the dynamic nature of self-management and the multitude of factors that feed youths' self-management behaviors.

Innovative features and functionalities of an artificial pancreas system: What do youth and parents want?

AIMS

Participant-driven solutions may help youth and families better engage and maintain use of diabetes technologies. We explored innovative features and functionalities of an ideal artificial pancreas (AP) system suggested by youth with type 1 diabetes and parents.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 39 youth, ages 10-25 years, and 44 parents. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and coded using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Youth (72% female, 82% non-Hispanic white) were (M ± SD) ages 17.0 ± 4.7 years, with diabetes for 9.4 ± 4.9 years, and HbA_1c of 68 ± 11 mmol/mol (8.4 ± 1.1%); 79% were pump-treated and 82% were continuous glucose monitor users. Of parents, 91% were mothers and 86% were non-Hispanic white, with a child 10.6 ± 4.5 years old. Youth and parents suggested a variety of innovative features and functionalities for an ideal AP system related to (1) enhancing the appeal of user interface, (2) increasing automation of new glucose management functionalities, and (3) innovative and commercial add-ons for greater convenience. Youth and parents offered many similar suggestions, including integration of ketone testing, voice activation, and location-tracking into the system. Youth seemed more driven by increasing convenience and normalcy while parents expressed more concerns with safety.

CONCLUSIONS

Youth and parents expressed creative solutions for an ideal AP system to increase ease of use, enhance normalcy, and reduce burden of management. Designers of AP systems will likely benefit from incorporating the desired preferences by end users to optimize acceptance and usability by young persons with diabetes.

Adolescents' Experiences of Using a Smartphone Application Hosting a Closed-loop Algorithm to Manage Type 1 Diabetes in Everyday Life: Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Closed-loop technology may help address health disparities experienced by adolescents, who are more likely to have suboptimal glycemic control than other age groups and, because of their age, find diabetes self-management particularly challenging. The CamAPS FX closed-loop has sought to address accessibility and usability issues reported by users of previous prototype systems. It comprises small components and a smartphone app used to: announce meal-time boluses, adjust ("boost" or "ease-off") closed-loop insulin delivery, customize alarms, and review/share data. We explored how using the CamAPS FX platform influences adolescents' self-management practices and everyday lives.

METHODS

Eighteen adolescents were interviewed after having ≥6 months experience using the closed-loop platform. Data were analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

Participants reported feeling less burdened and shackled by diabetes because closed-loop components were easier to carry/wear, finger-pricks were not required, the smartphone app provided a discreet and less stigmatizing way of managing diabetes in public, and they were able to customize alarms. Participants also reported checking and reviewing data more regularly, because they did so when using the smartphone for other reasons. Some reported challenges in school settings where use of personal phones was restricted. Participants highlighted how self-management practices were improved because they could easily review glucose data and adjust closed-loop insulin delivery using the "boost" and "ease-off" functions. Some described how using the system resulted in them forgetting about diabetes and neglecting certain tasks.

CONCLUSIONS

A closed-loop system with small components and control algorithm on a smartphone app can enhance usability and acceptability for adolescents and may help address the health-related disparities experienced by this age group. However, challenges can arise from using a medical app on a device which doubles as a smartphone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Closed Loop From Onset in Type 1 Diabetes (CLOuD); NCT02871089; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02871089.

Newest Diabetes-Related Technologies for Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes and Its Impact on Routine Care: a Narrative Synthesis of the Literature

Purpose of Review

This review aims to address the actual state of the most advanced diabetes devices, as follows: continuous subcutaneous insulin infusions (CSII), continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGM), hybrid-closed loop (HCL) systems, and “Do-it-yourself” Artificial Pancreas Systems (DIYAPS) in children, adolescents, and young adults. This review has also the objective to assess the use of telemedicine for diabetes care across three different areas: education, social media, and daily care.

Recent Findings

Recent advances in diabetes technology after integration of CSII with CGM have increased the popularity of this treatment modality in pediatric age and shifted the standard diabetes management in many countries. We found an impressive transition from the use of CSII and/or CGM only to integrative devices with automated delivery systems. Although much has changed over the past 5 years, including a pandemic period that precipitated a broader use of telemedicine in diabetes care, some advances in technology may still be an additional burden of care for providers, patients, and caregivers. The extent of a higher rate of “auto-mode” use in diabetes devices while using the HCL/DIYAPS is essential to reduce the burden of diabetes treatment.

Summary

More studies including higher-risk populations are needed, and efforts should be taken to ensure proper access to cost-effective advanced technology on diabetes care.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40124-021-00248-7.

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 on the combined use of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and real-time continuous glucose monitoring to manage Type 1 diabetes in their children: A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies

AIM

To explore the experiences and perspectives of the combined use of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) on parents of children with TIDM on their daily life.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of English studies published in seven databases between 2006-2021: CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and Scopus. All included studies underwent the process of thematic interpretive integration by the author team.

RESULTS

Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Six derived themes were generated which contained interacting with devices, interacting with glycaemic information, improving quality of life for parents of children with T1DM, burden of living with CSII therapy and CGM, impact on the parent-child relationship, requirement and expectation to advanced diabetes technology. Advanced diabetes technologies affect physical, emotional and relationship between the daily life of parents and their children with T1DM.

Benefits and Challenges of Current Closed-Loop Technologies in Children and Young People With Type 1 Diabetes

Recent advances in diabetes technology have led to the development of closed-loop insulin delivery systems for the management of type 1 diabetes. Several such systems are now commercially available for children and young people. While all available systems have been shown to improve glycaemic control and quality of life in this population, qualitative data also highlights the challenges in using closed-loop systems, which vary among different pediatric age-groups. Very young children require systems that are able to cope with low insulin doses and significant glycaemic variability due to their high insulin sensitivity and unpredictable eating and exercise patterns. Adolescents' compliance is often related to size and number of devices, usability of the systems, need for calibrations, and their ability to interact with the system. Given the speed of innovations, understanding the capabilities and key similarities and differences of current systems can be challenging for healthcare professionals, caregivers and young people with type 1 diabetes alike. The aim of this review is to summarize the key evidence on currently available closed-loop systems for children and young people with type 1 diabetes, as well as commenting on user experience, where real-world data are available. We present findings on a system-basis, as well as identifying specific challenges in different pediatric age-groups and commenting on how current systems might address these. Finally, we identify areas for future research with regards to closed-loop technology tailored for pediatric use and how these might inform reimbursement and alleviate disease burden.

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.

Prospective Analysis of the Impact of Commercialized Hybrid Closed-Loop System on Glycemic Control, Glycemic Variability, and Patient-Related Outcomes in Children and Adults: A Focus on Superiority Over Predictive Low-Glucose Suspend Technology

Background: Automatization of insulin delivery by closed-loop systems represents a major step in type 1 diabetes management. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of the commercialized hybrid closed-loop system, the MiniMed 670G system, on glycemic control, glycemic variability, and patient satisfaction. Methods: A prospective study, including type 1 diabetes patients consecutively starting on the 670G system in one adult and two pediatric hospitals, was performed. Baseline and 3-month visits were documented. Two weeks of data from the system were downloaded. Glycemic variability measures were calculated. Adults and adolescents completed a set of questionnaires (Gold and Clarke scores, Hypoglycemia Fear Survey, Diabetes Quality of Life [DQoL], Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction [DTS], Diabetes Distress Scale, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index). Results: Fifty-eight patients were included (age: 28 ± 15 years [7-63], <18 years old: 38% [n = 22], 59% [n = 34] females, previous use of SAP-PLGS [predictive low-glucose suspend]: 60% [n = 35]). HbA1c was reduced from 57 ± 10 to 53 ± 7 mmol/L (7.4% ± 0.9% to 7.0% ± 0.6%) (P < 0.001) and time in range 70-180 mg/dL was increased from 63.0% ± 11.4% to 72.7% ± 8.7% (P < 0.001). In patients with high baseline hypoglycemia risk, time <54 and <70 mg/dL were reduced from 0.9% ± 1.1% to 0.45% ± 0.7% (P = 0.021) and from 3.3% ± 2.8% to 2.1% ± 2.1% (P = 0.019), respectively. Glycemic variability measures improved. Time in auto mode was 85% ± 17%, the number of auto mode exits was 0.6 ± 0.3 per day, and the number of alarms was 8.5 ± 3.7 per day. Fear of hypoglycemia, DQoL, DTS, and diabetes distress improved, while the percentage of patients with poor sleep quality was reduced. The discontinuation rate was 3%. Conclusion: The commercialized hybrid closed-loop system improves glycemic control and glycemic variability in children and adults, reducing the burden of living with type 1 diabetes.

Closed-loop insulin delivery systems in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes

Introduction: Optimal glycemic control remains challenging in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes due to highly variable day-to-day and night-to-night insulin requirements. This hurdle could be addressed by glucose-responsive insulin delivery based on real-time continuous glucose measurements.Areas covered: This review summaries recent advances of closed-loop systems in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes, using both single- and dual-hormone closed-loop systems. The main outcomes, proportions of time spent in target range 70-180 mg/dl, and time spent in hypoglycemia below 70 mg/dl, are assessed particularly during unsupervised free-living randomized controlled trials.Expert opinion: Noteworthy and clinically meaningful translation of experimental investigations from controlled in-hospital settings to unrestricted home studies have been achieved over the past years, resulting in the regulatory approval of the first hybrid closed-loop system also in the pediatric population and with several other advanced devices in the pipeline. Large multinational and pivotal clinical trials including broad age populations are underway to facilitate the use of closed-loop systems in routine clinical practice.

A qualitative study exploring the expectations of people living with type 1 diabetes regarding prospective use of a hybrid closed-loop system

AIM

To identify the expectations of a diversified sample of informed adults with type 1 diabetes on their prospective use of a hybrid closed-loop system.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 adults with type 1 diabetes who shared their expectations on an experimental hybrid closed-loop system after receiving information on its design, functioning and capability. The sample had equal representation of genders and diabetes management methods and was diversified according to age, education and occupation when possible. Qualitative content analysis of the interview transcripts with MaxQDA was used to identify expected benefits, expected inconveniences and concerns, expected improvements to design and functionalities, and interest and trust in the system.

RESULTS

Participants expected benefits regarding diabetes management, clinical outcomes, psychosocial aspects of their lives, nutrition and meals, and physical activity. Participants expected inconveniences or shared concerns regarding wearability, costs and technical limitations. According to participants, improvements could be made to the system's physical appearance, practical convenience, functionalities, and software integration. Overall, 12 participants would use the system. While participants' trust could be immediate or grow over time, it could ultimately be conditional on the system's performance.

CONCLUSION

Prospective users' general enthusiasm and trust foster the clinical and commercial success of hybrid closed-loop systems. However, poor user satisfaction caused by unrealistic expectations and plausible inconveniences and concerns may limit this success. Providing prospective users with comprehensive information while validating their understanding could mitigate unrealistic expectations. Improvements to design and coverage policies could favour uptake.

Exposure to Closed Loop Barriers Using Virtual Reality

BACKGROUND

Closed loop (CL) automated insulin delivery systems are demonstrated to be safe and effective in regulating glucose levels and reducing cognitive burden in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, given the limited market options and the do-it-yourself nature of most systems, it can be difficult for potential users to shape their expectations fitting them into daily lives and management routines. As such, we examined the potential feasibility of a virtual reality (VR) intervention.

METHODS

A four-part VR intervention was created to expose adults with T1D to expected CL system barriers: body image, perceived hassles of using CL, deskilling fears, and unwanted social attention. Goals of the pilot were to assess feasibility and expose patients to CL. Surveys were conducted pre- and postparticipating in the VR experience.

RESULTS

A total of 20 adults with T1D completed the pilot. Average time to complete the experience was 14.1 minutes (8.8-39.9). Reported VR sickness was low. Willingness to use VR was maintained in 90% (n = 18) and did not change expectations of CL in 95% (n = 19). Virtual reality changed perceived hassles of CL in 25% (n = 5) with four concerned over alarms and one connectivity issues: positive diabetes technology attitudes, confidence in managing hypoglycemia, overall perceptions of appearance, and positive affect maintained after the VR intervention. Negative affect significantly decreased after exposure and perceptions of being overweight trended toward significance.

CONCLUSION

This pilot VR intervention demonstrated high potential in addressing expected barriers to uptake and usage of CL systems without decreasing enthusiasm or changing expectations of CL.

Closed-loop control in insulin pumps for type-1 diabetes mellitus: safety and efficacy

INTRODUCTION

Type 1 diabetes is a lifelong disease with high management burden. The majority of people with type 1 diabetes fail to achieve glycemic targets. Algorithm-driven automated insulin delivery (closed-loop) systems aim to address these challenges. This review provides an overview of commercial and emerging closed-loop systems.

AREAS COVERED

We review safety and efficacy of commercial and emerging hybrid closed-loop systems. A literature search was conducted and clinical trials using day-and-night closed-loop systems during free-living conditions were used to report on safety data. We comment on efficacy where robust randomized controlled trial data for a particular system are available. We highlight similarities and differences between commercial systems.

EXPERT OPINION

Study data shows that hybrid closed-loop systems are safe and effective, consistently improving glycemic control when compared to standard therapy. While a fully closed-loop system with minimal burden remains the end-goal, these hybrid closed-loop systems have transformative potential in diabetes care.

A qualitative study of clinician attitudes towards closed-loop systems in mainstream diabetes care in England

AIM

Clinicians mediate access to new technologies. Consequently, their views on specific devices may influence user access to diabetes technology in mainstream care. As yet, little is known about clinicians' views about closed-loop systems. This qualitative study explored clinicians' views on the likely impacts of future closed-loop systems in mainstream diabetes care in England.

METHODS

We conducted interviews with 36 clinicians from a range of professional backgrounds in five hospital outpatient clinics (two adult, two pregnancy, one paediatric) in England to explore possible consequences of closed-loop systems for users and clinicians. Data analysis utilized a framework approach.

RESULTS

Clinicians reported a range of expected benefits for future users, including improved glucose control and quality of life. Expected burdens included continued need for manual input and the risk of losing basic self-care skills. In terms of future clinical workloads, three clinicians emphasized only positive impacts, seven emphasized both positive and negative impacts, and 17 mentioned only negative impacts. Our most prominent finding, expressed by 24 clinicians, was that closed-loop systems would generate initial challenges due to the need for staff training, user education and support, and new analytical capacities, alongside existing intra-clinic variations in technological experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians recognize the value of closed-loop systems in terms of health benefits, but also identify a range of concerns for both users and healthcare staff, which could impact negatively on user access. Future implementation efforts should address these concerns by providing training and support for healthcare teams, taking varied technological expertise into account.

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

Ambassadors of hope, research pioneers and agents of change-individuals' expectations and experiences of taking part in a randomised trial of an innovative health technology: longitudinal qualitative study

Background

While a growing body of research has explored why people take part in clinical trials, this research has not considered how people’s understandings, motivations and agendas might influence their conduct during a trial. This is an important area of enquiry because it is now widely recognised that an intervention might lead to different clinical outcomes when delivered as part of a trial than when implemented in routine clinical practice; however, the reasons for this are not fully understood.

Methods/design

We interviewed 24 individuals who took part in a trial of an innovative health technology under development for people with type 1 diabetes which automatically regulates blood glucose: the closed-loop system. Participants were interviewed following randomisation to a closed-loop and at trial closeout.

Results

Participants provided complex agendas for taking part in which altruistic and self-interested considerations were often inseparable. Many described belonging to a wider diabetes community and being beneficiaries of others’ participation in research and how this had given rise to attendant citizenship obligations. Participants also shared the excitement and pride they experienced from contributing to research which situated them at the forefront of technological innovation and enabled them to present themselves to others, by virtue of their trial participation, as ambassadors of hope and research pioneers. Given their desire to support the progression of a potentially life-changing technology, and be part of that innovation, participants, at follow-up, described having made extra effort during the trial. Specifically, participants described having been more focused on their diabetes management to help create conditions in which the closed-loop could work most effectively to optimize their blood glucose control.

Conclusions

Our findings contribute a new dimension to understandings of trial effects; specifically, we argue that, to aid interpretation of trial outcomes, participants’ understandings and motivations for participation need to be considered. We highlight the potential pertinence of our findings in the contemporary era of bio-citizenship where, increasingly, people are driving research agendas and see themselves as co-producers of knowledge. We also recommend a new concept be introduced into the literature—‘the altruselfish agenda’—to recognise potential inseparability of self-interested and altruistic motivations.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02523131. Registered on 14 August 2015.