Health Care Provider Knowledge and Perceptions of FDA-Approved and Do-It-Yourself Automated Insulin Delivery

Objectives and outcomes of patient-driven innovations published in peer-reviewed journals: a qualitative analysis of publications included in a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of the objectives and outcomes of patient-driven innovations that have been published in the scientific literature, focusing on (A) the unmet needs that patient-driven innovations address and (B) the outcomes for patients and healthcare that have been reported.

METHODS

We performed an inductive qualitative content analysis of scientific publications that were included in a scoping review of patient-driven innovations, previously published by our research group. The review was limited to English language publications in peer-reviewed journals, published in the years 2008-2020.

RESULTS

In total, 83 publications covering 21 patient-driven innovations were included in the analysis. Most of the innovations were developed for use on an individual or community level without healthcare involvement. We created three categories of unmet needs that were addressed by these innovations: access to self-care support tools, open sharing of information and knowledge, and patient agency in self-care and healthcare decisions. Eighteen (22%) publications reported outcomes of patient-driven innovations. We created two categories of outcomes: impact on self-care, and impact on peer interaction and healthcare collaboration.

CONCLUSIONS

The patient-driven innovations illustrated a diversity of innovative approaches to facilitate patients' and informal caregivers' daily lives, interactions with peers and collaborations with healthcare. As our findings indicate, patients and informal caregivers are central stakeholders in driving healthcare development and research forward to meet the needs that matter to patients and informal caregivers. However, only few studies reported on outcomes of patient-driven innovations. To support wider implementation, more evaluation studies are needed, as well as research into regulatory approval processes, dissemination and governance of patient-driven innovations.

Hybrid Closed Loop Using a Do-It-Yourself Artificial Pancreas System in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

There is increasing use of open-source artificial pancreas systems (APS) in the management of Type 1 diabetes. Our aim was to assess the safety and efficacy of the automated insulin delivery system AndroidAPS (AAPS), compared with stand-alone pump therapy in people with type 1 diabetes. The primary outcome was the difference in the percentage of time in range (TIR, 70-180 mg/dL). Secondary aims included mean sensor glucose value and percent continuous glucose monitor (CGM) time below range (TBR, <70 mg/dL).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This open-label single-center randomized crossover study (ANZCTR, Australian New Zealand clinical trial registry, ANZCTR-ACTRN12620001191987) comprised 20 participants with type 1 diabetes on established pump therapy, assigned to either stand-alone insulin pump therapy or the open-source AAPS hybrid closed-loop system for four weeks, with crossover to the alternate arm for the following four weeks. The CGM outcome parameters were measured by seven-day CGM at baseline and the final week of each four-week study arm.

RESULTS

Twenty participants were recruited (60% women), aged 45.8 ± 15.9 years, with mean diabetes duration of 23.9 ± 13.2 years, baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 7.5% ± 0.5% (58 ± 6 mmol/mol) and mean TIR 62.3% ± 12.9%. The change in TIR from baseline for AAPS compared with stand-alone pump therapy was 18.6% (11.4-25.9), (P < .001), TIR 76.6% ± 11.7%, 58.0% ± 15.6%, for AAPS and stand-alone pump, respectively. Time glucose <54 mg/dL was not increased (mean = -2.0%, P = .191). No serious adverse events or episodes of severe hypoglycemia were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

This clinical trial of the open-source AAPS hybrid closed-loop system performed in an at-home setting demonstrated comparable safety to stand-alone pump therapy. The glycemic outcomes of AAPS were superior with improved TIR, and there was no significant difference in TBR compared with stand-alone pump therapy.

Automated insulin delivery: benefits, challenges, and recommendations. A Consensus Report of the Joint Diabetes Technology Working Group of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association

A technological solution for the management of diabetes in people who require intensive insulin therapy has been sought for decades. The last 10 years have seen substantial growth in devices that can be integrated into clinical care. Driven by the availability of reliable systems for continuous glucose monitoring, we have entered an era in which insulin delivery through insulin pumps can be modulated based on sensor glucose data. Over the past few years, regulatory approval of the first automated insulin delivery (AID) systems has been granted, and these systems have been adopted into clinical care. Additionally, a community of people living with type 1 diabetes has created its own systems using a do-it-yourself approach by using products commercialised for independent use. With several AID systems in development, some of which are anticipated to be granted regulatory approval in the near future, the joint Diabetes Technology Working Group of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association has created this consensus report. We provide a review of the current landscape of AID systems, with a particular focus on their safety. We conclude with a series of recommended targeted actions. This is the fourth in a series of reports issued by this working group. The working group was jointly commissioned by the executives of both organisations to write the first statement on insulin pumps, which was published in 2015. The original authoring group was comprised by three nominated members of the American Diabetes Association and three nominated members of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Additional authors have been added to the group to increase diversity and range of expertise. Each organisation has provided a similar internal review process for each manuscript prior to submission for editorial review by the two journals. Harmonisation of editorial and substantial modifications has occurred at both levels. The members of the group have selected the subject of each statement and submitted the selection to both organisations for confirmation.

Automated Insulin Delivery: Benefits, Challenges, and Recommendations. A Consensus Report of the Joint Diabetes Technology Working Group of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association

A technological solution for the management of diabetes in people who require intensive insulin therapy has been sought for decades. The last 10 years have seen substantial growth in devices that can be integrated into clinical care. Driven by the availability of reliable systems for continuous glucose monitoring, we have entered an era in which insulin delivery through insulin pumps can be modulated based on sensor glucose data. Over the past few years, regulatory approval of the first automated insulin delivery (AID) systems has been granted, and these systems have been adopted into clinical care. Additionally, a community of people living with type 1 diabetes has created its own systems using a do-it-yourself approach by using products commercialized for independent use. With several AID systems in development, some of which are anticipated to be granted regulatory approval in the near future, the joint Diabetes Technology Working Group of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association has created this consensus report. We provide a review of the current landscape of AID systems, with a particular focus on their safety. We conclude with a series of recommended targeted actions. This is the fourth in a series of reports issued by this working group. The working group was jointly commissioned by the executives of both organizations to write the first statement on insulin pumps, which was published in 2015. The original authoring group was comprised by three nominated members of the American Diabetes Association and three nominated members of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Additional authors have been added to the group to increase diversity and range of expertise. Each organization has provided a similar internal review process for each manuscript prior to submission for editorial review by the two journals. Harmonization of editorial and substantial modifications has occurred at both levels. The members of the group have selected the subject of each statement and submitted the selection to both organizations for confirmation.

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 31^st 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.

Understanding the needs of people aging with type 1 diabetes: a user-focused research study with prototype diabetes advance directive and setting the stage for future research

Purpose

People living with Type 1 diabetes (T1D) are living longer than ever and facing the new "luxury" of the challenges of aging. While research is slowly expanding and addressing T1D physiology with regards to aging, there is little research addressing specific challenges and barriers to optimal care by those aging with T1D. To address this gap, this study employed human-centered design research to explore the gaps and barriers to care faced by people aging with T1D.

Methods

Researchers employed human-centered design methods of needfinding and user interviews and facilitated participatory workshops. In total, 27 people with T1D (PWT1D), 5 loved ones (partners of PWT1D), and 7 healthcare providers (HCPs) were engaged.

Results

Design artifacts were developed, including user personas that help visually articulate the different experiences of PWT1D and their unique needs as they age, as well as a prototype diabetes-specific advance directive that could be further refined to specifically aid those with Type 1 diabetes who are aging and requiring more interactions with the healthcare system. Initial user testing with people with T1D as well as healthcare providers demonstrated the need for such a diabetes advance directive tool or document.

Conclusion

This work supports the conclusion that additional focus and scientific enquiry should be given to the needs of people aging with Type 1 diabetes, with a goal of improving the experience of all people with T1D when interacting with their care providers or with the healthcare system as a whole.

Patient-driven innovations reported in peer-reviewed journals: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Awareness of patients' innovative capabilities is increasing, but there is limited knowledge regarding the extent and nature of patient-driven innovations in the peer-reviewed literature.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the review was to answer the question: what is the nature and extent of patient-driven innovations published in peer-reviewed scientific journals?

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We used a broad definition of innovation to allow for a comprehensive review of different types of innovations and a narrow definition of 'patient driven' to focus on the role of patients and/or family caregivers. The search was limited to years 2008-2020.

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

Four electronic databases (Medline (Ovid), Web of Science Core Collection, PsycINFO (Ovid) and Cinahl (Ebsco)) were searched in December 2020 for publications describing patient-driven innovations and complemented with snowball strategies.

CHARTING METHODS

Data from the included articles were extracted and categorised inductively.

RESULTS

A total of 96 articles on 20 patient-driven innovations were included. The number of publications increased over time, with 69% of the articles published between 2016 and 2020. Author affiliations were exclusively in high income countries with 56% of first authors in North America and 36% in European countries. Among the 20 innovations reported, 'Do-It-Yourself Artificial Pancreas System' and the online health network 'PatientsLikeMe', were the subject of half of the articles.

CONCLUSIONS

Peer-reviewed publications on patient-driven innovations are increasing and we see an important opportunity for researchers and clinicians to support patient innovators' research while being mindful of taking over the work of the innovators themselves.

School Nurse Perspectives on Do-It-Yourself Automated Pancreas Systems in the School Setting

Do-it-yourself (DIY) artificial pancreas systems (APSs) are gaining popularity among children with type 1 diabetes. Little is known about how school systems provide care for children who use DIY APSs, and available guidance for schools is limited. This study explored school staff perspectives on DIY APSs through a national survey of school nurses about their current practices, beliefs, and attitudes toward DIY APSs. Although one-quarter (23%) of school nurses reported experience with DIY APSs in school, nearly half (46%) had no prior knowledge of this new technology. The majority (82%) reported that children should be allowed to use DIY APSs in school, although there was less consensus about school nurse responsibilities with these devices. Qualitative responses added context regarding potential barriers, including the need for more informed guidelines and training and fears of liability. Future development of school guidelines for DIY APSs is necessary and should incorporate stakeholder perspectives.

How Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Are Navigating the Challenges of Open-Source Artificial Pancreas Systems: A Qualitative Study

Objective: An emerging group of people with type 1 diabetes are building and using their own artificial pancreas systems (APS). Currently, these "user-led," open-source systems are not endorsed by regulatory bodies. People face multiple challenges when building and using open-source APS (e.g., lacking required technical knowledge, difficulties sourcing hardware). We explored the experiences of adults with type 1 diabetes using open-source APS to understand how they are navigating these challenges. Research Design and Methods: We conducted semistructured telephone interviews (October 2018 to January 2019) with Australian adults about their experiences using an open-source APS. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically. Results: Participants included 23 adults with type 1 diabetes, aged 25-64 years, 10 (43%) women, with 1-34 months of experience of open-source APS. Participants used four key strategies to navigate challenges: (1) peer support, (2) self-sufficiency, (3) risk management, and (4) trade-offs. Participants relied on peer support and self-sufficiency to fill perceived gaps in professional and industry support. They felt that using an open-source solution was no riskier than previous management and demonstrated a conscious weighing-up of risks. Overall, participants felt that the experienced benefits for their physical health and quality of life outweighed the challenges and potential risks. Conclusions: Adults with type 1 diabetes are applying several interweaving psychosocial and practical strategies to navigate the challenges of building and using open-source APS. The findings highlight the importance of health professionals' showing support and understanding for those choosing to use an open-source APS.

Initiating hybrid closed loop: A program evaluation of an educator-led Control-IQ follow-up at a large pediatric clinic

BACKGROUND

Control-IQ (Tandem Diabetes) is a hybrid closed-loop (HCL) system that users self-initiate after completing online training. Best practices for clinical follow-up are not known. Our quality improvement objective was to evaluate the usefulness of an educator-led follow-up program for new HCL users in a type 1 diabetes pediatric clinic.

METHODS

We implemented an ''HCLCheck-in'' program, first determining when users started HCL, then having diabetes educators contact them for a follow-up call 2-weeks after start. Educators used a Clinical Tool to inform insulin dose and behavior recommendations, and used four benchmarks to determine need for further follow-up: ≥71% HCL use, ≥71% CGM use, ≥60% Time-in-Range (TIR, 70-180 mg/dL), <5% below 70 mg/dL. Family and educator satisfaction were surveyed.

RESULTS

One-hundred-twenty-three youth [mean age 13.6 ± 3.7 y, 53.7% female, mean HbA1c 7.6 ± 1.4% (60 mmol/mol)] completed an HCLCheck-in call a median (IQR) of 18(15, 21) days post-HCL start. 74 users (60%) surpassed benchmarks with 94% HCL use and 71% TIR. Of the 49 who did not, 16 completed a second call, and improved median TIR 12.5% (p = 0.03). HCL users reported high satisfaction with the program overall [median 10 (9, 10) out of 10]. Educators spent a median of 45 (32,70) minutes per user and rated satisfaction with the program as 8 (7,9.5) and the Tool as 9 (9, 10).

CONCLUSION

Our HCLCheck-in program received high satisfaction ratings and resulted in improved TIR for those initially not meeting benchmarks, suggesting users may benefit from early follow-up. Similar programs may be beneficial for other new technologies.

Efficacy, safety, and user experience of DIY or open-source artificial pancreas systems: a systematic review

The do-it-yourself artificial pancreas system (DIYAPS) is a patient-driven initiative with the potential to revolutionise diabetes management, automating insulin delivery with existing pumps and CGM combined with open-source algorithms. Given the considerable interest in this topic within the diabetes community, we have conducted a systematic review of DIYAPS efficacy, safety, and user experience. Following recognised procedures and reporting standards, we identified 10 eligible publications of 730 participants within the peer-reviewed literature. Overall, studies reported improvements in time in range, HbA1c (glycated haemoglobin), reduced hypoglycaemia, and improved quality of life with DIYAPS use. While results were positive, the identified studies were small, and the majority were observational and at high risk of bias. Further research including well-designed randomised trials comparing DIYAPS with appropriate comparators is recommended.