Transatlantic Comparison of Pediatric Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use in the Diabetes-Patienten-Verlaufsdokumentation Initiative and Type 1 Diabetes Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative

European Survey on Adult People With Type 1 Diabetes and Their Caregivers: Insights into Perceptions of Technology

BACKGROUND

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a complex condition requiring constant monitoring and self-management. The landscape of diabetes management is evolving with the development of new technologies. This survey aimed to gain insight into the perceptions and experiences of people with T1D (PWD) and their caregivers on the use of technology in diabetes care, and identify future needs for T1D management.

METHODS

PWD and caregivers (≥18 years) living in five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom) completed an online survey. Data were collected during July and August 2021.

RESULTS

Responders included 458 PWD and 54 caregivers. More than 60% of PWD perceived devices/digital tools for diabetes management as useful and 63% reported that access to monitoring device data made their life easier. Nearly half of participants hoped for new devices and/or digital tools. While approximately one-third of all PWD had used teleconsultation, perceptions and usage varied significantly between countries and by age (both P < .0001), with the lowest use in Germany (20%) and the highest in Spain (48%). The proportions of PWD contributing to diabetes care costs varied by device and were highest for smart insulin pen users at 83% compared with 44% for insulin pen users and 37% for insulin pump users. One-quarter (24%) of PWD and 15% of caregivers felt they lacked knowledge about devices/digital tools for T1D.

CONCLUSIONS

Most PWD and caregivers had positive perceptions and experiences of new technologies/digital solutions for diabetes management, although improved support and structured education for devices/digital tools are still required.

The Impact of Public Policy on Equitable Access to Technology for Children and Youth Living with Type 1 Diabetes in British Columbia, Canada

Objective: Structural inequities impede technology uptake in marginalized populations living with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Our objective was to describe hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), time in range (TIR), and pump use to evaluate the impact of a universal funding policy for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) across levels of deprivation in children with T1D in the Canadian province of British Columbia (BC). Methods: Patients with T1D and at least one outpatient visit after June 10, 2020 (1-year before universal CGM funding) who were enrolled in the BC Pediatric Diabetes Registry were included (n = 477). The Canadian Index of Multiple Deprivation (quintile 1 = least deprived; quintile 5 = most deprived) was determined using postal code. Mixed effects models were used to describe HbA1c, TIR, and pump use, and an interrupted time series generalized additive model estimated the change in CGM use pre- and postintroduction of universal coverage. Results: No differences were observed among the five levels of deprivation for HbA1c and TIR; however, for residential instability, those with the highest level of deprivation had a lower probability of pump use (-18.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -26.1% to -11.7% for quintile 5 vs. 1). There was an increase in CGM uptake across all levels of deprivation 1-year after introduction of universal CGM funding. For example, the difference in sensor use from the most to least deprived situational group was -21.0% (-35.4%, -6.6%) at the time of universal coverage and shrank to -4.6% (-21.6%, 12.4%) after 12 months of coverage. However, an equity gap in CGM use persisted between the least and most deprived groups (-21.9, 95% CI = -34.5 to -9.4 for quintile 5 vs. 1 in economic dependency). Conclusions: Universal coverage of CGM improved uptake; however, equity gaps persisted. More research is needed to explore nonfinancial barriers to diabetes technology use in marginalized populations.

The association of resilience with HbA1c and key psychosocial factors in emerging adults with type 1 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Emerging adults (EAs) with type 1 diabetes (T1D) have difficulty meeting glycemic targets and have a high prevalence of mental health comorbidities. Resilience, the ability to harness resources needed to sustain one's emotional and physical well-being, may be a key factor impacting poor mental health and glycemic outcomes. We aimed to (a) evaluate the association between resilience, HbA1c, and key psychosocial factors and (b) explore whether resilience moderates the relationship between psychosocial factors (depression, diabetes-related distress, anxiety) and HbA1c in EAs with T1D.

METHOD

EAs with T1D (N = 233) (mean age = 19.9 years (SD = 1.6), range 16.8-24.7) seen at an EA-specific diabetes clinic completed resilience, diabetes-related distress, depression, and anxiety measures and had their HbA1c level evaluated. We used linear regression models and conducted moderation analyses for the resilience factor.

RESULTS

Resilience was strongly associated with HbA1c, depression, diabetes-related distress, and anxiety in EAs with T1D. We did not find evidence that resilience moderates the relationship between depression, anxiety, or diabetes-related distress and HbA1c.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that resilience is a highly relevant psychological factor associated with HbA1c and a key mental health factor for EAs with T1D. Novel interventions are needed to ameliorate high diabetes-related distress and HbA1c, and bolstering resilience may be one avenue to explore. Future research on resilience should longitudinally characterize and evaluate whether resilience may be a mechanism underlying the relationship between poor psychosocial outcomes and not meeting glycemic targets in EAs with T1D.

Disparities in Diabetes Technology Uptake in Youth and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Global Perspective

Globally, nearly 9 million people are living with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Although the incidence of T1D is not affected by socioeconomic status, the development of complications and limited access to modern therapy is overrepresented in vulnerable populations. Diabetes technology, specifically continuous glucose monitoring and automated insulin delivery systems, are considered the gold standard for management of T1D, yet access to these technologies varies widely across countries and regions, and varies widely even within high-income countries. This review focuses on disparities in diabetes technology use among adolescents and young adults with T1D, barriers to access and use, and summarizes common themes emerging across countries and regions. We conducted a survey among medical technology manufacturers and physicians in various countries across diverse geographical regions and performed extensive literature searches. Across all countries and regions, economic barriers stand out as the largest and most common barriers, either preventing market penetrance of technology into a country or limiting its access to the individual with diabetes due to high out of pocket costs. Other common barriers include structural or accessibility barriers, such as stringent eligibility requirements by insurance providers, regardless of whether the insurance was private or government-based, and provider/individual level barriers. Based on the evidence presented, we suggest the need for a joint effort involving governments, private health insurers, technology manufacturers, and healthcare providers to address the global disparities of diabetic technology utilization and ensure equitable access for all individuals living with T1D worldwide.

What is the Relationship Between Time in Range, Time in Tight Range, and HbA1c in Youth and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes? Results From the German/Austrian/Luxembourgian/Swiss Diabetes Prospective Follow-Up Registry

OBJECTIVES

Time in range (TIR, 70-180 mg/dL) is an established marker of glycemic control. More recently, time in tight range (TTR, 70-140 mg/dL) has been proposed as well. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between TIR, TTR, and HbA1c in youth and young adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in the German/Austrian/Luxembourgian/Swiss Diabetes Prospective Follow-up (DPV) registry.

METHODS

Data of youth and young adults aged ≤25 years with T1D for >3 months, documented in the DPV registry between 2019 and 2022 were analyzed. The most recent available HbA1c and corresponding continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) profiles in the 12 preceding weeks with at least 80% completeness were included. Associations were investigated using correlation and adjusted regression models.

RESULTS

1901 individuals (median age 14.0 years [IQR 10.4-16.9]) were included in the analysis. TIR and TTR correlated strongly, r = 0.965 (95% CI [0.962, 0.968]), P < .001. TTR estimates predicted from TIR were significantly higher in the group with high coefficient of variation (CV group ≥ 36%), P < .001. Correlations between TIR or TTR and HbA1c were both strong, r = -0.764 (95% CI [-0.782, -0.745]) and r = -0.777 (95% CI [-0.795, -0.759]), both P < .001, with no significant difference (P = .312) However, adjusted regression models indicated a slightly better fit for the prediction of HbA1c from TIR compared with TTR.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on large, real-world data from a multinational registry, TIR and TTR correlated strongly, and both showed a good prediction of HbA1c. TTR estimates predicted from TIR were significantly higher in people with high glucose variability (CV).

Adolescent-Preferred financial incentives to promote type 1 diabetes Self-Care: A discrete choice experiment

AIMS

This study aimed to quantify preferences for the characteristics of a financial incentives program that would motivate adolescent engagement in type 1 diabetes (T1D) self-care.

METHOD

We performed a discrete choice experiment with 12-18 year-olds with T1D from two pediatric hospital endocrinology clinics (n = 317). We identified key attributes of incentives: (1) monthly value of the reward, (2) payment structure, and (3) difficulty of incentivized behaviors. In twelve choice questions, adolescents chose the incentive option from a pair of profiles that was more likely to motivate them to increase adherence to recommended self-care. Options presented were tailored to adolescents' T1D technology use and perceived difficulty of completing each behavior. We analyzed data using a conditional logit model.

RESULTS

The value of the reward accounted for 60.8% of preferences. Adolescents were willing to accept lower value rewards when incentive payments used positive vs. negative reinforcement (-$10.88 (95% CI: -$12.60, -9.24)) and preferred higher incentives for performing hard vs. easier behaviors (+$14.92 (95% CI: +$12.66, +$17.28)).

CONCLUSIONS

Stated preferences can inform intervention design. Future research will evaluate the external validity of the discrete choice experiment-informed intervention design by assessing adolescent health and behavioral outcomes in a randomized controlled trial.

Demographic, Clinical, Management, and Outcome Characteristics of 8,004 Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To compare demographic, clinical, and therapeutic characteristics of children with type 1 diabetes age <6 years across three international registries: Diabetes Prospective Follow-Up Registry (DPV; Europe), T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Network (T1DX-QI; U.S.), and Australasian Diabetes Data Network (ADDN; Australasia).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

An analysis was conducted comparing 2019-2021 prospective registry data from 8,004 children.

RESULTS

Mean ± SD ages at diabetes diagnosis were 3.2 ± 1.4 (DPV and ADDN) and 3.7 ± 1.8 years (T1DX-QI). Mean ± SD diabetes durations were 1.4 ± 1.3 (DPV), 1.4 ± 1.6 (T1DX-QI), and 1.5 ± 1.3 years (ADDN). BMI z scores were in the overweight range in 36.2% (DPV), 41.8% (T1DX-QI), and 50.0% (ADDN) of participants. Mean ± SD HbA1c varied among registries: DPV 7.3 ± 0.9% (56 ± 10 mmol/mol), T1DX-QI 8.0 ± 1.4% (64 ± 16 mmol/mol), and ADDN 7.7 ± 1.2% (61 ± 13 mmol/mol). Overall, 37.5% of children achieved the target HbA1c of <7.0% (53 mmol/mol): 43.6% in DPV, 25.5% in T1DX-QI, and 27.5% in ADDN. Use of diabetes technologies such as insulin pump (DPV 86.6%, T1DX 46.6%, and ADDN 39.2%) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM; DPV 85.1%, T1DX-QI 57.6%, and ADDN 70.5%) varied among registries. Use of hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems was uncommon (from 0.5% [ADDN] to 6.9% [DPV]).

CONCLUSIONS

Across three major registries, more than half of children age <6 years did not achieve the target HbA1c of <7.0% (53 mmol/mol). CGM was used by most participants, whereas insulin pump use varied across registries, and HCL system use was rare. The differences seen in glycemia and use of diabetes technologies among registries require further investigation to determine potential contributing factors and areas to target to improve the care of this vulnerable group.

Optimizing Glycemic Outcomes for Children with Type 1 Diabetes

Changes in physical growth, neurocognitive development, and pubertal maturation are some of the challenges to achieving blood glucose targets in children with type 1 diabetes mellitus. To optimize glycemic outcomes, a comprehensive approach is crucial to address psychosocial needs, expand the use of diabetes technology, and diminish health inequities.

Improving Outcomes for People with Type 1 Diabetes Through Collaboration: Summary of Type 1 Diabetes Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative Studies

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) management has evolved over the last decade. Innovations and groundbreaking research have paved the way for improved outcomes for people with T1D. One of the major T1D focused research network that has supported real-world research studies in the United States is the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative (T1DX-QI) Network.T1DX-QI is a large multicenter network of 55 T1D clinics that uses quality improvement, health equity framework, and population health principles to improve outcomes for people with T1D. This article summarizes insights from T1DX-QI clinical and population health improvement studies.

Technology and health inequities in diabetes care: How do we widen access to underserved populations and utilize technology to improve outcomes for all?

Digital health technologies are being utilized increasingly in the modern management of diabetes. These include tools such as continuous glucose monitoring systems, connected blood glucose monitoring devices, hybrid closed-loop systems, smart insulin pens, telehealth, and smartphone applications (apps). Although many of these technologies have a solid evidence base, from the perspective of a person living with diabetes, there remain multiple barriers preventing their optimal use, creating a digital divide. In this article, we describe many of the origins of these barriers and offer recommendations on widening access to digital health technologies for underserved populations living with diabetes to improve their health outcomes.

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.

Roadmap to Achieving Continuous Glucose Monitoring Equity: Insights From the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative

This article describes successful interventions from the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative (T1DX-QI) to reduce inequities in access to and use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The author proposes a roadmap with recommendations for different stakeholders to achieve CGM equity using insights from the T1DX-QI experience.

Longitudinal Trends in Glycemic Outcomes and Technology Use for Over 48,000 People with Type 1 Diabetes (2016-2022) from the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative

Objective: Previous studies revealed that hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) increased overall in the United States in the past decade. In addition, health inequities in type 1 diabetes (T1D) outcomes by race/ethnicity and insurance type persist. This study examines the trends in HbA1c from 2016 to 2022 stratified by race/ethnicity and insurance in a large multicenter national database. Research Design and Methods: We analyzed glycemic outcomes and diabetes device use trends for >48,000 people living with type 1 diabetes (PwT1D) from 3 adult and 12 pediatric centers in the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative (T1DX-QI), comparing data from 2016 to 2017 with data from 2021 to 2022. Results: The mean HbA1c in 2021-2022 was lower at 8.4% compared with the mean HbA1c in 2016-2017 of 8.7% (0.3% improvement; P < 0.01). Over the same period, the percentage of PwT1D using a continuous glucose monitor (CGM), insulin pump, or hybrid closed-loop system increased (45%, 12%, and 33%, respectively). However, these improvements were not equitably demonstrated across racial/ethnic groups or insurance types. Racial/ethnic and insurance-based inequities persisted over all 7 years across all outcomes; comparing non-Hispanic White and non-Hispanic Black PwT1D, disparate gaps in HbA1c (1.2%-1.6%), CGM (30%), pump (25%-35%), and hybrid-closed loop system (up to 20%) are illuminated. Conclusion: Population-level data on outcomes, including HbA1c, can provide trends and insights into strategies to improve health for PwT1D. The T1DX-QI cohort showed a significant improvement in HbA1c from 2016 to 2022. Improvements in diabetes device use are also demonstrated. However, these increases were inconsistent across all racial/ethnic groups or insurance types, an important focus for future T1D population health improvement work.

Longitudinal relations of sleep quality with depressive symptoms, diabetes distress and self-efficacy in young people with type 1 diabetes

PURPOSE

To examine the longitudinal, bidirectional associations of sleep quality with depressive symptoms, diabetes-specific distress and diabetes management self-efficacy among adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Cross-lagged analyses used baseline, three-, six- and nine-month data from a randomized trial among 60 young people. Self-report measures included the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, Center for Epidemiological Studies - Depressed Mood scale, Problem Areas in Diabetes Teen version, and Diabetes Management Self-efficacy Scale.

RESULTS

Lower sleep quality at baseline was associated with higher three-month depressive symptoms (b = 0.21, p = 0.005) and lower diabetes self-efficacy (b = -0.18, p = 0.014), but not diabetes distress (b = 0.06, p = 0.403). Similar patterns were found at six and nine months. Three-month psychological functioning was not associated with six-month sleep quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Among adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes, lower sleep quality predicted subsequent depressive symptoms and lower diabetes self-efficacy rather than vice versa. Sleep deserves a central place in diabetes care.

Increased Technology Use Associated With Lower A1C in a Large Pediatric Clinical Population

OBJECTIVE

While continuous glucose monitors (CGMs), insulin pumps, and hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems each improve glycemic control in type 1 diabetes, it is unclear how the use of these technologies impacts real-world pediatric care.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We found 1,455 patients aged <22 years, with type 1 diabetes duration >3 months, and who had data from a single center in between both 2016-2017 (n = 2,827) and 2020-2021 (n = 2,731). Patients were grouped by multiple daily injections or insulin pump, with or without an HCL system, and using a blood glucose monitor or CGM. Glycemic control was compared using linear mixed-effects models adjusting for age, diabetes duration, and race/ethnicity.

RESULTS

CGM use increased from 32.9 to 75.3%, and HCL use increased from 0.3 to 27.9%. Overall A1C decreased from 8.9 to 8.6% (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Adoption of CGM and HCL was associated with decreased A1C, suggesting promotion of these technologies may yield glycemic benefits.