Efficacy and safety of carbohydrate counting versus other forms of dietary advice in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Effectiveness of the flash glucose monitoring system in preventing severe hypoglycemic episodes and in improving glucose metrics and quality of life in subjects with type 1 diabetes at high risk of acute diabetes complications

AIMS

To assess the effectiveness of the intermittent-scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) system in preventing severe hypoglycemic episodes and in improving glucose parameters and quality of life.

METHODS

Four hundred T1D individuals were enrolled in a prospective real-word study with an intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring device during the 12-months follow-up. The primary endpoint was the incidence of severe hypoglycemic events.

RESULTS

82% of subjects were naïve to the use of the device (group A) and 18% were already wearing the system (group B). The cumulative incidence of severe hypoglycemia (SH) at 12 months was 12.06 per 100 person-year (95% CI: 8.35-16.85) in group A and 10.14 (95% CI: 4.08-20.90) in group B without inter-group differences. In group A there was a significant decrease in SH at 12 months compared to 3 months period (p = 0.005). Time in glucose range significantly increased in both groups accompanied with a significant decrease in glucose variability. HbA1c showed a progressive significant time-dependent decrease in group A. The use of the device significantly improved the perceived quality of life.

CONCLUSION

This study confirmed the effectiveness of the isCGM in reducing hypoglycemic risk without glucose deterioration, with potential benefits on adverse outcomes in T1D individuals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov registration no. NCT04060732.

Clinical potential of fasting in type 1 diabetes

Most adults with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) are either overweight or obese. As such, dietary management is recommended as an adjunct to insulin treatment to improve glycemic control and facilitate weight loss in these patients. Time-restricted eating (TRE) is a form of intermittent fasting that offers a simplified approach to treating obesity in T1DM. TRE typically involves restricting eating to 6 to 10 h per day, with water and medications allowed outside the eating window. This review examines the efficacy of TRE and other fasting protocols in improving weight and glycemic control in patients with obesity and T1DM. This review will also evaluate the safety of these regimens and provide advice to clinicians on implementing intermittent fasting in T1DM.

The effect of bolus advisors on glycaemic parameters in adults with diabetes on intensive insulin therapy: A systematic review with meta-analysis

AIM

To conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis to provide a comprehensive synthesis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies investigating the effects of currently available bolus advisors on glycaemic parameters in adults with diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search of PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted in December 2022. The risk of bias was assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. (Standardized) mean difference (MD) was selected to determine the difference in continuous outcomes between the groups. A random-effects model meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed. This systematic review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022374588).

RESULTS

A total of 18 RCTs involving 1645 adults (50% females) with a median glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration of 8.45% (7.95%-9.30%) were included. The majority of participants had type 1 diabetes (N = 1510, 92%) and were on multiple daily injections (N = 1173, 71%). Twelve of the 18 trials had low risk of bias. The meta-analysis of 10 studies with available data on HbA1c showed that the use of a bolus advisor modestly reduced HbA1c compared to standard treatment (MD -011%, 95% confidence interval -0.22 to -0.01; I2 = 0%). This effect was accompanied by small improvements in low blood glucose index and treatment satisfaction, but not with reductions in hypoglycaemic events or changes in other secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Use of a bolus advisor is associated with slightly better glucose control and treatment satisfaction in people with diabetes on intensive insulin treatment. Future studies should investigate whether personalizing bolus advisors using artificial intelligence technology can enhance these effects.

Carbohydrate counting knowledge and ambulatory glucose profile in persons living with type 1 diabetes

CONTEXT

The amount of consumed carbohydrates is the strongest factor influencing glucose levels during the four hours following a meal. Our aim was to evaluate the association between carbohydrate counting knowledge and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) parameters in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using different insulin regimens.

METHOD

In this multicenter prospective study, the GluciQuizz questionnaire was used to evaluate carbohydrate knowledge. CGM data for the 14 days preceding completion of the questionnaire were analyzed. The primary endpoint was evaluation of the correlation between the GluciQuizz total score and time in range (TIR) in the study population.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 170 participants was 40.7 ± 14.8 years and duration of T1D 18.8 ± 12.1 years. The mean GluciQuizz total score for all participants was 66 ± 13 %. Mean TIR was 58.6 ± 18.7 %. GluciQuizz total score positively correlated with TIR (r = 0.3001; p < 0.0001). This correlation was observed in CSII users (r = 0.2526; p < 0.05) but not in MDI (r = 0.2510; p = 0.1134) and HCL users (r = -0.1065; p = 0.4914). TIR was also negatively correlated with the mean carb count error in all study participants (r = -0.2317; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, as the Gluciquizz score was associated with metabolic control, this easy-to-use self-administered questionnaire could be used widely on a routine basis to assess the carbohydrate knowledge of T1D patients and to offer them targeted education tailored to their needs.

Twelve-Month Follow-up from a Randomized Controlled Trial of Simplified Meal Announcement Versus Precise Carbohydrate Counting in Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes Using the MiniMed™ 780G Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System

Background and Aims: Carbohydrate counting is a well-established tool for self-management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and can improve glycemic control and potentially reduce long-term complication risk. However, it can also be burdensome, error-prone, and complicated for the patient. A randomized controlled trial was conducted to investigate glycemic control with carbohydrate counting ("flex") versus simplified meal announcement ("fix") in adolescents with T1D using the MiniMed™ 780G system. The present study reports follow-up data to 12 months. Methods: Adolescents with T1D were randomly assigned 1:1 to use the MiniMed™ 780G system alongside the flex versus fix approaches. Participants were followed for 12 months with outcomes recorded at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. The primary endpoint was the difference in time-in-range (TIR), and secondary endpoints included glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and other glucose and insulin metrics. Results: At 12 months, TIR (proportion of time with sensor glucose 70-180 mg/dL) was significantly lower in the fix versus flex group (72.9% vs. 80.1%, respectively; P = 0.001). There was no significant difference in HbA1c between the fix (6.8% ± 0.5%) and flex groups (6.5% ± 0.5%) at 12 months (P = 0.092), and mean HbA1c was below 7% at all time points in both arms. Conclusions: Glycemic control with simplified meal announcement was maintained over 12 months. On average, the international consensus targets were met in both arms for all time points. The simplified approach represents a viable alternative to carbohydrate counting, particularly in people who find the latter burdensome; however, carbohydrate counting resulted in superior TIR. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT05069727.

Does Insulin Delivery Technology Change Our Relationship with Foods? A Scoping Review

Introduction: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems reduce burden and improve glycemic management for people with type 1 diabetes (PwT1D) by automatically adjusting insulin as a response to measured glucose levels. There is a lack of evidence on AID and nutrition variables such as dietary intake, eating behaviors, and disordered eating. Objectives: This scoping review aims to provide a summary of the literature regarding AID and nutrition variables and to identify gaps that require further investigation. Methods: Two researchers conducted a blinded search of Medline (OVID) and PubMed for studies, including AID use (compared to non-AID use) and nutrition variables. Studies from January 2000 to July 2023 were included, as were PwT1D of all ages. Results: A total of 3132 articles were screened for appropriateness. After exclusions, 7 studies were included (2017-2023): 4 qualitative, 1 crossover, 1 randomized controlled, and 1 observational. Studies included adolescents (n = 1), adults (n = 3) or both (n = 2), and all ages (n = 1). In quantitative studies, AID was associated with lower eating distress (-0.43 ± 0.12, P = 0.004) and higher quality of life (3.1, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.8-5.4, P = 0.01), but not grams of carbohydrates at meals (1.0; 95% CI: -0.7 to 3.0; P = 0.24) and snacks (0.004; 95% CI: -0.8 to 0.8; P = 0.99) compared to non-AID use. In qualitative studies, AID increased the frequency and portions of food intake and led to less dietary control from parents. AID users reported eating foods higher in energy density. PwT1D were less worried about achieving accurate carbohydrate counting (CC) when using AID. Conclusions: AID use appears to influence eating behaviors, dietary patterns, and CC, although evidence was limited. AID may reduce food management burden due to the perception that AID can correct for CC inaccuracy. Significance: Further research needs to determine if AID allows for simplification of CC and improves eating behaviors while maintaining glycemic stability.

9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

5. Facilitating Positive Health Behaviors and Well-being to Improve Health Outcomes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Associations Between Psychosocial Needs, Carbohydrate-Counting Behavior, and App Satisfaction: A Randomized Crossover App Trial on 92 Adults With Diabetes

To examine whether psychosocial needs in diabetes care are associated with carbohydrate counting and if carbohydrate counting is associated with satisfaction with diabetes applications' usability, a randomized crossover trial of 92 adults with type 1 or 2 diabetes requiring insulin therapy tested two top-rated diabetes applications, mySugr and OnTrack Diabetes. Survey responses on demographics, psychosocial needs (perceived competence, autonomy, and connectivity), carbohydrate-counting frequency, and application satisfaction were modeled using mixed-effect linear regressions to test associations. Participants ranged between 19 and 74 years old (mean, 54 years) and predominantly had type 2 diabetes (70%). Among the three tested domains of psychosocial needs, only competence-not autonomy or connectivity-was found to be associated with carbohydrate-counting frequency. No association between carbohydrate-counting behavior and application satisfaction was found. In conclusion, perceived competence in diabetes care is an important factor in carbohydrate counting; clinicians may improve adherence to carbohydrate counting with strategies designed to improve perceived competence. Carbohydrate-counting behavior is complex; its impact on patient satisfaction of diabetes application usability is multifactorial and warrants consideration of patient demographics such as sex as well as application features for automated carbohydrate counting.

Healthy lifestyle and genomic ancestry related to good glycemic control in type 1 diabetes patients from Northeastern Brazil: a hierarchical analysis

Introduction

This study aimed to investigate the sociodemographic factors, dietary adherence, regular physical activity, and genomic ancestry percentage associated with good glycemic control in Brazilian patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using a hierarchical approach.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted in 152 T1D patients. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) levels were measured to evaluate the glycemic control status (good, moderate, or poor). Independent factors included sex, age, self-reported skin color, educational level, family income, dietary patterns, and physical activity. The percentage of genomic ancestry (Native American, European, and African) was influenced by a panel of 46 autosomal insertion/deletion ancestry markers. Statistical analyses included receiver operating characteristic curves, and hierarchical logistic regression analysis.

Results

The hierarchical analysis, patients who had high dietary adherence showed a positive association with good glycemic control (adjustedOR = 2.56, 95% CI:1.18-5.59, P = 0.016). Thus, age greater than 40 years was associated with good glycemic control compared to the children and adolescents group (adjustedOR = 4.55, 95% CI:1.14-18.1, P = 0.031). Males were associated with good glycemic control (adjustedOR = 2.00, 95% CI:1.01-4.00, P =0.047).

Conclusion

The study findings suggest that consistent adherence to dietary regimens is associated with good glycemic control after adjusting for sociodemographic and genomic ancestry factors in an admixed population of T1D patients from Northeast Brazil.

Insulin-to-carbohydrate ratios: An overview for nurses

ABSTRACT

Carbohydrate counting is an efficacious technique to safely achieve glycemic targets and improve outcomes for patients using meal-time insulin. This article provides nurses with the knowledge and skills to assist and support their patients. It also reviews how to evaluate glycemic control and provides guidelines for referral to diabetes education programs.

Manual and Application-Based Carbohydrate Counting and Glycemic Control in Type 1 Diabetes Subjects: A Narrative Review

Type 1 diabetes (T1DM) is the most common chronic disease in young adults and children, which is treated with insulin, usually given as basal and boluses. Carbohydrate counting (CHOC) helps patients to determine the correct meal doses. The aim of this review is to study the effect of CHOC on glucose control, body weight, insulin dose and quality of life (QoL). The literature search was conducted using PubMed from January 2010 to October 2022. Studies included in this review are limited to randomized controlled studies involving an intervention group undergoing CHOC and a control group following the usual practice, measuring glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) as a parameter of glucose control and involving only T1DM subjects. A total of ten articles were found to fulfill the criteria involving 1034 patients. Most of the studies showed a positive impact of CHOC on glucose control, especially in adults, where five out of six studies were statistically positive. However, in pediatrics, only two out of four showed a positive outcome. In all four studies using mobile applications, CHOC was better at controlling glucose. No difference was seen between the CHOC group and the control regarding the risk of severe hypoglycemia. In fact, two studies have shown lower hypoglycemia rates. No change in weight was observed in most of the studies (six out of eight). In subjects with T1DM, CHOC might provide better glucose control than traditional care without a significant increment in severe hypoglycemia or weight gain. Mobile application-based models showed promising results in glucose control.

Simplified Meal Announcement Versus Precise Carbohydrate Counting in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes Using the MiniMed 780G Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop System: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Glucose Control

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare glucose control in adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using the MiniMed 780G system who used simplified meal announcement with those who used precise carbohydrate counting.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This randomized controlled trial included 34 participants (age 12-18 years) with T1D who were on multiple daily injections or insulin pump and were scheduled to start using the MiniMed 780G system at Sidra Medicine in Qatar. After a 7-day run-in period, participants were randomly assigned to the fix group (simplified meal announcement by preset of three personalized fixed carbohydrate amounts) or the flex group (precise carbohydrate counting) and followed for 12 weeks. Between-group difference in time in range (TIR) was the primary end point. Secondary end points included HbA1c and other glycometrics.

RESULTS

During the 12-week study phase, TIR was 73.5 ± 6.7% in the fix and 80.3 ± 7.4% in the flex group, with a between-group difference of 6.8% in favor of flex (P = 0.043). Time >250 mg/dL was better in the flex group (P = 0.012), whereas HbA1c (P = 0.168), time below range (P = 0.283), and time between 180 and 250 mg/dL (P = 0.114) did not differ.

CONCLUSIONS

Adolescents using the MiniMed 780G system with a preset of three personalized fixed carbohydrate amounts can reach international targets of glycemic control. Therefore, it may be a valuable alternative to precise carbohydrate counting in users who are challenged by precise carbohydrate counting. Because carbohydrate counting further improves outcomes, these skills remain important for MiniMed 780G users.

Evaluation of carbohydrate counting knowledge among individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus in Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study

Introduction

Carbohydrate counting (CC) is an important nutritional strategy to improve glycaemic outcomes among patients with diabetes. Few studies have investigated CC knowledge among individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in Saudi Arabia. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate CC knowledge in Saudi adults with T1DM.

Study design and methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted between December 2021 and February 2022, including 224 patients with T1DM from the University Diabetes Center, Riyadh. Adults aged ≥18 years, diagnosed with T1DM for >1 year, and residing in Saudi Arabia were included. CC knowledge was assessed using a previously well-studied tool (AdultCarbQuiz), which was translated into Arabic and tested for validity by a group of dieticians. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis, and bivariate and regression analyses were conducted.

Results

The AdultCarbQuiz questionnaire-Arabic version had good validity and reliability (Cronbach's α: 0.87). The CC method was used by 54% of the participants. The mean CC knowledge score was 23.01±7.31. A significant negative linear relationship between the participants' CC knowledge scores, and age and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, was revealed by simple regression analysis. Furthermore, significant independent variables related to CC knowledge scores were CC use, HbA1c levels, being taught about CC (>5 times), insulin pump usage and DM duration (≤15 years).

Conclusions

Approximately half of the patients used the CC method. The mean CC knowledge scores were better in patients who used the CC method, were more frequently taught about CC, were treated using an insulin pump, and had a shorter DM duration than their counterparts. Therefore, designing and implementing a well-structured nutrition education programme tailored to individuals with diabetes is crucial to provide them with up-to-date dietary information, as well as the necessary knowledge and skills, to improve their outcomes and manage their condition.