Cost-effectiveness of health technologies in adults with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Continuous glucose monitoring vs. self-monitoring in pregnant individuals with type 1 diabetes: an economic analysis

BACKGROUND

In the United States, approximately 1% of pregnancies are complicated by pregestational diabetes. Individuals with type 1 diabetes have an increased risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. While continuous glucose monitoring has demonstrated benefits for patients with type 1 diabetes, its cost is higher than traditional intermittent fingerstick monitoring, particularly if used only during pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE

To develop an economic analysis model to compare in silico the cost of continuous glucose monitoring and self-monitoring of blood glucose in a cohort of pregnant individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

STUDY DESIGN

We developed an economic analysis model to compare two glucose monitoring strategies in pregnant individuals with type 1 diabetes: continuous glucose monitoring and self-monitoring. The model considered hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, large for gestational age, cesarean delivery, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, and neonatal hypoglycemia. The primary outcome was the total cost per strategy in 2022 USD from a health system perspective, with self-monitoring as the reference group. Probabilities, relative risks, and costs were extracted from the literature, and the costs were adjusted to 2022 US dollars. Sensitivity analyses were conducted by varying parameters based on the probability, relative risk, and cost distributions. The robustness of the results was tested through 1000 Monte Carlo simulations.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis, the cost of pregnancy using continuous glucose monitoring was $26,837 compared to $29,039 for self-monitoring, resulting in a cost reduction of $2,202 per individual. The parameters with the greatest effect on the incremental cost included the relative risk of NICU admission, cost of NICU admission, continuous glucose monitoring costs, and usual care costs. Monte Carlo simulations indicated that continuous glucose monitoring was the optimal strategy 98.7% of the time. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that continuous glucose monitoring was more economical if the relative risk of NICU admission with continuous glucose monitoring vs. self-monitoring was below 1.15.

CONCLUSION

Compared to self-monitoring, continuous glucose monitoring is an economical strategy for pregnant individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Estimating the cost-effectiveness of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes in England

OBJECTIVE

We previously showed that intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) reduces HbA1c at 24 weeks compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose with finger pricking (SMBG) in adults with type 1 diabetes and high HbA1c levels (58-97 mmol/mol [7.5%-11%]). We aim to assess the economic impact of isCGM compared with SMBG.

METHODS

Participant-level baseline and follow-up health status (EQ-5D-5L) and within-trial healthcare resource-use data were collected. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were derived at 24 weeks, adjusting for baseline EQ-5D-5L. Participant-level costs were generated. Using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model, economic analysis was performed from the National Health Service perspective over a lifetime horizon, discounted at 3.5%.

RESULTS

Within-trial EQ-5D-5L showed non-significant adjusted incremental QALY gain of 0.006 (95% CI: -0.007 to 0.019) for isCGM compared with SMBG and an adjusted cost increase of £548 (95% CI: 381-714) per participant. The lifetime projected incremental cost (95% CI) of isCGM was £1954 (-5108 to 8904) with an incremental QALY (95% CI) gain of 0.436 (0.195-0.652) resulting in an incremental cost-per-QALY of £4477. In all subgroups, isCGM had an incremental cost-per-QALY better than £20,000 compared with SMBG; for people with baseline HbA1c >75 mmol/mol (9.0%), it was cost-saving. Sensitivity analysis suggested that isCGM remains cost-effective if its effectiveness lasts for at least 7 years.

CONCLUSION

While isCGM is associated with increased short-term costs, compared with SMBG, its benefits in lowering HbA1c will lead to sufficient long-term health-gains and cost-savings to justify costs, so long as the effect lasts into the medium term.

The Health Economics of Automated Insulin Delivery Systems and the Potential Use of Time in Range in Diabetes Modeling: A Narrative Review

Intensive therapy with exogenous insulin is the treatment of choice for individuals living with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and some with type 2 diabetes, alongside regular glucose monitoring. The development of systems allowing (semi-)automated insulin delivery (AID), by connecting glucose sensors with insulin pumps and algorithms, has revolutionized insulin therapy. Indeed, AID systems have demonstrated a proven impact on overall glucose control, as indicated by effects on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), risk of severe hypoglycemia, and quality of life measures. An alternative endpoint for glucose control that has arisen from the use of sensor-based continuous glucose monitoring is the time in range (TIR) measure, which offers an indication of overall glucose control, while adding information on the quality of control with regard to blood glucose level stability. A review of literature on the health-economic value of AID systems was conducted, with a focus placed on the growing place of TIR as an endpoint in studies involving AID systems. Results showed that the majority of economic evaluations of AID systems focused on individuals with T1D and found AID systems to be cost-effective. Most studies incorporated HbA1c, rather than TIR, as a clinical endpoint to determine treatment effects on glucose control and subsequent quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains. Likely reasons for the choice of HbA1c as the chosen endpoint is the use of this metric in most validated and established economic models, as well as the limited publicly available evidence on appropriate methodologies for TIR data incorporation within conventional economic evaluations. Future studies could include the novel TIR metric in health-economic evaluations as an additional measure of treatment effects and subsequent QALY gains, to facilitate a holistic representation of the impact of AID systems on glycemic control. This would provide decision makers with robust evidence to inform future recommendations for health care interventions.

Smart connected insulin dose monitoring technologies versus standard of care: a Canadian cost-effectiveness analysis

Aim: There is growing interest in novel insulin management systems that improve glycemic control. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of smart connected insulin re-usable pens or caps for disposable insulin pens versus pens without connected capabilities in the management of adult patients with Type 1 diabetes (T1DM) from a Canadian societal perspective. Materials & methods: The IQVIA Core Diabetes Model was utilized to conduct the analyses. Applying data from a non-interventional study, the connected insulin device arm was assumed to result in greater reductions (-0.67%) in glycated hemoglobin from baseline and fewer non-severe hypoglycemic events (-32.87 events/patient annually). Macro- and micro-vascular risks were predicted using the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications study data. Direct and indirect costs and utilities were sourced from literature. Key model outcomes included life years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Both costs and effects were annually discounted at 1.5% over a 60-year time horizon. Uncertainty was explored in scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA). Results: The connected insulin pen device was associated with lower mean discounted total costs (CAD221,943 vs 266,199; -CAD44,256), improvement in mean life expectancy (25.78 vs 24.29; +1.49 years) and gains in QALYs (18.48 vs 16.74; +1.75 QALYs) over the patient's lifetime. Most scenario analyses confirmed the base case results. The PSA showed dominance in 99.5% of cases. Conclusion: For adults with T1DM in Canada, a connected insulin pen device is likely to be a cost-effective treatment option associated with greater clinical benefits and lower costs relative to a standard re-usable or disposable pen.

Levothyroxine personalized treatment: is it still a dream?

Levothyroxine is a milestone in the treatment of all causes of hypothyroidism. From 19th century till today, Levothyroxine experienced a great advancement, from hypodermic injections of an extract of the thyroid gland of a sheep to novel formulations, known to circumvent malabsorption issue. However, the rate of patients on suboptimal therapy is still high. Current Guidelines are clear, daily Levothyroxine dosage should be calculated based on body weight. However, we are still far away from the possibility to administer the right dosage to the right patient, for several reasons. We retrace the history of treatment with levothyroxine, pointing out strengths and weaknesses of different formulations, with particular attention to what keeps us away from tailored therapy. In the age of digitalization, the pharmaceutical industry has been giving rising importance to Digital therapeutics, that are known to be effective in reaching target therapies. By combining current knowledge of hypothyroidism therapy with cutting-edge technology, we also hypothesized what could be the future strategies to be developed in this field.

Patient Perspectives on the Benefits and Challenges of Diabetes and Digital Technology

Diabetes technology continues to evolve, advancing with our understanding of human biology and improving our ability to treat people with diabetes. Diabetes devices are broadly classified into the following categories: glucose sensors, insulin delivery devices, and digital health care technology (i.e., software and mobile applications). When supported by education and individually tailored, technology can play a key role in optimizing outcomes. Digital devices assist in diabetes management by tracking meals, exercise, sleep, and glycemic measurements in real time, all of which can guide physicians and other clinicians in their decision-making. Here, as people with diabetes and patient advocates, as well as diabetes specialists, primary care providers, and diabetes care and education specialists, we present our perspectives on the advances, benefits, and challenges of diabetes technology in primary care practices.

A cluster randomised controlled trial, process and economic evaluation of quality improvement collaboratives aligned to a national audit to improve the care for people with diabetes (EQUIPD): study protocol

BACKGROUND

People with type 1 diabetes and raised glucose levels are at greater risk of retinopathy, nephropathy, neuropathy, cardiovascular disease, sexual health problems and foot disease. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommends continuous subcutaneous 'insulin pump' therapy for people with type 1 diabetes whose HbA1c is above 69 mmol/mol. Insulin pump use can improve quality of life, cut cardiovascular risk and increase treatment satisfaction. About 90,000 people in England and Wales meet NICE criteria for insulin pumps but do not use one. Insulin pump use also varies markedly by deprivation, ethnicity, sex and location. Increasing insulin pump use is a key improvement priority. Audit and feedback is a common but variably effective intervention. Limited capabilities of healthcare providers to mount effective responses to feedback from national audits, such as the National Diabetes Audit (NDA), undermines efforts to improve care. We have co-developed a theoretically and empirically informed quality improvement collaborative (QIC) to strengthen local responses to feedback with patients and carers, national audits and healthcare providers. We will evaluate whether the QIC improves the uptake of insulin pumps following NDA feedback.

METHODS

We will undertake an efficient cluster randomised trial using routine data. The QIC will be delivered alongside the NDA to specialist diabetes teams in England and Wales. Our primary outcome will be the proportion of people with type 1 diabetes and an HbA1c above 69 mmol/mol who start and continue insulin pump use during the 18-month intervention period. Secondary outcomes will assess change in glucose control and duration of pump use. Subgroup analyses will explore impacts upon inequalities by ethnicity, sex, age and deprivation. A theory-informed process evaluation will explore diabetes specialist teams' engagement, implementation, fidelity and tailoring through observations, interviews, surveys and documentary analysis. An economic evaluation will micro-cost the QIC, estimate cost-effectiveness of NDA feedback with QIC and estimate the budget impact of NHS-wide QIC roll out.

DISCUSSION

Our study responds to a need for more head-to-head trials of different ways of reinforcing feedback delivery. Our findings will have implications for other large-scale audit and feedback programmes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN82176651 Registered 18 October 2022.

Current Technologies for Managing Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus and Their Impact on Quality of Life-A Narrative Review

Type 1 diabetes mellitus is a chronic autoimmune disease that affects millions of people and generates high healthcare costs due to frequent complications when inappropriately managed. Our paper aimed to review the latest technologies used in T1DM management for better glycemic control and their impact on daily life for people with diabetes. Continuous glucose monitoring systems provide a better understanding of daily glycemic variations for children and adults and can be easily used. These systems diminish diabetes distress and improve diabetes control by decreasing hypoglycemia. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusions have proven their benefits in selected patients. There is a tendency to use more complex systems, such as hybrid closed-loop systems that can modulate insulin infusion based on glycemic readings and artificial intelligence-based algorithms. It can help people manage the burdens associated with T1DM management, such as fear of hypoglycemia, exercising, and long-term complications. The future is promising and aims to develop more complex ways of automated control of glycemic levels to diminish the distress of individuals living with diabetes.

Asia-Pacific Perspectives on the Role of Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Optimizing Diabetes Management

Diabetes is prevalent, and it imposes a substantial public health burden globally and in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region. The cornerstone for optimizing diabetes management and treatment outcomes is glucose monitoring, the techniques of which have evolved from self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) to glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and to continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Contextual differences with Western populations and limited regionally generated clinical evidence warrant regional standards of diabetes care, including glucose monitoring in APAC. Hence, the APAC Diabetes Care Advisory Board convened to gather insights into clinician-reported CGM utilization for optimized glucose monitoring and diabetes management in the region. We discuss the findings from a pre-meeting survey and an expert panel meeting regarding glucose monitoring patterns and influencing factors, patient profiles for CGM initiation and continuation, CGM benefits, and CGM optimization challenges and potential solutions in APAC. While CGM is becoming the new standard of care and a useful adjunct to HbA1c and SMBG globally, glucose monitoring type, timing, and frequency should be individualized according to local and patient-specific contexts. The results of this APAC survey guide methods for the formulation of future APAC-specific consensus guidelines for the application of CGM in people living with diabetes.

Costs and Outcomes Comparison of Diabetes Technology Usage Among People With Type 1 or 2 Diabetes Using Rapid-Acting Insulin

BACKGROUND

Does initiation of a continuous glucose monitor (CGM) or insulin pump lower health care utilization and/or costs?

METHODS

Distinct cohorts of people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) using a blood glucose monitor (BGM), CGM, pump, or CGM with pump were identified from a large claims database. Patients ≥40 years old with 12 months of continuous enrollment before and after the device start date qualified for the study. Outcomes included one-year medical utilization and costs (minus device) for events such as hospitalizations and office visits. Generalized linear models were fitted, controlling for numerous baseline covariates. The Holm method corrected for the multiplicity of hypotheses tested.

RESULTS

Of the 8235 total patients, the BGM control group was the largest, had the lowest percentage of patients with T1D, and was significantly different from the device groups in most baseline categories. Formally, only two comparisons were statistically significant: Compared with BGM, the pump cohort had greater adjusted first-year total medical and office visit costs. Other secondary outcomes such as days hospitalized, emergency department visits and labs, favored pump. Most endpoints were favorable for CGM. Results for CGM with pump generally were intermediate between CGM and pump alone.

CONCLUSIONS

During a one-year follow-up, unadjusted medical costs of both CGM and pump appear lower than BGM, but multivariable modeling yielded adjusted savings only for CGM use. Economic benefits might be observable sooner for CGMs than for pumps. Generalized linear models fitted to health care utilization event rates produced favorable results for both CGM and pump.

Nationally Subsidized Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) Initiative recently introduced universal subsidized CGM funding for people with type 1 diabetes under 21 years of age in Australia. We thus aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of this CGM Initiative based on national implementation data and project the economic impact of extending the subsidy to all age-groups.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We used a patient-level Markov model to simulate disease progression for young people with type 1 diabetes and compared government-subsidized access to CGM with the previous user-funded system. Three years of real-world clinical input data were sourced from analysis of the Australasian Diabetes Data Network and National Diabetes Services Scheme registries. Costs were considered from the Australian health care system's perspective. An annual discount rate of 5% was applied to future costs and outcomes. Uncertainty was evaluated with probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Government-subsidized CGM funding for young people with type 1 diabetes compared with a completely user-funded model resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of AUD 39,518 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Most simulations (85%) were below the commonly accepted willingness-to-pay threshold of AUD 50,000 per QALY gained in Australia. Sensitivity analyses indicated that base-case results were robust, though strongly impacted by the cost of CGM devices. Extending the CGM Initiative throughout adulthood resulted in an ICER of AUD 34,890 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

Providing subsidized access to CGM for people with type 1 diabetes was found to be cost-effective compared with a completely user-funded model in Australia.

Healthcare Utilization, Costs, and Adverse Events of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring versus Traditional Blood Glucose Monitoring Among US Adults with Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To compare healthcare utilization, costs, and incidence of diabetes-specific adverse events (ie, hyperglycemia, diabetic ketoacidosis, and hypoglycemia) in type 1 diabetes adult patients using real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) versus traditional blood glucose monitoring (BG).

METHODS

Adult patients (≥18 years old) with type 1 diabetes in a large national administrative claims database between 2013 and 2015 were identified. rtCGM patients with 6-month continuous health plan enrollment and ≥1 pharmacy claim for insulin during pre-index and post-index periods were propensity-score matched with BG patients. Healthcare utilization associated with diabetic adverse events were examined. A difference-in-difference (DID) method was used to compare the change in costs between rtCGM and BG cohorts.

RESULTS

Six-month medical costs for rtCGM patients (N = 153) increased from pre- to post-index period, while they decreased for matched BG patients (N = 153). DID analysis indicated a $2,807 (P = .062) higher post-index difference in total medical costs for rtCGM patients. Pharmacy costs for both cohorts increased. DID analysis indicated a $1,775 (P < .001) higher post-index difference in pharmacy costs for rtCGM patients. The incidence of hyperglycemia for both cohorts increased minimally from pre- to post-index period. The incidence of hypoglycemia for rtCGM patients decreased, while it increased marginally for BG patients. Inpatient hospitalizations for rtCGM and BG patients increased and decreased marginally, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

rtCGM users had non-significantly higher pre-post differences in medical costs but significantly higher pre-post differences in pharmacy costs (mostly due to the rtCGM costs themselves) compared to BG users. Changes in adverse events were minimal.

Economic Evaluation of Pharmacist-Led Digital Health Interventions: A Systematic Review

There has been growing interest in integrating digital technologies in healthcare. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the economic value of pharmacist-led digital interventions. PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane databases were searched to select studies that had conducted economic evaluations of digital interventions by pharmacists for the period from January 2001 to February 2022. Economic evidence from 14 selected studies was synthesized in our analysis. Pharmacists used telephones, computers, web-based interventions, videotapes, smartphones, and multiple technologies for their digital interventions. Prior studies have reported the results of telephone-based interventions to be cost-effective. Alternatively, these interventions were found to be cost-effective when reevaluated with recently cited willingness-to-pay thresholds. In addition, pharmacist-led interventions based on computers, web-based interventions, smartphones, and multiple technologies have been reported to be cost-effective in previous studies. However, videotape-based intervention was found cost-ineffective because there was no significant difference in outcomes between the intervention and the usual care groups. If this intervention had been intensive enough to improve outcomes in the intervention group, favorable cost-effectiveness results could have been obtained. The economic evidence in the previous studies represented short-term economic values. Economic evaluations of the long-term value of digital interventions are warranted in future studies.

The Cost of Control: Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Hybrid Closed-Loop Therapy in Youth

OBJECTIVE

Hybrid closed-loop (HCL) therapy is an efficacious management strategy for young people with type 1 diabetes. However, high costs prevent equitable access. We thus sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of HCL therapy compared with current care among young people with type 1 diabetes in Australia.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A patient-level Markov model was constructed to simulate disease progression for young people with type 1 diabetes using HCL therapy versus current care, with follow-up from 12 until 25 years of age. Downstream health and economic consequences were compared via decision analysis. Treatment effects and proportions using different technologies to define "current care" were based primarily on data from an Australian pediatric randomized controlled trial. Transition probabilities and utilities for health states were sourced from published studies. Costs were considered from the Australian health care system's perspective. An annual discount rate of 5% was applied to future costs and outcomes. Uncertainty was evaluated with probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Use of HCL therapy resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of Australian dollars (AUD) $32,789 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The majority of simulations (93.3%) were below the commonly accepted willingness-to-pay threshold of AUD $50,000 per QALY gained in Australia. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the base-case results were robust.

CONCLUSIONS

In this first cost-effectiveness analysis of HCL technologies for the management of young people with type 1 diabetes, HCL therapy was found to be cost-effective compared with current care in Australia.

Need for HTA supported risk factor screening for hypertension and diabetes in Nepal: A systematic scoping review

Objective

Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is a comprehensive and important tool for assessment and decision-making in public health and healthcare practice. It is recommended by the WHO and has been applied in practice in many countries, mostly the developed ones. HTA might be an important tool to achieve universal health coverage (UHC), especially beneficial to low-and-middle-income countries (LMIC). Even though the Package for Essential Non-communicable Diseases (PEN) has already been initiated, there is a clear policy gap in the HTA of any health device, service, or procedure, including the assessment of cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) in Nepal. Hence, we carried out the review to document the HTA supported evidence of hypertension and diabetes screening, as CVRFs in Nepal.

Materials and methods

We searched in PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar, along with some gray literature published in the last 6 years (2016–2021) in a systematic way with a controlled vocabulary using a well-designed and pilot tested search strategy, screened them, and a total of 53 articles and reports that matched the screening criteria were included for the review. We then, extracted the data in a pre-designed MS-Excel format, first in one, and then, from it, in two, with more specific data.

Results

Of 53 included studies, we reported the prevalence and/or proportion of hypertension and diabetes with various denominators. Furthermore, HTA-related findings such as cost, validity, alternative tool or technology, awareness, and intervention effectiveness have been documented and discussed further, however, not summarized due to their sparingness.

Conclusion

Overall, the prevalence of DM (4.4–18.8%) and HTN (17.2–70.0%) was reported in most studies, with a few, covering other aspects of HTA of DM/HTN. A national policy for establishing an HTA agency and some immediately implementable actions are highly recommended.

Technologies for Diabetes Self-Monitoring: A Scoping Review and Assessment Using the REASSURED Criteria

BACKGROUND

Self-management is an important pillar for diabetes control and to achieve it, glucose self-monitoring devices are needed. Currently, there exist several different devices in the market and many others are being developed. However, whether these devices are suitable to be used in resource constrained settings is yet to be evaluated.

AIMS

To assess existing glucose monitoring tools and also those in development against the REASSURED which have been previously used to evaluate diagnostic tools for communicable diseases.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review by searching PubMed for peer-review articles published in either English, Spanish or Portuguese in the last 5 years. We selected papers including information about devices used for self-monitoring and tested on humans with diabetes; then, the REASSURED criteria were used to assess them.

RESULTS

We found a total of 7 continuous glucose monitoring device groups, 6 non-continuous, and 6 devices in development. Accuracy varied between devices and most of them were either invasive or minimally invasive. Little to no evidence is published around robustness, affordability and delivery to those in need. However, when reviewing publicly available prices, none of the devices would be affordable for people living in low- and middle-income countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Available devices cannot be considered adapted for use in self-monitoring in resource constraints settings. Further studies should aim to develop less-invasive devices that do not require a large set of components. Additionally, we suggest some improvement in the REASSURED criteria such as the inclusion of patient-important outcomes to increase its appropriateness to assess non-communicable diseases devices.

Perceived Burdens and Benefits Associated With Continuous Glucose Monitor Use in Type 1 Diabetes Across the Lifespan

BACKGROUND

Continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) help people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) improve their glycemic profiles but are underutilized. To better understand why, perceived CGM burdens and benefits in nonusers versus users with type 1 diabetes across the lifespan were assessed.

METHODS

Burdens (BurCGM) and benefits of CGM (BenCGM) questionnaires were completed during T1D outpatient visits (n = 1334) from February 2019 to February 2020. Mean scores were calculated (scale one to five; higher scores reflect greater perceived burdens/benefits). Data were collected from medical records including glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) within 3 months of the visit.

RESULTS

Individuals of all ages using CGM described more benefits and less burdens (mean scores 4.48 and 1.69, respectively) when compared with those who were not using CGM (mean score 4.19 and 2.35, respectively) (P < .001). There were no differences in burdens or benefits by sex. Non-CGM users aged ≥50 years had higher mean BurCGM scores than those aged <50 years (P = .004); the cost was the greatest barrier in those aged 27+ years. Other burdens were readings not trusted, painful to wear, and takes too much time to use. For those aged 65+, nonusers versus users, 18.5% versus 3.1% agreed with "it was too hard to understand CGM information," and 21.4% versus 7.7% agreed that CGM causes too much worry. Mean HbA1C was lower in CGM users (8.1%) versus non-CGM users (mean A1c 9.1%; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

CGM was perceived as having more burdens and less benefits in nonusers, with differences in concerns varying across the lifespan. Lower costs and age-appropriate education are needed to address these barriers.

American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: The Use of Advanced Technology in the Management of Persons With Diabetes Mellitus

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based recommendations regarding the use of advanced technology in the management of persons with diabetes mellitus to clinicians, diabetes-care teams, health care professionals, and other stakeholders.

METHODS

The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology (AACE) conducted literature searches for relevant articles published from 2012 to 2021. A task force of medical experts developed evidence-based guideline recommendations based on a review of clinical evidence, expertise, and informal consensus, according to established AACE protocol for guideline development.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes of interest included hemoglobin A1C, rates and severity of hypoglycemia, time in range, time above range, and time below range.

RESULTS

This guideline includes 37 evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for advanced diabetes technology and contains 357 citations that inform the evidence base.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Evidence-based recommendations were developed regarding the efficacy and safety of devices for the management of persons with diabetes mellitus, metrics used to aide with the assessment of advanced diabetes technology, and standards for the implementation of this technology.

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced diabetes technology can assist persons with diabetes to safely and effectively achieve glycemic targets, improve quality of life, add greater convenience, potentially reduce burden of care, and offer a personalized approach to self-management. Furthermore, diabetes technology can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of clinical decision-making. Successful integration of these technologies into care requires knowledge about the functionality of devices in this rapidly changing field. This information will allow health care professionals to provide necessary education and training to persons accessing these treatments and have the required expertise to interpret data and make appropriate treatment adjustments.

Standardizing Reporting of Glucose and Insulin Data for Patients on Multiple Daily Injections Using Connected Insulin Pens and Continuous Glucose Monitoring

Background: Recent development and availability of several connected insulin pens with digital memory are likely to expand the availability of glucose and insulin metrics that previously had been available only for the much smaller number of people using insulin pumps. It would be highly desirable to standardize data presentations to avoid the chaotic emergence of multiple formats that might reduce the clinical utility of connected pens. Methods: We reviewed the literature and analyzed data displays from multiple blood glucose monitoring, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), insulin pump, and automated insulin delivery systems, and methods for combination of glucose and insulin data. We examined multiple forms of presentation and now propose a prototype for a standardized method for data analysis and display, focusing on the content and format of a one-page dashboard summary for patients on multiple daily injection (MDI) insulin regimens. Results: We propose the following metrics to be included in the one-page report: (A) glucose metrics: simplified glucose distribution in the form of a stacked bar chart showing percentages of time below-, above-, or within-target ranges overall and (optionally) by date, by time of day, or day of the week; (B) insulin metrics: types and doses, and timing of basal and bolus insulin; (C) an enhanced ambulatory glucose profile or "AGP+" showing glucose data points and/or distributions (10th to 90th percentiles), dosages and timing of basal and bolus insulins and (optionally) graphical display of risk of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia; and (D) user experience regarding technology usage, frequency of alerts for hypo- and hyperglycemia, and information regarding lifestyle, meals, exercise, and sleep, if available; and (E) clinical insights and interpretation. Conclusion: We propose a prototype for a dashboard summary report of glucose, insulin, meals, and activity data intended for providers and patients on MDI using connected pens and CGM. Our goal is to stimulate development of a standardized approach.