Practical strategies to manage obesity in type 2 diabetes

The rising phenomenon of obesity, a major risk factor for the development and progression of type 2 diabetes, is a complex and multifaceted issue that requires a comprehensive and coordinated approach to be prevented and managed. Although novel pharmacological measures to combat obesity have achieved unprecedented efficacy, a healthy lifestyle remains essential for the long-term success of any therapeutic intervention. However, this requires a high level of intrinsic motivation and continued behavioural changes in the face of multiple metabolic, psychological and environmental factors promoting weight gain, particularly in the context of type 2 diabetes. This review is intended to provide practical recommendations in the context of a holistic, person-centred approach to weight management, including evidence-based and expert recommendations addressing supportive communication, shared decision-making, as well as nutritional and pharmacological therapeutic approaches to achieve sustained weight loss.

Healthcare Professional Experiences and Opinions on Depression and Suicide in People With Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

People with diabetes have an increased risk of depression, intentional self-injury and self-harm (ISI), and suicide compared with the general population. This study aimed to explore experiences and awareness of healthcare professionals (HCPs) regarding depression, ISI, and suicide, and understand resource use and needs among HCPs who care for persons with diabetes (PWD).

METHODS

Healthcare professionals who see children and/or adults with type 1 diabetes or type 2 diabetes anonymously completed an online survey about their experiences, opinions, barriers, and needs surrounding identification and care of PWD with depression, ISI, and suicide.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-nine HCPs participated. The majority were medical doctors (MDs) or advanced practice providers (APPs). Only a quarter of MDs and APPs felt very comfortable asking about ISI or suicidal ideation (SI), whereas 20% felt they had received appropriate training to support those with ISI or SI. The primary needs reported include more training on how to ask, respond, and support those expressing ISI and SI. Healthcare professionals reported wanting better access to resources for PWD.

DISCUSSION

The HCPs tend to underestimate SI in the diabetes population and rates of training were low. Areas to address include providing education and training to HCPs to improve identification and management of ISI and suicide risk. These data can inform the development of mechanisms to improve discussions of depression and suicide and of resources to help HCPs support PWD.

CVOT Summit Report 2023: new cardiovascular, kidney, and metabolic outcomes

The 9th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial (CVOT) Summit: Congress on Cardiovascular, Kidney, and Metabolic Outcomes was held virtually on November 30-December 1, 2023. This reference congress served as a platform for in-depth discussions and exchange on recently completed outcomes trials including dapagliflozin (DAPA-MI), semaglutide (SELECT and STEP-HFpEF) and bempedoic acid (CLEAR Outcomes), and the advances they represent in reducing the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), improving metabolic outcomes, and treating obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). A broad audience of endocrinologists, diabetologists, cardiologists, nephrologists and primary care physicians participated in online discussions on guideline updates for the management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in diabetes, heart failure (HF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD); advances in the management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and its comorbidities; advances in the management of CKD with SGLT2 inhibitors and non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (nsMRAs); and advances in the treatment of obesity with GLP-1 and dual GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonists. The association of diabetes and obesity with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH; metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis, MASH) and cancer and possible treatments for these complications were also explored. It is generally assumed that treatment of chronic diseases is equally effective for all patients. However, as discussed at the Summit, this assumption may not be true. Therefore, it is important to enroll patients from diverse racial and ethnic groups in clinical trials and to analyze patient-reported outcomes to assess treatment efficacy, and to develop innovative approaches to tailor medications to those who benefit most with minimal side effects. Other keys to a successful management of diabetes and comorbidities, including dementia, entail the use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology and the implementation of appropriate patient-physician communication strategies. The 10th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial Summit will be held virtually on December 5-6, 2024 ( http://www.cvot.org ).

A Three-Arm Randomized Controlled Study Comparing Patient-Reported Outcomes in People With Type 1 Diabetes Using Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion or Multiple Daily Injections

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in people with type 1 diabetes using either continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) with two different insulin patch pumps or multiple daily injections (MDIs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this randomized three-arm study, people with type 1 diabetes on MDI therapy were included and used either MDI, the Accu-Chek Solo micropump system (Solo) or Omnipod for 26 weeks. From weeks 26 to 39, all participants used CSII with Solo. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the diabetes technology questionnaire (DTQ); in addition, HbA1c values were measured.

RESULTS

Overall, 181 participants were randomized (61 MDI arm, 62 Solo arm, 58 Omnipod arm) and 142 completed the study. After 26 weeks in the study, the DTQ "change" score in the Solo group (105.9 [100.6-111.2]; baseline-adjusted mean [95% confidence interval]) was significantly higher than in the MDI group (94.8 [89.6-100.0]) (P = .001). The comparison between the Solo group (105.1 [99.1-111.1]) and the Omnipod group (108.7 [103.1-114.4]) showed no significant differences (P = .382). HbA1c increased by 0.2% ± 0.7% in the MDI group and decreased in both pump groups (Solo group -0.2% ± 0.8% and Omnipod group -0.1% ± 0.8%). Differences in HbA1c between the Solo group and the MDI group were significant (P = .009), but not between the Solo group and the Omnipod group (P = .896).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that switching from MDI to CSII improves both psychosocial well-being and physiological outcomes. Furthermore, there were no substantial differences between the established and the recently released patch pump. Trial registration at www.clinicaltrials.gov is NCT03478969.

Intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes: A subgroup analysis from the FLASH-UK study

AIMS

The FLASH-UK trial showed lower HbA1c with intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM), as compared with self monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), in adults with type 1 diabetes and HbA1c ≥58 mmol/mol (≥7.5%). Here, we present results from the pre-specified subgroup analysis for the 24-week HbA1c (primary outcome) and selected sensor-based secondary outcomes.

METHODS

This was a multi-centre, parallel-design, randomised controlled trial. The difference in treatment effect between subgroups (baseline HbA1c [≤75 vs. >75 mmol/mol] [≤9.0 vs >9.0%], treatment modality [pump vs injections], prior participation in structured education, age, educational level, impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia, deprivation index quintile sex, ethnic group and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9] detected depression category) were evaluated.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-six participants (females 44%, mean [SD] baseline HbA1c 71 [9] mmol/mol 8.6 [0.8%], age 44 [15]) were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio to isCGM (n = 78) or SMBG (n = 78). The mean (SD) baseline HbA1c (%) was 8.7 (0.9) in the isCGM group and 8.5 (0.8) in the SMBG group, lowering to 7.9 (0.8) versus 8.3 (0.9), respectively, at 24 weeks (adjusted mean difference -0.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.7 to -0.3; p < 0.001]. For HbA1c, there was no impact of treatment modality, prior participation in structured education, deprivation index quintile, sex or baseline depression category. The between-group difference in HbA1c was larger for younger people (a reduction of 2.7 [95% CI 0.3-5.0; p = 0.028] mmol/mol for every additional 15 years of age). Those with HbA1c 76-97 mmol/mol (>9.0%-11.0%) had a marginally non-significant higher reduction in HbA1c of 8.4 mmol/mol (3.3-13.5) compared to 3.1 (0.3-6.0) in those with HbA1c 58-75 mmol/mol (p = 0.08). For 'Time in range' (% 3.9-10 mmol/L), the difference was larger for those with at least a bachelor's degree. For 'Time below range' (% <3.9 mmol/L), the difference was larger for those using injections, older people and those with less than bachelor's degree.

CONCLUSIONS

Intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring is generally effective across a range of baseline characteristics.

The psychosocial burdens of living with diabetes

AIM

To better understand the prevalence of self-reported psychosocial burdens and the unmet needs identified by people with diabetes in relation to routine diabetes visits.

METHODS

An English language, online survey was distributed via social media, key stakeholder networks, charity and advocacy groups to adults with type 1 diabetes or type 2 diabetes. Survey items were designed by members of the FDA RESCUE Collaborative Community Governing Committee prior to pilot testing with potential participants. Descriptive statistical analyses were conducted, as well as thematic analyses on free-text responses using NVivo v14.

RESULTS

Four hundred and seventy-eight participants completed the survey: 373 (78%) had type 1 diabetes, 346 (73%) identified as a woman and 433 (91%) were white. Most participants had experienced self-reported (rather than diagnosed) anxiety and depression (n = 323 and n = 313, respectively), as well as fear of low blood sugars (n = 294), low mood (n = 290) and diabetes-related distress (n = 257). Sixty-eight percent reported that diabetes had negatively affected self-esteem, 62% reported the feelings of loneliness, but 93% reported that friends/family/work colleagues were supportive when needed. Two hundred and seventy-two percent (57%) reported that their diabetes team had never raised the topic of mental health. The overwhelming majority stated that the best thing their diabetes team could do to help was to simply ask about mental well-being, listen with empathy and without judgement, and practice skills to understand psychosocial issues in diabetes.

CONCLUSION

Integrating psychosocial discussions and support within routine healthcare visits is crucial to improve outcomes for people with diabetes. Such a biopsychosocial model of healthcare has long been advocated by regulatory bodies.

Listening to Women: Experiences of Using Closed-Loop in Type 1 Diabetes Pregnancy

Introduction: Recent high-profile calls have emphasized that women's experiences should be considered in maternity care provisioning. We explored women's experiences of using closed-loop during type 1 diabetes (T1D) pregnancy to inform decision-making about antenatal rollout and guidance and support given to future users. Methods: We interviewed 23 closed-loop participants in the Automated insulin Delivery Among Pregnant women with T1D (AiDAPT) trial after randomization to closed-loop and ∼20 weeks later. Data were analyzed thematically. Results: Women described how closed-loop lessened the physical and mental demands of diabetes management, enabling them to feel more normal and sleep better. By virtue of spending increased time-in-range, women also worried less about risks to their baby and being judged negatively by health care professionals. Most noted that intensive input and support during early pregnancy had been crucial to adjusting to, and developing confidence in, the technology. Women emphasized that attaining pregnancy glucose targets still required ongoing effort from themselves and the health care team. Women described needing education to help them determine when, and how, to intervene and when to allow the closed-loop to operate without interference. All women reported more enjoyable pregnancy experiences as a result of using closed-loop; some also noted being able to remain longer in paid employment. Conclusions: Study findings endorse closed-loop use in T1D pregnancy by highlighting how the technology can facilitate positive pregnancy experiences. To realize fully the benefits of closed-loop, pregnant women would benefit from initial intensive oversight and support together with closed-loop specific education and training. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT04938557.

Automated Insulin Delivery in Women with Pregnancy Complicated by Type 1 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Hybrid closed-loop insulin therapy has shown promise for management of type 1 diabetes during pregnancy; however, its efficacy is unclear.

METHODS

In this multicenter, controlled trial, we randomly assigned pregnant women with type 1 diabetes and a glycated hemoglobin level of at least 6.5% at nine sites in the United Kingdom to receive standard insulin therapy or hybrid closed-loop therapy, with both groups using continuous glucose monitoring. The primary outcome was the percentage of time in the pregnancy-specific target glucose range (63 to 140 mg per deciliter [3.5 to 7.8 mmol per liter]) as measured by continuous glucose monitoring from 16 weeks' gestation until delivery. Analyses were performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Key secondary outcomes were the percentage of time spent in a hyperglycemic state (glucose level >140 mg per deciliter), overnight time in the target range, the glycated hemoglobin level, and safety events.

RESULTS

A total of 124 participants with a mean (±SD) age of 31.1±5.3 years and a mean baseline glycated hemoglobin level of 7.7±1.2% underwent randomization. The mean percentage of time that the maternal glucose level was in the target range was 68.2±10.5% in the closed-loop group and 55.6±12.5% in the standard-care group (mean adjusted difference, 10.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 7.0 to 14.0; P<0.001). Results for the secondary outcomes were consistent with those of the primary outcome; participants in the closed-loop group spent less time in a hyperglycemic state than those in the standard-care group (difference, -10.2 percentage points; 95% CI, -13.8 to -6.6); had more overnight time in the target range (difference, 12.3 percentage points; 95% CI, 8.3 to 16.2), and had lower glycated hemoglobin levels (difference, -0.31 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.50 to -0.12). Little time was spent in a hypoglycemic state. No unanticipated safety problems associated with the use of closed-loop therapy during pregnancy occurred (6 instances of severe hypoglycemia, vs. 5 in the standard-care group; 1 instance of diabetic ketoacidosis in each group; and 12 device-related adverse events in the closed-loop group, 7 related to closed-loop therapy).

CONCLUSIONS

Hybrid closed-loop therapy significantly improved maternal glycemic control during pregnancy complicated by type 1 diabetes. (Funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Program; AiDAPT ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN56898625.).

Delivering Biopsychosocial Health Care Within Routine Care: Spotlight-AQ Pivotal Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Results

BACKGROUND

Annual national diabetes audit data consistently shows most people with diabetes do not consistently achieve blood glucose targets for optimal health, despite the large range of treatment options available.

AIM

To explore the efficacy of a novel clinical intervention to address physical and mental health needs within routine diabetes consultations across health care settings.

METHODS

A multicenter, parallel group, individually randomized trial comparing consultation duration in adults diagnosed with T1D or T2D for ≥6 months using the Spotlight-AQ platform versus usual care. Secondary outcomes were HbA1c, depression, diabetes distress, anxiety, functional health status, and healthcare professional burnout. Machine learning models were utilized to analyze the data collected from the Spotlight-AQ platform to validate the reliability of question-concern association; as well as to identify key features that distinguish people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, as well as important features that distinguish different levels of HbA1c.

RESULTS

n = 98 adults with T1D or T2D; any HbA1c and receiving any diabetes treatment participated (n = 49 intervention). Consultation duration for intervention participants was reduced in intervention consultations by 0.5 to 4.1 minutes (3%-14%) versus no change in the control group (-0.9 to +1.28 minutes). HbA1c improved in the intervention group by 6 mmol/mol (range 0-30) versus control group 3 mmol/mol (range 0-8). Moderate improvements in psychosocial outcomes were seen in the intervention group for functional health status; reduced anxiety, depression, and diabetes distress and improved well-being. None were statistically significant. HCPs reported improved communication and greater focus on patient priorities in consultations. Artificial Intelligence examination highlighted therapy and psychological burden were most important in predicting HbA1c levels. The Natural Language Processing semantic analysis confirmed the mapping relationship between questions and their corresponding concerns. Machine learning model revealed type 1 and type 2 patients have different concerns regarding psychological burden and knowledge. Moreover, the machine learning model emphasized that individuals with varying levels of HbA1c exhibit diverse levels of psychological burden and therapy-related concerns.

CONCLUSION

Spotlight-AQ was associated with shorter, more useful consultations; with improved HbA1c and moderate benefits on psychosocial outcomes. Results reflect the importance of a biopsychosocial approach to routine care visits. Spotlight-AQ is viable across health care settings for improved outcomes.

CGM accuracy: Contrasting CE marking with the governmental controls of the USA (FDA) and Australia (TGA): A narrative review

The National Institute for Clinical Excellence updated guidance for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in 2022, recommending that CGM be available to all people living with type 1 diabetes. Manufacturers can trade in the UK with Conformité Européenne (CE) marking without an initial national assessment. The regulatory process for CGM CE marking, in contrast to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) process, is described. Manufacturers operating in the UK provided clinical accuracy studies submitted for CE marking. Critical appraisal of the studies shows several CGM devices have CE marking for wide-ranging indications beyond available data, unlike FDA and TGA approval. The FDA and TGA use tighter controls, requiring comprehensive product-specific clinical data evaluation. In 2018, the FDA published the integrated CGM (iCGM) criteria permitting interoperability. Applying the iCGM criteria to clinical data provided by manufacturers trading in the UK identified several study protocols that minimized glucose variability, thereby improving CGM accuracy on all metrics. These results do not translate into real-life performance. Furthermore, for many CGM devices available in the UK, accuracy reported in the hypoglycaemic range is below iCGM standards, or measurement is absent. We offer a framework to evaluate CGM accuracy studies critically. The review concludes that FDA- and TGA-approved indications match the available clinical data, whereas CE marking indications can have discrepancies. The UK can bolster regulation with UK Conformity Assessed marking from January 2025. However, balanced regulation is needed to ensure innovation and timely technological access are not hindered.

Rollout of Closed-Loop Technology to Pregnant Women with Type 1 Diabetes: Healthcare Professionals' Views About Potential Challenges and Solutions

Aims: To explore healthcare professionals' views about the training and support needed to rollout closed-loop technology to pregnant women with type 1 diabetes. Methods: We interviewed (n = 19) healthcare professionals who supported pregnant women using CamAPS FX closed-loop during the Automated insulin Delivery Amongst Pregnant women with Type 1 diabetes (AiDAPT) trial. Data were analyzed descriptively. An online workshop involving (n = 15) trial team members was used to inform recommendations. Ethics approvals were obtained in conjunction with those for the wider trial. Results: Interviewees expressed enthusiasm for a national rollout of closed-loop, but anticipated various challenges, some specific to use during pregnancy. These included variations in insulin pump and continuous glucose monitoring expertise and difficulties embedding and retaining key skills, due to the relatively small numbers of pregnant women using closed-loop. Inexperienced staff also highlighted difficulties interpreting data downloads. To support rollout, interviewees recommended providing expert initial advice training, delivered by device manufacturers together with online training resources and specific checklists for different systems. They also highlighted a need for 24 h technical support, especially when supporting technology naive women after first transitioning onto closed-loop in early pregnancy. They further recommended providing case-based meetings and mentorship for inexperienced colleagues, including support interpreting data downloads. Interviewees were optimistic that if healthcare professionals received training and support, their long-term workloads could be reduced because closed-loop lessened women's need for glycemic management input, especially in later pregnancy. Conclusions: Interviewees identified challenges and opportunities to rolling-out closed-loop and provided practical suggestions to upskill inexperienced staff supporting pregnant women using closed-loop. A key priority will be to determine how best to develop mentorship services to support inexperienced staff delivering closed-loop. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT04938557.

Consensus Recommendations for the Use of Automated Insulin Delivery Technologies in Clinical Practice

The significant and growing global prevalence of diabetes continues to challenge people with diabetes (PwD), healthcare providers, and payers. While maintaining near-normal glucose levels has been shown to prevent or delay the progression of the long-term complications of diabetes, a significant proportion of PwD are not attaining their glycemic goals. During the past 6 years, we have seen tremendous advances in automated insulin delivery (AID) technologies. Numerous randomized controlled trials and real-world studies have shown that the use of AID systems is safe and effective in helping PwD achieve their long-term glycemic goals while reducing hypoglycemia risk. Thus, AID systems have recently become an integral part of diabetes management. However, recommendations for using AID systems in clinical settings have been lacking. Such guided recommendations are critical for AID success and acceptance. All clinicians working with PwD need to become familiar with the available systems in order to eliminate disparities in diabetes quality of care. This report provides much-needed guidance for clinicians who are interested in utilizing AIDs and presents a comprehensive listing of the evidence payers should consider when determining eligibility criteria for AID insurance coverage.

Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Type 1 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

In persons with type 1 diabetes and high glycated hemoglobin levels, the benefits of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring with optional alarms for high and low blood glucose levels are uncertain.

METHODS

In a parallel-group, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial involving participants with type 1 diabetes and glycated hemoglobin levels between 7.5% and 11.0%, we investigated the efficacy of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring as compared with participant monitoring of blood glucose levels with fingerstick testing. The primary outcome was the glycated hemoglobin level at 24 weeks, analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Key secondary outcomes included sensor data, participant-reported outcome measures, and safety.

RESULTS

A total of 156 participants were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to undergo intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (the intervention group, 78 participants) or to monitor their own blood glucose levels with fingerstick testing (the usual-care group, 78 participants). At baseline, the mean (±SD) age of the participants was 44±15 years, and the mean duration of diabetes was 21±13 years; 44% of the participants were women. The mean baseline glycated hemoglobin level was 8.7±0.9% in the intervention group and 8.5±0.8% in the usual-care group; these levels decreased to 7.9±0.8% and 8.3±0.9%, respectively, at 24 weeks (adjusted mean between-group difference, -0.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.7 to -0.3; P<0.001). The time per day that the glucose level was in the target range was 9.0 percentage points (95% CI, 4.7 to 13.3) higher or 130 minutes (95% CI, 68 to 192) longer in the intervention group than in the usual-care group, and the time spent in a hypoglycemic state (blood glucose level, <70 mg per deciliter [<3.9 mmol per liter]) was 3.0 percentage points (95% CI, 1.4 to 4.5) lower or 43 minutes (95% CI, 20 to 65) shorter in the intervention group. Two participants in the usual-care group had an episode of severe hypoglycemia, and 1 participant in the intervention group had a skin reaction to the sensor.

CONCLUSIONS

Among participants with type 1 diabetes and high glycated hemoglobin levels, the use of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring with optional alarms for high and low blood glucose levels resulted in significantly lower glycated hemoglobin levels than levels monitored by fingerstick testing. (Funded by Diabetes UK and others; FLASH-UK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03815006.).

Feasibility of Spotlight Consultations Tool in Routine Care: Real-World Evidence

BACKGROUND

Burnout in people with diabetes and healthcare professionals (HCPs) is at an all-time high. Spotlight AQ, a novel "smart" adaptive patient questionnaire, is designed to improve consultations by rapidly identifying patient priorities and presenting these in the context of best-practice care pathways to aid consultations. We aimed to determine Spotlight AQ's feasibility in routine care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Spotlight prototype tool was trialed at three centers: two UK primary care centers and one US specialist center (June-September 2020). Participants with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) completed the questionnaire prior to their routine consultations. Results were immediately available and formed the basis of the clinical discussion and decision-making within the clinic visit.

RESULTS

A convenience sample of 49 adults took part, n=31 T1D, (n=18 female); and n=18 T2D (n=10 male, n=4 female, n=4 gender unreported). Each identified two priority concerns. "Psychological burden of diabetes" was the most common priority concern (T1D n = 27, 87.1%) followed by "gaining more skills about particular aspects of diabetes" (T1D n=19, 61.3%), "improving support around me" (n=8, 25.8%) and "diabetes-related treatment issues" (n=8, 25.8%). Burden of diabetes was widespread as was lack of confidence around self-management. Similarly, psychological burden of diabetes was the primary concern for participants with T2D (n=18,100%) followed by "gaining more skills about aspects of diabetes" (n=7, 38.9%), "improving support around me" (n=7, 38.9%) and "diabetes-related treatment issues" (n=4; 22.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Spotlight AQ is acceptable and feasible for use in routine care. Gaining more skills and addressing the psychological burden of diabetes are high-priority areas that must be addressed to reduce high levels of distress.

Protocol paper: multi-Centre randomised controlled trial evaluating a pre-clinic diabetes assessment and mapped care planning intervention amongst adults with type 1, type 2 or pre-diabetes

BACKGROUND

Existing therapeutic interventions to treat diabetes are well known, yet the majority of people with diabetes do not consistently achieve blood glucose targets (even individual therapy targets) for optimal health, despite the large range of treatment options available. Such outcomes have remained stubbornly poor for decades with <25% adults with diabetes achieving glycaemic targets. Patient behaviour, individually supported in routine clinical care, is an important missing component to improved outcomes, in a medical healthcare model not ideally suited to supporting successful diabetes management.

METHODS

A multi-centre, parallel group, individually randomised trial comparing consultation duration in adults with type 1, type 2 or pre-diabetes using the Spotlight Consultations pre-clinic assessment compared to usual care in the Spotlight-AQ study. Two hundred adults with type 1, type 2 or pre-diabetes attending routine care outpatient appointments across up to ten participating sites will be invited to participate.

INTERVENTION

An outpatient pre-clinic intervention delivered within 1 week prior to scheduled routine outpatient appointment.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Duration of routine outpatient consultation.

SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Functional health status Diabetes distress Depression Treatment satisfaction Impact on self-care behaviours HCP burnout HCP treatment satisfaction and burden Hypoglycaemia (time less than 70mg/dL) Hyperglycaemia (time above 180 mg/dL) Change in weight Change in HbA_1c Cost effectiveness of intervention DISCUSSION: Results from the study will provide valuable insights into patient-professional communication practices within routine care and recommendations will be made, as necessary, for improvements to that. If the intervention is shown to be clinically and cost-effective, the feedback from participants and healthcare professionals will be used to make any improvements prior to its deployment to support improved communication and associated health outcomes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial was approved by the Wales REC7 Research Ethics Committee (21/WA/0020). Results will be disseminated through national and international conferences, scientific journals, newsletters, magazines and social media. Target audiences include consultants and other clinicians in diabetes, and medical professionals or scientists overall.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN15511689 . Registered on 10 November 2021.

AiDAPT: automated insulin delivery amongst pregnant women with type 1 diabetes: a multicentre randomized controlled trial - study protocol

Background

Pregnant women with type 1 diabetes strive for tight glucose targets (3.5-7.8 mmol/L) to minimise the risks of obstetric and neonatal complications. Despite using diabetes technologies including continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), insulin pumps and contemporary insulin analogues, most women struggle to achieve and maintain the recommended pregnancy glucose targets. This study aims to evaluate whether the use of automated closed-loop insulin delivery improves antenatal glucose levels in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes.

Methods/design

A multicentre, open label, randomized, controlled trial of pregnant women with type 1 diabetes and a HbA1c of ≥48 mmol/mol (6.5%) at pregnancy confirmation and ≤ 86 mmol/mol (10%) at randomization. Participants who provide written informed consent before 13 weeks 6 days gestation will be entered into a run-in phase to collect 96 h (24 h overnight) of CGM glucose values. Eligible participants will be randomized on a 1:1 basis to CGM (Dexcom G6) with usual insulin delivery (control) or closed-loop (intervention). The closed-loop system includes a model predictive control algorithm (CamAPS FX application), hosted on an android smartphone that communicates wirelessly with the insulin pump (Dana Diabecare RS) and CGM transmitter. Research visits and device training will be provided virtually or face-to-face in conjunction with 4-weekly antenatal clinic visits where possible. Randomization will stratify for clinic site. One hundred twenty-four participants will be recruited. This takes into account 10% attrition and 10% who experience miscarriage or pregnancy loss. Analyses will be performed according to intention to treat. The primary analysis will evaluate the change in the time spent in the target glucose range (3.5-7.8 mmol/l) between the intervention and control group from 16 weeks gestation until delivery. Secondary outcomes include overnight time in target, time above target (> 7.8 mmol/l), standard CGM metrics, HbA1c and psychosocial functioning and health economic measures. Safety outcomes include the number and severity of ketoacidosis, severe hypoglycaemia and adverse device events.

Discussion

This will be the largest randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of closed-loop insulin delivery during type 1 diabetes pregnancy.

Trial registration

ISRCTN 56898625 Registration Date: 10 April, 2018.

Liraglutide and the management of overweight and obesity in people with severe mental illness: qualitative sub-study

BACKGROUND

People with severe mental illness are two to three times more likely to be overweight or have obesity than the general population and this is associated with significant morbidity and premature mortality. Liraglutide 3 mg is a once daily injectable GLP-1 receptor agonist that is licensed for the treatment of obesity in the general population and has the potential to be used in people with severe mental illness.

AIMS

To record the expectations and experiences of people with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorders or first episode psychosis taking daily liraglutide 3 mg injections in a clinical trial for the treatment of obesity. To seek the views of healthcare professionals about the feasibility of delivering the intervention in routine care.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews were undertaken with a purposive sub-sample of people with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorders or first episode psychosis with overweight or obesity who were treated with a daily injection of liraglutide 3 mg in a double-blinded, randomised controlled pilot study evaluating the use of liraglutide for the treatment of obesity. Interviews were also conducted with healthcare professionals.

RESULTS

Seventeen patient participants were interviewed. Sixteen took part in the baseline interview, eight completed both baseline and follow-up interviews, and one took part in follow-up interview only. Mean interview duration was thirteen minutes (range 5-37 min). Despite reservations by some participants about the injections before the study, most of those who completed the trial reported no challenges in the timing of or administering the injections. Key themes included despondency regarding prior medication associated weight gain, quality of life impact of weight loss, practical aspects of participation including materials received and clinic attendance. Healthcare professionals reported challenges with recruitment, however, overall it was a positive experience for them and for participants.

CONCLUSION

Liraglutide appears to be an acceptable therapy for obesity in this population with limited side effects. The quality of life benefits realised by several intervention participants reinforce the biomedical benefits of achieved weight loss.

User and Healthcare Professional Perspectives on Do-It-Yourself Artificial Pancreas Systems: A Need for Guidelines

A growing number of individuals with type 1 diabetes are choosing to use "do-it-yourself" artificial pancreas systems (DIY APS) to support their diabetes self-management. Observational and self-report data of glycemic benefits of DIY APS are promising; however, without rigorous clinical trials or regulation from governing bodies, liability and user safety continue to be central concerns for stakeholders. Despite DIY APS having been used for several years now, there are no guidelines to assist users and healthcare professionals in addressing DIY APS use in routine clinical care. This commentary reports key stakeholders' perspectives presented at the annual Advanced Technologies and Treatments in Diabetes conference in February 2020. Important considerations to inform the development of clinical care guidelines are also presented to generate further debate.

Developing an intervention to optimise the outcome of cardiac surgery in people with diabetes: the OCTOPuS pilot study

BACKGROUND

Cardiothoracic surgical outcomes are poorer in people with diabetes compared with those without diabetes. There are two important uncertainties in the management of people with diabetes undergoing major surgery: (1) how to improve diabetes management in the weeks leading up to an elective procedure and (2) whether that improved management leads to improved postoperative outcomes. The aim of this study was to develop and pilot a specialist diabetes team-led intervention to improve surgical outcomes in people with diabetes.

DESIGN

Open pilot feasibility study SETTING: Diabetes and cardiothoracic surgery departments, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust PARTICIPANTS: Seventeen people with diabetes undergoing cardiothoracic surgery INTERVENTION: Following two rapid literature reviews, a prototype intervention was developed based on a previously used nurse-led outpatient intervention and tested.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Feasibility and acceptability of delivering the intervention SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Biomedical data were collected at baseline and prior to surgery. We assessed how the intervention was used. In depth qualitative interviews with participants and healthcare professionals were used to explore perceptions and experiences of the intervention and how it might be improved.

RESULTS

Thirteen of the 17 people recruited completed the study and underwent cardiothoracic surgery. All components of the OCTOPuS intervention were used, but not all parts were used for all participants. Minor changes were made to the intervention as a result of feedback from the participants and healthcare professionals. Median (IQR) HbA1c was 10 mmol/mol (3, 13) lower prior to surgery than at baseline.

CONCLUSION

This study has shown that it is possible to develop a clinical pathway to improve diabetes management prior to admission. The clinical and cost-effectiveness of this intervention will now be tested in a multicentre randomised controlled trial in cardiothoracic centres across the UK.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN; ISRCTN10170306 . Registered 10 May 2018.

Flash glucose monitoring with the FreeStyle Libre 2 compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in suboptimally controlled type 1 diabetes: the FLASH-UK randomised controlled trial protocol

INTRODUCTION

Optimising glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes (T1D) remains challenging. Flash glucose monitoring with FreeStyle Libre 2 (FSL2) is a novel alternative to the current standard of care self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). No randomised controlled trials to date have explored the potential benefits of FSL2 in T1D. We aim to assess the impact of FSL2 in people with suboptimal glycaemic control T1D in comparison with SMBG.

METHODS

This open-label, multicentre, randomised (via stochastic minimisation), parallel design study conducted at eight UK secondary and primary care centres will aim to recruit 180 people age ≥16 years with T1D for >1 year and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 7.5%-11%. Eligible participants will be randomised to 24 weeks of FSL2 (intervention) or SMBG (control) periods, after 2-week of blinded sensor wear. Participants will be assessed virtually or in-person owing to the COVID-19 pandemic. HbA1c will be measured at baseline, 12 and 24 weeks (primary outcome). Participants will be contacted at 4 and 12 weeks for glucose optimisation. Control participants will wear a blinded sensor during the last 2 weeks. Psychosocial outcomes will be measured at baseline and 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes include sensor-based metrics, insulin doses, adverse events and self-report psychosocial measures. Utility, acceptability, expectations and experience of using FSL2 will be explored. Data on health service resource utilisation will be collected.

ANALYSIS

Efficacy analyses will follow intention-to-treat principle. Outcomes will be analysed using analysis of covariance, adjusted for the baseline value of the corresponding outcome, minimisation factors and other known prognostic factors. Both within-trial and life-time economic evaluations, informed by modelling from the perspective of the National Health Service setting, will be performed.

ETHICS

The study was approved by Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee (reference 19/NW/0081). Informed consent will be sought from all participants.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03815006.

PROTOCOL VERSION

4.0 dated 29 June 2020.

The Optimising Cardiac Surgery ouTcOmes in People with diabeteS (OCTOPuS) randomised controlled trial to evaluate an outpatient pre-cardiac surgery diabetes management intervention: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Cardiothoracic surgical outcomes are poorer in people with diabetes compared with those without diabetes. There are two important uncertainties in the management of people with diabetes undergoing major surgery: (1) how to improve diabetes management in the weeks leading up to an elective procedure and (2) whether that improved management leads to better postoperative outcomes. We previously demonstrated the feasibility of delivering the Optimising Cardiac Surgery ouTcOmes in People with diabeteS (OCTOPuS) intervention, an outpatient intervention delivered by diabetes healthcare professionals for people with suboptimally managed diabetes over 8-12 weeks before elective cardiac surgery. The present study will assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the intervention in cardiothoracic centres across the UK.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A multicentre, parallel group, single-blinded 1:1 individually randomised trial comparing time from surgery until clinically fit for discharge in adults with suboptimally managed type 1 diabetes or type 2 diabetes undergoing elective surgery between the OCTOPuS intervention and usual care (primary endpoint). Secondary endpoints will include actual time from surgery to discharge from hospital; days alive and either out of hospital or judged as clinically fit for discharge; mortality; time on intensive therapy unit (ITU)/ventilator; infections; acute myocardial infarction; change in weight; effect on postoperative renal function and incidence of acute kidney injury; change in HbA1c; frequency and severity of self-reported hypoglycaemia; operations permanently cancelled for suboptimal glycaemic levels; cost-effectiveness; psychosocial questionnaires. The target sample size will be 426 recruited across approximately 15 sites. The primary analysis will be conducted on an intention-to-treat population. A two-sided p value of 0.05 or less will be used to declare statistical significance for all analyses and results will be presented with 95% CIs.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial was approved by the South Central-Hampshire A Research Ethics Committee (20/SC/0271). Results will be disseminated through conferences, scientific journals, newsletters, magazines and social media.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN10170306.

The use of liraglutide 3.0 mg daily in the management of overweight and obesity in people with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and first episode psychosis: Results of a pilot randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

AIM

To investigate the feasibility and acceptability of using liraglutide 3.0 mg daily in the management of overweight and obesity in people with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and first episode psychosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot trial took place in mental health centres and primary care within Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust. The participants were adults with schizophrenia, schizoaffective or first-episode psychosis prescribed antipsychotic medication who were overweight or obese. The intervention was once-daily subcutaneous liraglutide or placebo, titrated to 3.0 mg daily, for 6 months. The primary outcomes were recruitment, consent, retention and adherence. The secondary exploratory outcomes were weight, HbA1c and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale.

RESULTS

Seven hundred and ninety-nine individuals were screened for eligibility. The most common reasons for exclusion were ineligibility (44%) and inability to make contact (28%). The acceptance rate, as a proportion of all eligible participants, was 12.2%. The most commonly stated reason why eligible candidates declined to participate related to the study-specific medication and protocol (n = 50). Forty-seven participants were randomized, with 79% completing the trial. Participants in the liraglutide arm lost a mean 5.7 ± 7.9 kg compared with no significant weight change in the placebo group (treatment difference -6.0 kg, p = .015). Body mass index, waist circumference and HbA1c were reduced in the intervention group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the need for a larger randomized controlled trial to evaluate the use of liraglutide (maximum dose 3.0 mg daily) in the management of obesity in people with severe mental illness.

A standard set of person-centred outcomes for diabetes mellitus: results of an international and unified approach

AIMS

To select a core list of standard outcomes for diabetes to be routinely applied internationally, including patient-reported outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a structured systematic review of outcome measures, focusing on adults with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes. This process was followed by a consensus-driven modified Delphi panel, including a multidisciplinary group of academics, health professionals and people with diabetes. External feedback to validate the set of outcome measures was sought from people with diabetes and health professionals.

RESULTS

The panel identified an essential set of clinical outcomes related to diabetes control, acute events, chronic complications, health service utilisation, and survival that can be measured using routine administrative data and/or clinical records. Three instruments were recommended for annual measurement of patient-reported outcome measures: the WHO Well-Being Index for psychological well-being; the depression module of the Patient Health Questionnaire for depression; and the Problem Areas in Diabetes scale for diabetes distress. A range of factors related to demographic, diagnostic profile, lifestyle, social support and treatment of diabetes were also identified for case-mix adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend the standard set identified in this study for use in routine practice to monitor, benchmark and improve diabetes care. The inclusion of patient-reported outcomes enables people living with diabetes to report directly on their condition in a structured way.

Liraglutide and the management of overweight and obesity in people with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and first-episode psychosis: protocol for a pilot trial

Background

People with severe mental illness (SMI) are two to three times more likely to be overweight and obese than the general population and this is associated with significant morbidity and premature mortality. Although lifestyle interventions can support people with SMI to lose weight, some are unable to make the necessary lifestyle changes or, despite making the changes, continue to gain weight.

Objective

To assess the feasibility and acceptability of delivering a full-scale trial evaluating whether liraglutide 3.0 mg, a once-daily injectable therapy, may be an effective treatment of overweight and obesity in people with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and first-episode psychosis.

Methods

Design: a single-centre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

Setting: mental health facilities within Southern Health NHS Trust.

Participants: 60 adults with schizophrenia, schizoaffective or first-episode psychosis prescribed antipsychotic medication will be recruited. Participants will be overweight or obese, defined by their baseline BMI which will be:

• BMI ≥ 30 kg/m² or

• BMI ≥ 27 kg/m² to < 30 kg/m² in the presence of at least one weight-related consequence.

This is in concordance with the current EU licence for liraglutide (maximum dosage 3.0 mg).

Intervention: participants will be allocated in a 1:1 ratio using a computer-based randomisation programme to either once-daily subcutaneously administered liraglutide or placebo, titrated to 3.0 mg daily, for 6 months. All participants will receive standardised written information about healthy eating and exercise at their randomisation visit.

Outcomes: the main aim of the study is to gather data on recruitment, consent, retention and adherence. Qualitative interviews with a purposive sub-sample of participants and healthcare workers will provide data on intervention feasibility and acceptability. Secondary clinical outcome measurements will be assessed at 3 and 6 months and will include: weight, fasting plasma glucose, lipid profile, HbA_1c level; and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale.

Discussion

This study should provide evidence of the potential benefits of liraglutide (maximum dosage 3.0 mg daily) on body weight and metabolic variables in people with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and first-episode psychosis. It will also address the feasibility and acceptability of the use of liraglutide in mental health settings. This will inform the design of a longer outcome study that will be needed to determine whether any weight loss can be maintained in the long term.

Trial registration

Universal Trial Number (UTN), ID: U1111-1203-0068. Registered on on 2/10/2017.

European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT), ID: 2017-004064-35. Registered on 3/10/2017.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3689-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Utilizing eHealth and Telemedicine Technologies to Enhance Access and Quality of Consultations: It's Not What You Say, It's the Way You Say It

Therapeutic inertia and suboptimal adherence to therapy have been cited as key contributors to poor diabetes outcomes. Although many of the factors associated with therapeutic inertia and adherence are often beyond the control of both patients and health care providers, most factors can be addressed through improved patient-provider communications.Use of telemedicine and electronic health (eHealth) technologies has the potential to address these factors, and thus, improve management of diabetes, increase access to care, and diminish inequalities in providing health care services. This article examines the behavioral aspects of the eHealth and telemedicine technologies, discusses how patient-centered care can be delivered effectively using eHealth and telemedicine, and reviews a novel model of care, KALMOD, which addresses a range of factors that are critical to improving patient-provider communications and collaborations.