Satisfaction with diabetes involvement: Exploring parent and adolescent perspectives.

AIMS: Both parent and adolescent involvement in type 1 diabetes management are critical during adolescence. The current study sought to understand the factors associated with parent and adolescent satisfaction with their own and one another's involvement in diabetes management. METHODS: Cross-sectional baseline data from 157 parent-adolescent dyads enrolled in an RCT were used. Adolescent ages ranged from 12 to 19 (Mage = 14.7, SD = 1.89) and were balanced by gender (50.3% male). Paired t-tests examined concordance between parent and adolescent satisfaction, bivariate correlations identified correlates, and regressions examined unique associations. RESULTS: Roughly, 43% of adolescents and 29% of parents were very satisfied with adolescent involvement in diabetes management, whereas 71% of adolescents and 26.1% of parents were very satisfied with parent involvement. Indicators of better glycaemic health (via higher percent time-in-range and lower HbA1c and percent time in hyperglycaemia) and psychosocial functioning (less diabetes distress and depression) were correlated with higher satisfaction. Parent satisfaction with adolescent involvement was higher among older adolescents (R = 0.198, p = 0.013). Non-Hispanic white youth were more satisfied with their own involvement than youth of colour (t(149) = -2.783, p = 0.003). Both percent time-in-range and one's own diabetes distress uniquely related to parent and adolescent satisfaction with adolescent involvement. Conversely, parent satisfaction with their own involvement was only uniquely associated with parent diabetes distress. CONCLUSION: Both adolescent and parents' satisfaction with adolescents' involvement in self-management are indicators of both glycaemic control and psychosocial well-being, whereas parents' self-evaluations are more closely tied to diabetes-specific distress.

Expanding the use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs): Screening youth with type 1 diabetes from underrepresented populations.

AIM: Youth from lower socioeconomic status (SES) have suboptimal type 1 diabetes (T1D) outcomes. Patient reported outcomes (PROs) measure psychosocial states and are associated with T1D outcomes, however are understudied in low SES youth. We aimed to evaluate associations between PROs and public insurance status, a proxy for low SES. METHODS: We analyzed survey data from 129 youth with T1D (age 15.7 ± 2.3 years, 33 % publicly insured) screened with PROMIS Global Health (PGH, measuring global health) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9, measuring depressive symptoms) during diabetes appointments. Correlation and regression analyses evaluated differences in PGH and PHQ-9 by insurance status. RESULTS: For youth with public insurance, lower global health correlated with lower self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG; r = 0.38,p = 0.033) and older age (r = -0.45,p = 0.005). In youth with private insurance, lower global health correlated with lower SMBG (r = 0.27,p = 0.018) and female sex (rho = 0.26,p = 0.015). For youth with private insurance, higher depressive symptoms correlated with higher body mass index (r = 0.22,p = 0.03) and fewer SMBG (r = -0.35,p = 0.04). In multivariate regression analyses, public insurance was inversely associated with global health (p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: PGH is a particularly salient PRO in youth with public insurance. Global health may be an important psychosocial factor to assess in youth with T1D from low SES backgrounds.

DiabetesWise: An innovative approach to promoting diabetes device awareness.

BACKGROUND: DiabetesWise is an unbranded, data-driven online resource that tailors device recommendations based on preferences and priorities of people with insulin-requiring diabetes. The objective of this study is to examine whether DiabetesWise increases uptake of diabetes devices, which are empirically supported to improve glycemic and psychosocial outcomes. METHODS: The sample included 458 participants (Mage = 37.1, SD = 9.73; 66% female; 81% type 1 diabetes) with insulin-requiring diabetes and minimal diabetes device use at enrollment. Participants used DiabetesWise and completed online surveys. Chi-square and t tests evaluated requests for a device prescription, receiving a prescription, and starting a new device at 1 and 3 months post use. Baseline predictors of these variables and past use of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) and changes in diabetes distress post use were also examined. RESULTS: Within the first month of interacting with DiabetesWise 19% of participants asked for a prescription for a diabetes device. This rate rose to 31% in the first 3 months. These requests resulted in 16% of the sample starting a new device within the first 3 months. Whereas several factors were associated with prior CGM use, receiving a prescription, and starting a new device, more diabetes distress (t(343) = -3.13, p = .002) was the only factor associated with asking for a prescription. Diabetes distress decreased after interacting with DiabetesWise within 1 month (t(193) = 3.51, p < .001) and 3 months (t(180) = 5.23, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Within 3 months of interacting with DiabetesWise, one in three participants had requested a prescription for a new diabetes device and average distress levels were reduced, indicating benefit from this low-intensity online platform.

Psychosocial Effects of the Loop Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery System.

AIMS: This study examined the psychosocial impact of Loop, an open-source automated insulin dosing system that has emerged from the diabetes technology "Do-It-Yourself" (DIY) movement. METHODS: Subsamples of 239 adults, 115 children, and 243 parents completed data collection at the time of Loop initiation and 3 and 6 months later. Surveys collected demographic and clinical information, percent time-in-range, HbA1c, and validated psychosocial measures. Analyses included paired t tests and McNemar's tests to compare psychosocial functioning at 3 and 6 months and regression models to assess baseline predictors of psychosocial outcomes at 6 months. RESULTS: Adults reported significant improvements in diabetes distress (t = -7.20 P < .001; t = -8.01, P < .001), sleep quality (t = 6.81, P < .001; t = 2.98, P = .003), fear of hypoglycemia (t = -4.42, P < .001; t = -4.97, P < .001), and hypoglycemia confidence (t = 8.68, P < .001; t = 7.96 P < .001) from baseline to 3 months and 6 months, respectively. Significant improvements in parents' and children's sleep quality and parents' fear of hypoglycemia were also observed. Several baseline characteristics were associated with psychosocial outcomes at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings support the broad and sustained benefits of Loop across multiple aspects of psychosocial well-being. Advancement and dissemination of such technologies has the potential to improve mental and physiological health among people living with type 1 diabetes.

Qualitative Study of User Experiences with Loop, an Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery System.

Background: Loop is an open-source automated insulin delivery (AID) system, used by more than 9,000 people with type 1 diabetes. Understanding the pros and cons of Loop use may help improve disease management and support population level innovation. Methods: Focus groups revealed 72 new and existing users' perspectives on Loop uptake, use, and persistence. A subsample of participants from a mixed-methods, observational cohort study shared first-hand accounts of their experiences using Loop. Participants were predominately white (95%), male (50%), privately insured (94%), and reported annual household income ≥$100K (73%) and education exceeding a bachelor's degree (87%) with a mean HbA1c of 6.6% ± 0.8%. Data were analyzed and synthesized by a multidisciplinary team. Results: Participants detailed their experiences with (1) Loop technical support and troubleshooting, (2) decreased mental/behavioral burden, (3) technical issues with parts of the system, (4) glycemic control, (5) personalizing settings, and (6) providers while using Loop. Decreased burden was the most endorsed benefit defined by less worry, stress, and cognitive effort and less time spent on diabetes management tasks. Participants highlighted the benefits of Loop overnight and their introduction to "Loop communities" during use. The most discussed challenges involved technical issues. A range of provider attitudes and knowledge about Loop complicated users' clinical experiences and disclosure. Conclusions: This sample of new and experienced Loop users reported benefits to quality of life and glycemic control that outweighed challenges of setting up system components, customizing the system to suit one's lifestyle and habits, and adjusting system settings. Challenges related to system setup and calibrating settings are remediable and, if addressed, may better serve Loop users. Users reported feeling empowered by the customizability of and the educational effects facilitated by the open-source AID system. Loop helped users learn more about their chronic illness and physiology in an acceptable format. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT03838900.

Discontinued Use of the Loop Insulin Dosing System: A Mixed-Methods Investigation.

Background: Loop is an open-source automated insulin dosing system that allows users unrivaled control over system settings that affect future glucose prediction. Thousands use Loop, but little is known about those who discontinue. Methods: In a large observational study, 874 Loop participants completed surveys and provided glycemic data, 46 (5.3%) of those self-identified as discontinuing Loop use during the observation window, 45 completed a discontinued use survey, 22 provided system settings data, and 19 participated in semistructured interviews about their discontinuation. Qualitative data were transcribed, coded, and analyzed. Results: Older age and not trusting Loop were associated with discontinued use, although no other demographic or clinical characteristics were significant correlates. The most endorsed reasons were "I decided to try something else" (27.8%) followed by "It just didn't help as much as I thought it would" (22.2%). Qualitative analyses revealed prominent themes centered upon mental and emotional burden and adjusting settings. Other reasons for discontinued use included fear of disapproval of Loop use from diabetes provider, barriers to acquiring component devices, a desire to try new/different technologies, concerns that Loop could not accommodate specific exercise or low insulin dose regimens, and worry about Loop use during pregnancy. It was noted that burdens might be alleviated by enhanced technical assistance and expert guidance. Conclusions: Although the majority of individuals in the Loop observational study continued use, those who discontinued reported similar challenges. Technical support and education specific to setting calculations could expand Loop benefits, alleviate burden, and support sustained use among new Loop users. Clinical Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03838900).

ONBOARD: A Feasibility Study of a Telehealth-Based Continuous Glucose Monitoring Adoption Intervention for Adults with Type 1 Diabetes.

Background: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) can improve glycemic control for adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) but certain barriers interfere with consistent use including cost, data overload, alarm fatigue, physical discomfort, and unwanted social attention. This pilot study aimed to examine feasibility and acceptability of a behavioral intervention, ONBOARD (Overcoming Barriers and Obstacles to Adopting Diabetes Devices) to support adults with T1D in optimizing CGM use. Methods: Adults (18-50 years) with T1D in their first year of CGM use were invited to participate in a tailored, multicomponent telehealth-based intervention delivered over four 60-min sessions every 2-3 weeks. Participants completed surveys (demographics; diabetes distress, Diabetes Distress Scale for adults with type 1 diabetes; satisfaction with program) and provided CGM data at baseline and postintervention (3 months). Data were analyzed using paired t-tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Results: Twenty-two participants (age = 30.95 ± 8.32 years; 59% women; 91% non-Hispanic; 86% White, 5% Black, 9% other; 73% pump users) completed the study. ONBOARD demonstrated acceptability and a high rate of retention. Moderate effect sizes were found for reductions in diabetes distress (P = 0.01, r = -0.37) and increases in daytime spent in target range (70-180 mg/dL: P = 0.03, r = -0.35). There were no significant increases in hypoglycemia. Conclusions: Findings show preliminary evidence of feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy of ONBOARD for supporting adults with T1D in optimizing CGM use while alleviating diabetes distress. Further research is needed to examine ONBOARD in a larger sample over a longer period.

Cost, Hassle, and On-Body Experience: Barriers to Diabetes Device Use in Adolescents and Potential Intervention Targets.

Background: Adolescents with diabetes have the highest A1cs of all age groups. Diabetes devices (insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors [CGM]) can improve glycemic outcomes, and although the uptake of devices has increased, they remain underutilized in this population. This study characterizes adolescent-reported barriers to diabetes device use to determine targets for clinician intervention. Methods: We surveyed 411 adolescents with type 1 diabetes (mean age 16.30 ± 2.25 years) on barriers to diabetes device use, technology use attitudes (general and diabetes specific), benefits and burdens of CGM, self-efficacy for diabetes care, diabetes distress, family conflict, and depression. We characterize barriers to device uptake; assess demographic and psychosocial differences in device users, discontinuers, and nonusers; and determine differences in device use by gender and age. Results: The majority of adolescents used an insulin pump (n = 307, 75%) and more than half used CGM (n = 225, 55%). Cost/insurance-related concerns were the most commonly endorsed barrier category (61%) followed by wear-related issues (58.6%), which include the hassle of wearing the device (38%) and dislike of device on the body (33%). Adolescents who endorsed more barriers also reported more diabetes distress (P = 0.003), family conflict (P = 0.003), and depressive symptoms (P = 0.014). Pump and CGM discontinuers both endorsed more barriers and more negative perceptions of technology than current users, but reported no difference from device users in diabetes distress, family conflict, or depression. Gender was not related to the perceptions of devices. Conclusions: Clinicians can proactively assess attitudes toward diabetes technology and perceptions of benefits/burdens to encourage device uptake and potentially prevent device discontinuation among adolescents.

Trust in hybrid closed loop among people with diabetes: Perspectives of experienced system users.

Automated closed loop systems will greatly change type 1 diabetes management; user trust will be essential for acceptance of this new technology. This qualitative study explored trust in 32 individuals following a hybrid closed loop trial. Participants described how context-, system-, and person-level factors influenced their trust in the system. Participants attempted to override the system when they lacked trust, while trusting the system decreased self-management burdens and decreased stress. Findings highlight considerations for fostering trust in closed loop systems. Systems may be able to engage users by offering varying levels of controls to match trust preferences.

Depression in context: Important considerations for youth with type 1 vs type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Youth with diabetes are at increased risk for depression. However, severity and correlates of depressive symptoms may differ by diabetes type. OBJECTIVE: Associations of depressive symptoms with global health, diabetes duration, and gender were compared between youth with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A sample of 149 youth ages 12 to 21 diagnosed with either type 1 (n = 122) or type 2 (n = 27) diabetes were screened during routine clinic appointments. Regression models were constructed to examine differences by diabetes type. RESULTS: Adolescents with type 2 diabetes had significantly higher depressive symptom scores (4.89 vs 2.99, P = .025) than those with type 1 diabetes. A significant interaction between global health and diabetes type on depressive symptoms revealed inverse associations between global health and depressive symptoms that was stronger among youth with type 2 diabetes (ß = -.98, P < .001) than type 1 (ß = -.48, P < .001). Further probing revealed that among youth with better global health, adolescents with type 1 had more depressive symptoms than those with type 2 diabetes (ß = .33, P = .035). Diabetes duration and depressive symptoms were positively associated among individuals with type 2 (ß = .86, P = .043), but not type 1 diabetes. No gender differences were detected. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that correlates of depressive symptoms in youth with diabetes differ by diabetes type. Global health appears to be an important correlate among youth with both types, whereas diabetes duration was only a significant factor among those with type 2 diabetes. The current findings can inform future psychosocial intervention efforts within both these populations.

Feasibility Studies of an Insulin-Only Bionic Pancreas in a Home-Use Setting.

BACKGROUND: We tested the safety and performance of the "insulin-only" configuration of the bionic pancreas (BP) closed-loop blood-glucose control system in a home-use setting to assess glycemic outcomes using different static and dynamic glucose set-points. METHOD: This is an open-label non-randomized study with three consecutive intervention periods. Participants had consecutive weeks of usual care followed by the insulin-only BP with (1) an individualized static set-point of 115 or 130 mg/dL and (2) a dynamic set-point that automatically varied within 110 to 130 mg/dL, depending on hypoglycemic risk. Human factors (HF) testing was conducted using validated surveys. The last five days of each study arm were used for data analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen participants were enrolled with a mean age of 28 years, mean A1c of 7.2%, and mean daily insulin dose of 0.6 U/kg (0.4-1.0 U/kg). The usual care arm had an average glucose of 145 ± 20 mg/dL, which increased in the static set-point arm (159 ± 8 mg/dL, P = .004) but not in the dynamic set-point arm (154 ± 10 mg/dL, P = ns). There was no significant difference in time spent in range (70-180 mg/dL) among the three study arms. There was less time <70 mg/dL with both the static (1.8% ± 1.4%, P = .009) and dynamic set-point (2.7±1.5, P = .051) arms compared to the usual-care arm (5.5% ± 4.2%). HF testing demonstrated preliminary user satisfaction and no increased risk of diabetes burden or distress. CONCLUSIONS: The insulin-only configuration of the BP using either static or dynamic set-points and initialized only with body weight performed similarly to other published insulin-only systems.

Psychosocial and Human Factors During a Trial of a Hybrid Closed Loop System for Type 1 Diabetes Management.

BACKGROUND: Hybrid closed loop (HCL) systems are designed to automate insulin delivery to improve type 1 diabetes (T1D) outcomes and reduce user burden and distress. Because the systems only automate some aspects of diabetes care, psychosocial and human factors remain an important consideration in their use. Thus, we examined whether psychosocial and human factors (i.e., distress related to diabetes management, fear of hypoglycemia, and technology attitudes) would (1) change after using the system and (2) predict glycemic outcomes during the trial. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Fourteen adults and 15 adolescents with T1D participated in a multisite clinical trial of an investigational version of the MiniMed™ 670G system (Medtronic, Northridge, CA) over 4 to 5 days in a semisupervised outpatient setting. Users completed surveys assessing psychosocial and human factors before beginning the HCL system and at the conclusion of the study. t-Tests and regression analyses were conducted to examine whether these factors changed following trial exposure to the HCL system and predicted glycemic outcomes during the trial. RESULTS: Diabetes management distress decreased and diabetes technology attitudes became more positive over the trial period. Fear of hypoglycemia did not change over the trial period. There was a trend toward greater pretrial management distress predicting less time in range during the trial, controlling for time in range before the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that this system is promising for enhancing technology attitudes and reducing management distress. Psychosocial factors, such as management distress, may negatively impact glycemic outcomes and should be a priority area for further investigation.

From Wary Wearers to d-Embracers: Personas of Readiness to Use Diabetes Devices.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes devices such as insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) are associated with improved health and quality of life in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, uptake remains low. The aim of this study was to develop different "personas" of adults with T1D in relation to readiness to adopt new diabetes technology. METHODS: Participants were 1498 T1D Exchange participants who completed surveys on barriers to uptake, technology attitudes, and other psychosocial variables. HbA1c data was available from the T1D Exchange for 30% of the sample. K-means cluster analyses grouped the sample by device barriers and attitudes. The authors assigned descriptive labels based on cluster characteristics. ANOVAs and chi-square tests assessed group differences by demographic and psychosocial variables (eg, diabetes duration, diabetes distress). RESULTS: Analyses yielded five distinct personas. The d-Embracers (54% of participants) endorsed few barriers to device use and had the highest rates of device use, lowest HbA1c, and were the least distressed. The Free Rangers (23%) had the most negative technology attitudes. The Data Minimalists (10%) used pumps but had lower CGM use and did not want more diabetes information. The Wary Wearers (11%) had lower overall device use, were younger, more distressed, endorsed many barriers, and had higher HbA1c. The High Distress (3%) group members were the youngest, had the shortest diabetes duration, reported the most barriers, and were the most distressed. CONCLUSION: These clinically meaningful personas of device readiness can inform tailored interventions targeting barriers and psychosocial needs to increase device uptake.

Using Cluster Analysis to Understand Clinician Readiness to Promote Continuous Glucose Monitoring Adoption.

BACKGROUND: Many people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) report barriers to using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Diabetes care providers may have their own barriers to promoting CGM uptake. The goal of this study was to develop clinician "personas" with regard to readiness to promote CGM uptake. METHODS: Diabetes care providers who treat people with T1D (N = 209) completed a survey on perceived patient barriers to device uptake, technology attitudes, and characteristics and barriers specific to their clinical practice. K-means cluster analyses grouped the sample by CGM barriers and attitudes. ANOVAs and chi-square tests assessed group differences on provider and patient characteristics. The authors assigned descriptive names for each persona. RESULTS: Analyses yielded three clinician personas regarding readiness to promote CGM uptake. Ready clinicians (20% of sample; 24% physicians, 38% certified diabetes educators/CDEs) had positive technology attitudes, had clinic time to work with patients using CGM, and found it easy to keep up with technology advances. In comparison, Cautious clinicians (41% of sample; 17% physicians, 53% CDEs) perceived that their patients had many barriers to adopting CGM and had less time than the Ready group to work with patients using CGM data. Not Yet Ready clinicians (40% of sample; 9% physicians; 79% CDEs) had negative technology attitudes and the least clinic time to work with CGM data. They found it difficult to keep up with technology advances. CONCLUSION: Some diabetes clinicians may benefit from tailored interventions and additional time and resources to empower them to help facilitate increased uptake of CGM technology.

Implementation of Depression Screening and Global Health Assessment in Pediatric Subspecialty Clinics.

PURPOSE: Adolescents with chronic illness face greater risk of psychosocial difficulties, complicating disease management. Despite increased calls to screen for patient-reported outcomes, clinical implementation has lagged. Using quality improvement methods, this study aimed to investigate the feasibility of standardized screening for depression and assessment of global health and to determine recommended behavioral health follow-up, across three pediatric subspecialty clinics. METHODS: A total of 109 patients aged 12-22 years (median = 16.6) who were attending outpatient visits for treatment of diabetes (80% type 1), inflammatory bowel disease, or cystic fibrosis completed the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) depression and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pediatric Global Health measures on electronic tablets. Patients screening positive on the PHQ-9 received same-day behavioral health assessment and regular phone check-ins to facilitate necessary follow-up care. RESULTS: Overall, 89% of 122 identified patients completed screening during a 6-month window. Patients completed measures in a timely manner (within 3 minutes) without disruption to clinic flow, and they rated the process as easy, comfortable, and valuable. Depression scores varied across disease type. Patients rated lower global health relative to a previously assessed validation cohort. Depression and global health related significantly to certain medical outcomes. Fifteen percent of patients screened positive on the PHQ-9, of whom 50% confirmed attending behavioral health appointments within 6 months of screening. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized depression and global health assessment protocol implemented across pediatric subspecialties was feasible and effective. Universal behavioral health screening for adolescents and young adults living with chronic disease is necessary to meet programmatic needs in pediatric subspecialty clinics.

Optimal Use of Diabetes Devices: Clinician Perspectives on Barriers and Adherence to Device Use.

BACKGROUND: Insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors (CGM) can improve glycemic control for individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Device uptake rates continue to show room for improvement, and consistent adherence is needed to achieve better outcomes. Diabetes health care providers have important roles to play in promoting device use and adherence. METHODS: We surveyed 209 clinicians who treat people with type 1 diabetes to examine perceptions of barriers to device uptake, attitudes toward diabetes technology, and resources needed for clinicians to improve device uptake. We compared findings with our survey of adults with T1D. RESULTS: Younger clinicians treated more patients using insulin pumps ( r = -.26, P < .001) and CGM ( r = -.14, P = .02), and had more positive attitudes about diabetes technology ( r = -.23, P = .001). The most frequently endorsed modifiable barriers were perceptions that patients dislike having the device on their body (73% pump; 63% CGM), dislike the alarms (61% CGM), and do not understand what to do with device information or features (40% pump; 46% CGM). Clinicians wanted lower cost and better insurance coverage for their patients, and they recommended counseling and education to help address barriers and improve adherence to devices. CONCLUSION: Clinicians perceive many barriers to their patients initiating and adhering to diabetes devices. Findings highlight opportunities for intervention to improve clinician-patient communication around device barriers to help address them.

Expectations and Attitudes of Individuals With Type 1 Diabetes After Using a Hybrid Closed Loop System.

Purpose The first hybrid closed loop (HCL) system, which automates insulin delivery but requires user inputs, was approved for treatment of type 1 diabetes (T1D) by the US Food and Drug Administration in September 2016. The purpose of this study was to explore the benefits, expectations, and attitudes of individuals with T1D following a clinical trial of an HCL system. Methods Thirty-two individuals with T1D (17 adults, 15 adolescents) participated in focus groups after 4 to 5 days of system use. Content analysis generated themes regarding perceived benefits, hassles, and limitations. Results Some participants felt misled by terms such as "closed loop" and "artificial pancreas," which seemed to imply a more "hands-off" experience. Perceived benefits were improved glycemic control, anticipated reduction of long-term complications, better quality of life, and reduced mental burden of diabetes. Hassles and limitations included unexpected tasks for the user, difficulties wearing the system, concerns about controlling highs, and being reminded of diabetes. Conclusion Users are willing to accept some hassles and limitations if they also perceive health and quality-of-life benefits beyond current self-management. It is important for clinicians to provide a balanced view of positives and negatives to help manage expectations.

Diabetes Device Use in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: Barriers to Uptake and Potential Intervention Targets.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes devices (insulin pumps, continuous glucose monitors [CGMs]) are associated with benefits for glycemic control, yet uptake of these devices continues to be low. Some barriers to device uptake may be modifiable through psychosocial intervention, but little is known about which barriers and which patients to target. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We surveyed 1,503 adult T1D Exchange participants (mean age 35.3 [SD 14.8] years, mean diagnosis duration 20.4 [SD 12.5] years) to investigate barriers to device uptake, understand profiles of device users versus nonusers, and explore differences by age and sex. Scales used were the Diabetes Distress Scale, Technology Use Attitudes (General and Diabetes-Specific), and Barriers to Device Use and Reasons for Discontinuing Devices. RESULTS: Most commonly endorsed modifiable barriers were related to the hassle of wearing devices (47%) and disliking devices on one's body (35%). CGM users (37%) were older than nonusers (mean 38.3 vs. 33.5 years), had diabetes for longer (22.9 vs. 18.8 years), had more positive technology attitudes (22.6-26.0 vs. 21.4-24.8), and reported fewer barriers to using diabetes technology than nonusers (3.3 vs. 4.3). The youngest age-group (18-25 years) had the lowest CGM (26% vs. 40-48%) and insulin pump (64% vs. 69-77%) uptake, highest diabetes distress (2.2 vs. 1.8-2.1), and highest HbA1c levels (8.3% [67 mmol/mol] vs. 7.2-7.4% [55-57 mmol/mol]). CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to increase device use need to target physical barriers to wearing devices. Because young adults had the lowest device uptake rates, highest distress, and highest HbA1c compared with older age-groups, they should be the focus of future interventions to increase device use.