Out-of-pocket expenses and rationing of insulin and diabetes supplies: findings from the 2022 T1International cross-sectional web-based survey

Introduction

Continue investigating Out-of-Pocket Expenses (OoPEs) and rationing of insulin and diabetes supplies, including impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, for people with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

Methods

A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted in English and advertised by T1International's global network of patient advocates from May through September 2022. Participants provided monthly OoPEs and rationing frequency for insulin and supplies, impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, and open-ended comments.

Results

In the seven most represented countries, mean monthly OoPEs were highest in the United States, followed by Panama, Canada, and India, and were much lower in the United Kingdom, Germany, and Sweden. OoPEs were highest for participants with partial healthcare coverage, followed by those with no healthcare coverage. The COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted access and/or affordability of insulin and/or supplies for over half of participants. Globally, 19.5% reported insulin rationing and 36.6% reported rationing glucose testing supplies. Qualitative analysis of open-ended responses identified themes such as 'mental health impacts' and 'limits to life choices.'

Discussion

High OoPEs lead to rationing of insulin and supplies for many people with T1D globally. Healthcare systems improvements and price reductions of insulin and supplies are needed to ensure adequate, equitable access for all.

Changes to care delivery at nine international pediatric diabetes clinics in response to the COVID-19 global pandemic

BACKGROUND

Pediatric diabetes clinics around the world rapidly adapted care in response to COVID-19. We explored provider perceptions of care delivery adaptations and challenges for providers and patients across nine international pediatric diabetes clinics.

METHODS

Providers in a quality improvement collaborative completed a questionnaire about clinic adaptations, including roles, care delivery methods, and provider and patient concerns and challenges. We employed a rapid analysis to identify main themes.

RESULTS

Providers described adaptations within multiple domains of care delivery, including provider roles and workload, clinical encounter and team meeting format, care delivery platforms, self-management technology education, and patient-provider data sharing. Providers reported concerns about potential negative impacts on patients from COVID-19 and the clinical adaptations it required, including fears related to telemedicine efficacy, blood glucose and insulin pump/pen data sharing, and delayed care-seeking. Particular concern was expressed about already vulnerable patients. Simultaneously, providers reported 'silver linings' of adaptations that they perceived as having potential to inform care and self-management recommendations going forward, including time-saving clinic processes, telemedicine, lifestyle changes compelled by COVID-19, and improvements to family and clinic staff literacy around data sharing.

CONCLUSIONS

Providers across diverse clinical settings reported care delivery adaptations in response to COVID-19-particularly telemedicine processes-created challenges and opportunities to improve care quality and patient health. To develop quality care during COVID-19, providers emphasized the importance of generating evidence about which in-person or telemedicine processes were most beneficial for specific care scenarios, and incorporating the unique care needs of the most vulnerable patients.