Why #WeAreNotWaiting-Motivations and Self-Reported Outcomes Among Users of Open-source Automated Insulin Delivery Systems: Multinational Survey

Diabetes Technology Meeting 2023

Diabetes Technology Society hosted its annual Diabetes Technology Meeting from November 1 to November 4, 2023. Meeting topics included digital health; metrics of glycemia; the integration of glucose and insulin data into the electronic health record; technologies for insulin pumps, blood glucose monitors, and continuous glucose monitors; diabetes drugs and analytes; skin physiology; regulation of diabetes devices and drugs; and data science, artificial intelligence, and machine learning. A live demonstration of a personalized carbohydrate dispenser for people with diabetes was presented.

Patient-reported outcomes in studies of diabetes technology: What matters

In recent years, diabetes technologies have revolutionized the care of people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Emerging evidence suggests that people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) can experience similar benefits from these advances in technology. While glycaemic outcomes are often a primary focus, the lived experience of the person with diabetes is equally important. In this review, we describe the impact of diabetes technologies on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). We highlight that most of the published studies investigated PROMs as secondary outcomes. Continuous glucose monitoring systems may have an important role in improving PROMs in individuals with T1D, which may be driven by the prevention or proactive management of hypoglycaemia. In people with T2D, continuous glucose monitoring may also have an important role in improving PROMs, particularly in those treated with insulin therapy. The impact of insulin pumps on PROMs seems positive in T1D, while there is limited evidence in T2D. Studies of hybrid closed-loop therapies suggest increased treatment satisfaction, improved quality of life and decreased diabetes-related distress in T1D, but it is unclear whether these benefits are because of a 'class-effect' or individual systems. We conclude that PROMs deserve a more central role in trials and clinical practice, and we discuss directions for future research.

Perceived Penalties for Sharing Patient Beliefs with Health Care Providers

BACKGROUND

Health care interactions may require patients to share with a physician information they believe but is incorrect. While a key piece of physicians' work is educating their patients, people's concerns of being seen as uninformed or incompetent by physicians may lead them to think that sharing incorrect health beliefs comes with a penalty. We tested people's perceptions of patients who share incorrect information and how these perceptions vary by the reasonableness of the belief and its centrality to the patient's disease.

DESIGN

We recruited 399 United States Prolific.co workers (357 retained after exclusions), 200 Prolific.co workers who reported having diabetes (139 after exclusions), and 244 primary care physicians (207 after exclusions). Participants read vignettes describing patients with type 2 diabetes sharing health beliefs that were central or peripheral to the management of diabetes. Beliefs included true and incorrect statements that were reasonable or unreasonable to believe. Participants rated how a doctor would perceive the patient, the patient's ability to manage their disease, and the patient's trust in doctors.

RESULTS

Participants rated patients who shared more unreasonable beliefs more negatively. There was an extra penalty for incorrect statements central to the patient's diabetes management (sample 1). These results replicated for participants with type 2 diabetes (sample 2) and physician participants (sample 3).

CONCLUSIONS

Participants believed that patients who share incorrect information with their physicians will be penalized for their honesty. Physicians need to be educated on patients' concerns so they can help patients disclose what may be most important for education.

HIGHLIGHTS

Understanding how people think they will be perceived in a health care setting can help us understand what they may be wary to share with their physicians.People think that patients who share incorrect beliefs will be viewed negatively.Helping patients share incorrect beliefs can improve care.

A comparison of the usage of an open-source automated insulin delivery system and the MiniMed™ 780 G system in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes in real-world settings: the AWeSoMe study group

PURPOSE

In recent years there has been a noticeable increase in the use of advanced hybrid closed-loop systems (AHCLs) for managing type 1 diabetes (T1D) among youth. However, there is a lack of comparison between the open-source automated insulin delivery (AID) system and the MiniMed™ 780 G system (780 G).

METHODS

In this multi-center study, we retrospectively compared selected glycemic ranges of 26 individuals who used open-source AID and 20 individuals who used 780 G (age 11.3 years [IQR 9.3, 12.9] and 13.4 years [IQR 10.9, 16.5], respectively, p = 0.069) from system initiation to the most recent visit.

RESULTS

At baseline, the median HbA1c was significantly lower and the time below range (TBR)<54mg/dL was significantly higher in the open-source AID group compared to the 780 G group (6.8% [IQR 6.4, 7.1] vs. 7.4% [IQR 6.9, 8.6], p = 0.006 and (1.0% [IQR 0.5, 2.8] vs. 0.0% [0.0, 1.0], p = 0.014), respectively; the median time in range (TIR70-180mg/dL) was similar (p = 0.068). After a median duration of 10.9 months on AHCLs the reduction of HbA1c was similar ( ~ 0.3%). The time spent in the hypoglycemic ranges was longer among users of the open-source AID compared to 780 G (TBR54-70mg/dL 4.2% [IQR 2.6, 7.3] vs. 2.0% [1.0, 4.0], p = 0.005) and TBR<54mg/dL 1.1% [IQR 0.4, 2.3] vs. 0.0 [0.0, 1.0], p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both AHCLs similarly improved HbA1c and TIR70-180mg/dL. The open-source AID youth had better glycemic control but spent longer time in the hypoglycemic range. These findings must be considered when choosing the use of AHCL technologies.

Point-Counterpoint: The Need for Do-It-Yourself (DIY) Open Source (OS) AID Systems in Type 1 Diabetes Management

In the last decade, technology developed by people with diabetes and their loved ones has added to the options for diabetes management. One such example is that of automated insulin delivery (AID) algorithms, which were created and shared as open source by people living with type 1 diabetes (T1D) years before commercial systems were first available. Now, numerous options for commercial systems exist in some countries, yet tens of thousands of people with diabetes are still choosing Open-Source AID (OS-AID), previously called "do-it-yourself" (DIY) systems, which are noncommercial versions of these open-source AID systems. In this article, we provide point and counterpoint perspectives regarding (1) safety and efficacy, (2) regulation and support, (3) user choice and flexibility, (4) access and affordability, and (5) patient and provider education, for open source and commercial AID systems. The perspectives reflected here include that of a person living with T1D who uses and has developed OS-AID systems, a physician-researcher based in the United States who conducts clinical trials to support development of commercial AID systems and supports people with diabetes using all types of AID, and an endocrinologist with T1D who uses both systems and treats people with diabetes using all types of AID.

A European regulatory pathway for Tidepool loop following clearance in the United States?

The recent clearance by the United States Food and Drug Administration of Tidepool Loop sets an important precedent within the medical device landscape. For the first time, an automated insulin delivery mobile application-based on an algorithm initially designed and developed by users -has been recognised as safe and effective by a regulatory body. The aim of this paper is twofold: firstly, we map out the regulatory pathways and processes that were navigated by Tidepool, the non-profit behind Tidepool Loop, in order to make this landmark moment possible. Secondly, we set out potential approvals processes in the European Union and United Kingdom with a view to examining the challenges to obtaining regulatory clearance for Tidepool Loop in these jurisdictions. In so doing, we highlight the significant differences, not only between the United States and European systems but also between the European Union and Great Britain systems. We conclude by arguing that the complexity encountered when seeking to introduce an innovative solution in different regulatory systems has the potential to act as a disincentive to open source developers from seeking regulatory approvals for such technologies in the future.

Glucometrics and device satisfaction in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes using different treatment modalities: A multicenter real-world observational study

AIMS

To analyze metabolic outcomes, diabetes impact and device satisfaction in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes in Italy who used different treatment modalities for diabetes care in a real-life context.

METHODS

In this multicenter, nationwide, cross-sectional study, 1464 participants were enrolled at a routine visit. The following treatment modalities were considered MDI + SMBG; MDI + CGM; Sensor Augmented Pump Therapy; predictive management of low glucose; Hybrid Closed Loop (HCL); Advanced Hybrid Closed Loop (AHCL). Health related quality of life was evaluated by the Italian version of the Diabetes Impact and Device Satisfaction Scale (DIDS) questionnaire.

RESULTS

Patients treated with AID systems were more likely to have HbA1c ≤ 6.5 %, higher percentage of time with glucose levels between 70 and 180 mg/dL, lower percentage of time with glucose levels above 180 mg/dL, higher device satisfaction, and reduced impact of diabetes. All the therapeutic modalities with respect to MDI + CGM, except for MDI + SMBG, contributed to increase the device satisfaction. HCL and AHCL respect to MDI + CGM were associated with lower diabetes impact.

CONCLUSION

Real-life use of automated insulin delivery systems is associated with reduced type 1 diabetes impact, increased device satisfaction, and achievement of glycemic goals.

Retrospective Comparison of Commercially Available Automated Insulin Delivery With Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery Systems in Type 1 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems have shown to improve glycemic control in a range of populations and settings. At the start of this study, only one commercial AID system had entered the Austrian market (MiniMed 670G, Medtronic). However, there is an ever-growing community of people living with type 1 diabetes (PWT1D) using open-source (OS) AID systems.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 144 PWT1D who used either the MiniMed 670G (670G) or OS-AID systems routinely for a period of at least three to a maximum of six months, between February 18, 2020 and January 15, 2023, were retrospectively analyzed (116 670G aged from 2.6 to 71.8 years and 28 OS-AID aged from 3.4 to 53.5 years). The goal is to evaluate and compare the quality of glycemic control of commercially available AID and OS-AID systems and to present all data by an in-depth descriptive analysis of the population. No statistical tests were performed.

RESULTS

The PWT1D using OS-AID systems spent more time in range (TIR)70-180 mg/dL (81.7% vs 73.9%), less time above range (TAR)181-250 mg/dL (11.1% vs 19.6%), less TAR>250 mg/dL (2.5% vs 4.3%), and more time below range (TBR)54-69 mg/dL (2.2% vs 1.7%) than PWT1D using the 670G system. The TBR<54 mg/dL was comparable in both groups (0.3% vs 0.4%). In the OS-AID group, median glucose level and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) were lower than in the 670G system group (130 vs 150 mg/dL; 6.2% vs 7.0%).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, both groups were able to achieve satisfactory glycemic outcomes independent of age, gender, and diabetes duration. However, the PWT1D using OS-AID systems attained an even better glycemic control with no clinical safety concerns.

Glucose Variability Analysis in Two Large-Scale and Real-World Data Sets of Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery Systems

BACKGROUND

Open-source automated insulin delivery (OS-AID) systems combine commercially available insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors with open-source algorithms to automate insulin dosing for people with insulin-requiring diabetes. Two data sets (OPEN and the OpenAPS Data Commons) contain anonymized OS-AID user data.

METHODS

We assessed glycemic variability (GV) outcomes in the OPEN data set and characterized it alongside a comparison to the n = 122 version of the OpenAPS Data Commons. Glucose data are analyzed using an unsupervised machine learning algorithm for clustering, and GV metrics are quantified using statistical tests for distribution comparison. Demographic data are also analyzed quantitatively.

RESULTS

The n = 75 OPEN data set contains 36 827 days worth of data. Mean TIR is 82.08% (TOR < 70: 3.66%; TOR > 180: 14.3%). LBGI (P < .05) differs by gender whereas HBGI distributions are similar (P > .05). GV metrics (except TOR < 70, LBGI) show a statistically significant difference (P < .05) between data sets.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the OPEN and OpenAPS Data Commons data sets show TOR < 70, TIR, and TOR > 180 within recommended goals, adding additional evidence of real-world efficacy of OS-AID. Future research should evaluate in more detail potential data set differences and relationships between individual patterns of user behaviors and GV outcomes.

Variability of Glycemic Outcomes and Insulin Requirements Throughout the Menstrual Cycle: A Qualitative Study on Women With Type 1 Diabetes Using an Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery System

BACKGROUND

The impact of hormone dynamics throughout the menstrual cycle on insulin sensitivity represents a currently under-researched area. Despite therapeutic and technological advances, self-managing insulin therapy remains challenging for women with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

METHODS

To investigate perceived changes in glycemic levels and insulin requirements throughout the menstrual cycle and different phases of life, we performed semi-structured interviews with 12 women with T1D who are using personalized open-source automated insulin delivery (AID) systems. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis with an inductive, hypothesis-generating approach.

RESULTS

Participants reported significant differences between the follicular phase, ovulation, and luteal phase of the menstrual cycle and also during puberty, pregnancy, and menopause. All participants reported increased comfort and safety since using AID, but were still required to manually adjust their therapy according to their cycle. A lack of information and awareness and limited guidance by health care providers were frequently mentioned. Although individual adjustment strategies exist, achieving optimum outcomes was still perceived as challenging.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights that scientific evidence, therapeutic options, and professional guidance on female health-related aspects in T1D are insufficient to date. Further efforts are required to better inform people with T1D, as well as for health care professionals, researchers, medical device manufacturers, and regulatory bodies to better address female health needs in therapeutic advances.

The First Regulatory Clearance of an Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery Algorithm

Open-source Automated Insulin Dosing (OS-AID) algorithms are made publicly accessible so that every facet of their operation can be understood. Currently, commercial AID algorithms are kept proprietary trade secrets, despite the role they take in making life and death decisions for people living with type 1 diabetes. Loop was the second OS-AID algorithm, developed initially by Nate Racklyeft and Pete Schwamb. In 2018, the nonprofit organization Tidepool (Palo Alto, CA) announced the launch of the "Tidepool Loop" initiative with the aim to generate real-world evidence and obtain regulatory clearance. By the end of 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration received Tidepool's application for an interoperable automated glycemic controller based on Loop. After 2 years, the FDA approved the Tidepool Loop on January 23, 2023.

Open-source automated insulin delivery systems (OS-AIDs) in a pediatric population with type 1 diabetes in a real-life setting: the AWeSoMe study group experience

PURPOSE

The use of open-source automated insulin delivery systems (OS-AIDs), for the management of type 1 diabetes (T1D), has increased over recent years in all age groups. Real-life data has demonstrated the safety and efficacy of these systems, however, studies in the pediatric population remain limited. In this study, we aimed to examine the effect of transition to an OS-AIDs on glycemic parameters, and on several aspects related to quality of life. In addition, we aimed to characterize the socioeconomic position of families who chose this treatment modality, assess their motivations to do so, and evaluate treatment satisfaction.

METHODS

In this multi-center observational real-life study from the AWeSoMe Group, we compared glycemic parameters of 52 individuals with T1D (56% males, mean diabetes duration 4.2 ± 3.9 years), from the last clinic visit prior to OS-AIDs initiation to the most recent clinic visit while using the system. Socioeconomic position (SEP) index was retrieved from the Israel Central Bureau of Statistics. Caregivers completed questionnaires assessing reasons for system initiation and treatment satisfaction.

RESULTS

Mean age at OS-AIDs initiation was 11.2 ± 4 years, range 3.3-20.7 years with a median usage duration of 11.1 months (range 3-45.7). Mean SEP Index was 1.033 ± 0.956 (value range: -2.797 to 2.590). Time in range (TIR) of 70 to 180 mg/dl increased from 69.0 ± 11.9 to 75.5 ± 11.7%, (P < 0.001), and HbA1c decreased from 6.9 ± 0.7 to 6.4 ± 0.6%, (P < 0.001). Time in tight range (TITR) of 70 to 140 mg/dl increased from 49.7 ± 12.9 to 58.8 ± 10.8% (P < 0.001). No episodes of severe hypoglycemia or DKA were reported. Reduction in diabetes burden and sleep quality improvement were the main reasons for OS-AID initiation.

CONCLUSIONS

In our cohort of youth with T1D, the transition to an OS-AID resulted in greater TIR and less severe hypoglycemia regardless of age, diabetes duration or SEP, which was found to be above average. The overall improvement in glycemic parameters in our study population with excellent baseline glycemic control, provides additional evidence of beneficence and efficacy of OS-AIDs in the pediatric population.

Barriers to uptake of Open-Source automated insulin delivery Systems: Analysis of socioeconomic factors and perceived challenges of adults with type 1 diabetes from the OPEN survey

AIMS

Social and technical trends are empowering people with diabetes to co-create or self-develop medical devices and treatments to address their unmet healthcare needs, for example, open-source automated insulin delivery (AID) systems. This study aims to investigate the perceived barriers towards adoption and maintaining of open-source AID systems.

METHODS

This is a multinational study based on a cross-sectional, retrospective web-based survey of non-users of open-source AID. Participants (n = 129) with type 1 diabetes from 31 countries were recruited online to elicit their perceived barriers towards building and maintaining of an open-source AID system.

RESULTS

Sourcing the necessary components, lack of confidence in one's own technology knowledge and skills, perceived time and energy required to build a system, and fear of losing healthcare provider support appear to be major barriers towards the uptake of open-source AID.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified a range of structural and individual-level barriers to uptake of open-source AID. Some of these individual-level barriers may be overcome over time through the peer support of the DIY online community as well as greater acceptance of open-source innovation among healthcare professionals. The findings have important implications for understanding the possible wider diffusion of open-source diabetes technology solutions in the future.

Quality of life and psychological well-being among children and adolescents with diabetes and their caregivers using open-source automated insulin delivery systems: Findings from a multinational survey

BACKGROUND

Open-source automated insulin delivery (AID) systems have shown to be safe and effective in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in real-world studies. However, there is a lack of evidence on the effect on their caregivers' quality-of-life (QoL) and well-being. The aim of this study was to assess the QoL of caregivers and children and adolescents using open-source AID systems using validated measures.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional online survey we examined the caregiver-reported QoL and well-being of users and non-users. Validated questionnaires assessed general well-being (WHO-5), diabetes-specific QoL (PAID, PedsQL) and sleep quality (PSQI).

RESULTS

168 caregivers from 27 countries completed at least one questionnaire, including 119 caregivers of children using open-source AID and 49 not using them. After inclusion of covariates, all measures but the PAID and one subscale of the PedsQL showed significant between-group differences with AID users reporting higher general (WHO-5: p = 0.003), sleep-related (PSQI: p = 0.001) and diabetes-related QoL (PedsQL: p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The results show the potential impact of open-source AID on QoL and psychological well-being of caregivers and children and adolescents with T1D, and can therefore help to inform academia, regulators, and policymakers about the psychosocial health implications of open-source AID.

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.

Mapping the Landscape of Do-it-Yourself Medicine

The practice of medicine is typically conceptualized as remaining within the boundaries of a hospital or clinic. However, in recent years, patients have been able to gain access to information about medical research as it is ongoing. As a result, there has been a rise in do-it-yourself (DIY) medicine, where individuals treat themselves for medical conditions outside of clinical settings, often mimicking experimental therapies that remain inaccessible to the wider public. For example, in DIY brain stimulation, individuals suffering from depression build at-home electrical headsets using nine-volt batteries, mimicking an experimental neuroscience technique used in scientific laboratories. In DIY fecal transplantation, those with intestinal disorders like C. Difficile and inflammatory bowel disease transplant stool from donors into themselves with the aid of blenders and enemas. In the open Artificial Pancreas System movement, diabetes patients hacked together an artificial pancreas system from their glucose monitors and insulin pumps, years before such a system was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA). To date, scholarship on DIY medicine has largely been relegated to specific medical domains (e.g., neurology, gastroenterology, infectious disease). In this paper, however, I recognize DIY medicine as a cross-cutting phenomenon that has emerged independently across medical domains but shares common features. I map the varieties of DIY medicine across these domains and suggest that four key factors lead to their creation, growth, and uptake. In doing so, this essay sheds light on an understudied area of biomedical citizen science that is likely to grow substantially in the coming decades.

Improved Glycemia and Quality of Life Among Loop Users: Analysis of Real-world Data From a Single Center

BACKGROUND

Despite do-it-yourself automated insulin delivery being an unapproved method of insulin delivery, an increasing number of people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) worldwide are choosing to use Loop, a do-it-yourself automated insulin delivery system.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to assess glycemic outcomes, safety, and the perceived impact on quality of life (QOL) in a local Edmonton cohort of known Loop users.

METHODS

An observational study of adults with T1D who used Loop was performed. An assessment of glycemic and safety outcomes, HbA1c, time in range, hospital admissions, and time below range compared users most recent 6 months of Loop use, with their prior regulatory approved insulin delivery method. QOL outcomes were assessed using Insulin Dosing Systems: Perceptions, Ideas, Reflections, and Expectations, diabetes impact, and device satisfaction measures (with maximum scores of 100, 10, and 10, respectively) and semistructured interviews.

RESULTS

The 24 adults with T1D who took part in this study 16 (67%) were female, with a median age of 33 (IQR 28-45) years, median duration of diabetes of 22 (IQR 17-32) years, median pre-Loop HbA1c of 7.9% (IQR 7.6%-8.3%), and a median duration of Loop use of 18 (IQR 12-25) months. During Loop use, the participants had median (IQR) values of 7.1% (6.5%-7.5%), 54 mmol (48-58) for HbA1c and 76.5% (64.6%-81.9%) for time in range, which were a significant improvement from prior therapy (P=.001 and P=.005), with a nonsignificant reduction in time below range; 3.0 to 3.9 mmol/L (P=.17) and <3 mmol/L (P=.53). Overall, 2 episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis occurred in a total of 470 months of Loop use, and no severe hypoglycemia occurred. The positive impact of Loop use on QOL was explored in qualitative analysis and additionally demonstrated through a median Insulin Dosing Systems: Perceptions, Ideas, Reflections, and Expectations score of 86 (IQR 79-95), a median diabetes impact score of 2.8 (IQR 2.1-3.9), and a median device satisfaction score of 9 (IQR 8.2-9.4).

CONCLUSIONS

This local cohort of people with T1D demonstrated a beneficial effect of Loop use on both glycemic control and QOL, with no safety concerns being highlighted.

A scoping review of Do-It-Yourself Automated Insulin Delivery system (DIY AID) use in people with type 1 diabetes

INTRODUCTION

User designed Automated Insulin Delivery systems (AID), termed Do-It-Yourself (DIY) AID include; AndroidAPS, OpenAPS and Loop. These unregulated systems provide challenges for healthcare providers worldwide, with potential legal and ethical barriers to supporting their use. We performed a scoping review of the currently available literature surrounding DIY AID systems, specifically to highlight the evidence available to facilitate healthcare providers to support persons with diabetes who may benefit from DIY AID.

METHODS

Studies relating to DIY AID systems were searched in Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, Proquest and Cochrane library until 31st December 2021. Publications were screened through title and abstract to identify study type and AID system type described. A thematic synthesis methodology was used for analysis of studies of DIY AID use due to the heterogeneity in study designs (case reports, qualitative, cross-sectional and cohort studies), with similarity in outcome themes.

RESULTS

Following implementation of the search strategy, 38 relevant full texts were identified; comprising 12 case reports, 9 qualitative studies and 17 cohort studies, and data was also available from 24 relevant conference abstracts. No randomized studies were identified. Common themes were identified in the outcomes across the studies; glycemic variability, safety, quality of life, healthcare provider attitudes and social media.

CONCLUSION

There is extensive real-world data, but a lack of randomized control trial evidence supporting DIY AID system use, due to the user-driven, unregulated nature of these systems. Healthcare providers report a lack of understanding surrounding, and confidence in supporting, DIY AID despite impressive observational and user self-reported improvements in glycemic variability, without any reported safety compromises.

Barriers to Uptake of Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery Systems: Analysis of Socioeconomic Factors and Perceived Challenges of Caregivers of Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes From the OPEN Survey

Background

As a treatment option for people living with diabetes, automated insulin delivery (AID) systems are becoming increasingly popular. The #WeAreNotWaiting community plays a crucial role in the provision and distribution of open-source AID technology. However, while a large percentage of children were early adopters of open-source AID, there are regional differences in adoption, which has prompted an investigation into the barriers perceived by caregivers of children with diabetes to creating open-source systems.

Methods

This is a retrospective, cross-sectional and multinational study conducted with caregivers of children and adolescents with diabetes, distributed across the online #WeAreNotWaiting online peer-support groups. Participants—specifically caregivers of children not using AID—responded to a web-based questionnaire concerning their perceived barriers to building and maintaining an open-source AID system.

Results

56 caregivers of children with diabetes, who were not using open-source AID at the time of data collection responded to the questionnaire. Respondents indicated that their major perceived barriers to building an open-source AID system were their limited technical skills (50%), a lack of support by medical professionals (39%), and therefore the concern with not being able to maintain an AID system (43%). However, barriers relating to confidence in open-source technologies/unapproved products and fear of digital technology taking control of diabetes were not perceived as significant enough to prevent non-users from initiating the use of an open-source AID system.

Conclusions

The results of this study elucidate some of the perceived barriers to uptake of open-source AID experienced by caregivers of children with diabetes. Reducing these barriers may improve the uptake of open-source AID technology for children and adolescents with diabetes. With the continuous development and wider dissemination of educational resources and guidance—for both aspiring users and their healthcare professionals—the adoption of open-source AID systems could be improved.

Current Status and Emerging Options for Automated Insulin Delivery Systems

Combining technologies including rapid insulin analogs, insulin pumps, continuous glucose monitors, and control algorithms has allowed for the creation of automated insulin delivery (AID) systems. These systems have proven to be the most effective technology for optimizing metabolic control and could hold the key to broadly achieving goal-level glycemic control for people with type 1 diabetes. The use of AID has exploded in the past several years with several options available in the United States and even more in Europe. In this article, we review the largest studies involving these AID systems, and then examine future directions for AID with an emphasis on usability.

Safety and effectiveness of do-it-yourself artificial pancreas system compared with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusions in combination with free style libre in people with type 1 diabetes

AIMS

The use of do-it-yourself artificial pancreas systems (DIYAPS) among people with type 1 diabetes is increasing. At present, it is unclear how DIYAPS compares with other technologies such as FreeStyle Libre (FSL) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). The aim of this analysis is to compare safety, effectiveness and quality-of-life outcomes of DIYAPS use with the addition of FSL to CSII.

METHOD

Data from two large UK hospitals were extracted from the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) DIYAPS and FSL audits. Outcomes included HbA_1c , glucose TBR (time-below-range), TIR (time-in-range), Diabetes Distress Score (DDS), and Gold hypoglycaemia score. Any adverse events were noted. Changes at follow-up were assessed using paired t-tests and ANOVA in Stata; TIR/TBR at follow-up assessed using unpaired t-tests; chi-square tests assessed the change in frequency of health utilisation (e.g. hospital admissions).

RESULTS

DIYAPS (n = 35) and FSL+CSII (n = 149) users, with median follow-up duration of 1.4 (IQR 0.8-2.1) and 1.3 (IQR 0.7-1.8) years, respectively, were included. HbA_1c with DIYAPS use changed by -10 mmol/mol [0.9%] (p < 0.001, 95% CI 5, 14 [0.5, 1.3%]) significantly lower (p < 0.001) than in the FSL+CSII group -3 mmol/mol [0.25%] (p < 0.001, 95% CI 1, 4 [0.1, 0.4%]). TIR was higher and TBR was lower in the DIYAPS group. Adverse events were rare in both groups and no significant differences were observed in the frequency of healthcare utilisation.

CONCLUSION

DIYAPS use was associated with a lower HbA_1c levels, higher TIR and lower TBR compared with FSL+CSII. There was no significant increase in adverse events, although this should be interpreted cautiously given the low numbers of users. Full results from the ABCD DIYAPS audit are awaited.

'We're all on the same team'. Perspectives on the future of artificial pancreas systems by adults in Australia with type 1 diabetes using open-source technologies: A qualitative study

AIMS

An emerging group of people with type 1 diabetes are not waiting for commercial solutions, choosing to manage their condition with open-source artificial pancreas systems (APS). Our aim was to explore their perspectives on the future of APS.

METHODS

Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted (in Australia, October 2018 to January 2019) with 23 adults with type 1 diabetes currently using open-source APS. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Participants described five key features of open-source APS they value: compatibility, user-led design, customisability, ability to evolve faster and community-driven. They attributed the success of the open-source APS movement to benefits they derive from these features: choice, solutions that meet their needs, ownership, staying one step ahead and real-time support. They expressed hope that future commercial products and healthcare would benefit from their learnings and from collaboration with the open-source APS community.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants believed that there will always be a place for the open-source community. It will continue to build on and advance commercial products, respond to user needs, offering a higher degree of control and customisation than afforded by commercial products and generating optimism for the future. Participants desired that future commercial diabetes technologies would be inspired by the open-source community and developed collaboratively with people with diabetes.

Real-world evidence on clinical outcomes of people with type 1 diabetes using open-source and commercial automated insulin dosing systems: A systematic review

AIMS

Several commercial and open-source automated insulin dosing (AID) systems have recently been developed and are now used by an increasing number of people with diabetes (PwD). This systematic review explored the current status of real-world evidence on the latest available AID systems in helping to understand their safety and effectiveness.

METHODS

A systematic review of real-world studies on the effect of commercial and open-source AID system use on clinical outcomes was conducted employing a devised protocol (PROSPERO ID 257354).

RESULTS

Of 441 initially identified studies, 21 published 2018-2021 were included: 12 for Medtronic 670G; one for Tandem Control-IQ; one for Diabeloop DBLG1; two for AndroidAPS; one for OpenAPS; one for Loop; three comparing various types of AID systems. These studies found that several types of AID systems improve Time-in-Range and haemoglobin A_1c (HbA_1c ) with minimal concerns around severe hypoglycaemia. These improvements were observed in open-source and commercially developed AID systems alike.

CONCLUSIONS

Commercially developed and open-source AID systems represent effective and safe treatment options for PwD of several age groups and genders. Alongside evidence from randomized clinical trials, real-world studies on AID systems and their effects on glycaemic outcomes are a helpful method for evaluating their safety and effectiveness.

User-driven open-source artificial pancreas systems and patient-reported outcomes: A missed opportunity?

AIM

This paper aims to highlight the attributes of engagement and urgency to act to control diabetes demonstrated by open-source artificial pancreas system users with the view that increased user involvement in research and practice can capitalize on these self-management traits; and to outline the challenges of researching outcomes in the context of unlicensed therapies.

METHODS

A group of technically minded people with type 1 diabetes have reverse-engineered commercially available diabetes devices to help them achieve the diabetes outcomes they desire. Although studies have reported improved biomedical outcomes with these artificial pancreas systems, there are only a few studies examining patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

The investigation of patient-reported outcomes for open-source artificial pancreas system users has been hampered by the rapid advances in the technology, the lack of randomized controlled trials and the ethical challenges of researching unregulated technologies. There is an on-going debate about the most appropriate types of measures to evaluate patient-related outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The early adopters of open-source artificial pancreas systems exhibit many of the characteristics that predict optimal diabetes outcomes through engagement and urgency regarding self-management. These qualities should be harnessed to improve research in this and other areas of diabetes management.

Device activism and material participation in healthcare: retracing forms of engagement in the #WeAreNotWaiting movement for open-source closed-loop systems in type 1 diabetes self-care

The #WeAreNotWaiting movement is a global digital health phenomenon in which people with diabetes, mainly type 1 diabetes (T1D), engage in the development and usage of open-source closed-loop technology for the improvement of their "chronic living" (Wahlberg et al. 2021). The characteristics of a digitally enabled and technologically engaged global activist patient collective feed into existing narratives of user-led and open-source innovation. They also call for more exploration of what it actually means to be locally involved in this kind of technologically mediated and global form of patient engagement. Building on empirical research conducted in the German healthcare context, we explore the different forms of material participation encountered among a group of people with T1D (who describe themselves as loopers), who are engaged in the development and usage of this open-source technology. Introducing the concept of device activism, we retrace three different device-centered narratives that show how a globally shared concern and political participation through technology use varies with local practices. Hereby we stress that the engagement in the #WeAreNotWaiting movement is both shaped by and is shaping the matters of concerns: devices in, on, and with bodies.

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

Association of British Clinical Diabetologists, Diabetes Technology Network UK and Association of Children's Diabetes Clinicians Survey of UK Healthcare Professional Attitudes Towards Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery Systems

INTRODUCTION

Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems can enable improved glycaemic outcomes with reduced mental burden. Open-source AID (OS-AID) systems overcome some of the developmental and access barriers enabling a wider use of these systems. Limited data are available on healthcare professional (HCP) opinions and current practice regarding these systems. The aim of this survey was to gain insight into HCP perceptions and practices around OS-AID.

METHODS

This survey was developed collaboratively with OS-AID users and distributed to adult and children's teams, using an online survey tool. Results were received between February and April 2019. Responses were assessed using simple descriptive statistics with analyses stratified by respondent characteristics.

RESULTS

317 responses were obtained from a range of HCPs in both adult and paediatric services. Key results include: HCP perception of OS-AID as "risky in the wrong hands" (43%); 91% felt uncomfortable initiating discussions around OS-AID because of lack of regulation (67%) and/or their own lack of knowledge (63%). Half of HCPs (47%) reported that they would choose OS-AID if they themselves had type 1 diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

HCPs are generally supportive of OS-AID users but many feel uncomfortable with the technicalities of the systems given the lack of approval. Knowledge around the use of these systems was limited. Re-assessment of HCP perceptions should be performed in the future given the evolving landscape of diabetes technology, recent consensus statements and emerging ethical and legal perspectives.

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.

Integrated Digital Health Solutions in the Management of Growth Disorders in Pediatric Patients Receiving Growth Hormone Therapy: A Retrospective Analysis

Digital health has seen rapid advancements over the last few years in helping patients and their healthcare professionals better manage treatment for a variety of illnesses, including growth hormone (GH) therapy for growth disorders in children and adolescents. For children and adolescents requiring such therapy, as well as for their parents, the treatment is longitudinal and often involves daily injections plus close progress monitoring; a sometimes daunting task when young children are involved. Here, we describe our experience in offering devices and digital health tools to support GH therapy across some 40 countries. We also discuss how this ecosystem of care has evolved over the years based on learnings and advances in technology. Finally, we offer a glimpse of future planned enhancements and directions for digital health to play a bigger role in better managing conditions treated with GH therapy, as well as model development for adherence prediction. The continued aim of these technologies is to improve clinical decision making and support for GH-treated patients, leading to better outcomes.

Automated insulin dosing systems: Advances after a century of insulin

The daily complexities of insulin therapy and glucose variability in type 1 diabetes still pose significant challenges, despite advancements in modern insulin analogues. Minimising hypoglycaemia and optimising time spent within target glucose range are recommended to reduce the risk of diabetes-related complications and distress. Access to structured education and adjuvant diabetes technologies, such as insulin pumps and glucose sensors, are recommended by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to enable people with type 1 diabetes achieve their glycaemic goals. One hundred years after the discovery of insulin, automated insulin dosing (AID, a.k.a. closed loop or artificial pancreas) systems are a reality with a number of systems available and being used in usual clinical practice. Evidence from randomised clinical trials and real-world prospective studies support efficacy, effectiveness and safety of AID systems. Qualitative evaluations reveal treatment satisfaction and positive effects on quality of life. Current insulin-only AID systems still require carbohydrate and activity announcement (hybrid closed loop) due to the inherent pharmacokinetic limitations of rapid-acting insulin analogies. Ultra-rapid acting insulin and adjunctive use of other therapies (e.g. glucagon, pramlitide) are being evaluated to achieve full closed loop. Open-source AID (OS-AID) systems have been developed by the diabetes community, driven by a desire for safety and to accelerate technological advancement. In addition to effectiveness and safety, real-world prospective studies suggest that OS-AID systems fulfil unmet needs of commercially approved systems. The development, ongoing challenges and expectations of AID are outlined in this review.

Open-source automated insulin delivery systems for the management of type 1 diabetes during pregnancy

A 40-year-old woman used an open-source automated insulin delivery system to manage her type 1 diabetes (T1D) prior to conception. The code for building the iPhone application called 'Loop' that carried the software for the hybrid closed-loop controller was available online. Her glycated hemoglobin before conception was 6.4%. Between 6 and 12 weeks gestation, she spent 66% time-in-range (TIR), 28% time-above-range (TAR) and 6% time-below-range (TBR). Between 18 and 24 weeks gestation, she spent 68% TIR, 27% TAR and 5% TBR. During her third trimester, she spent 72% TIR, 21% TAR and 7% TBR. She delivered a healthy infant with no neonatal complications. Clinicians should be aware of this technology as it gains traction in the T1D community and seeks Food and Drug Administration approval.

Costs and underuse of insulin and diabetes supplies: Findings from the 2020 T1International cross-sectional web-based survey

AIMS

To investigate self-reported out-of-pocket expenses (OoPE) associated with insulin and diabetes supplies for people living with type 1 diabetes (T1D) worldwide.

METHODS

A web-based, cross-sectional survey was conducted from August to December 2020. The analysis included comparisons between responses from countries with no, partial, and full healthcare coverage.

RESULTS

1,066 participants from 64 countries took part in the study. ~25% of respondents reported having underused insulin at least once within the last year due to perceived cost. A significant correlation was observed between OoPEs and reported household income for respondents with partial healthcare coverage. 63.2% of participants reported disruption of insulin supplies and 25.3% reported an increase of prices related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms previous reports of ~25% of people in the United States with T1D using less insulin and/or fewer supplies at least once in the last year due to cost, a trend associated with the extent of healthcare coverage. Similar trends were observed in some middle/low income countries. Moreover, patients reported an increase in insulin prices and disruption of supplies during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study highlights the importance of self-reported OoPEs and its association with underuse/rationing of insulin.