Health care effects and medical benefits of a smartphone-based diabetes self-management application: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes self-management is a mainstay of diabetes care, but the implementation of self-management regimens into daily life is complex and often results in discouragement and distress. Modern approaches such as smartphone-based self-management applications are therefore needed to support people with diabetes. Since reimbursability would increase the availability of such digital applications to people with diabetes, we designed a study that meets all scientific and methodological requirements set by the German Digital Healthcare Act to allow reimbursement for a specific application (mySugr PRO). Here, we report the protocol of this study that aims at evaluating the efficacy of the digital self-management application with regard to patient-reported outcomes and medical benefits. METHODS/DESIGN: This multicenter, open-label, randomized, parallel-group, controlled trial will evaluate the health care effects and medical benefits of mySugr PRO. A total of 466 people with diabetes will be randomly allocated (2:1 randomization) to the interventional group (n = 311) that will use the digital self-management application during the 12-week study period or the control group (n = 155; no usage of the application). Baseline and follow-up examinations will assess diabetes distress as the primary endpoint as well as empowerment, HbA1c, blood glucose data, self-management, general well-being, and treatment satisfaction as secondary endpoints. Statistical analyses will use an intention-to-treat procedure (using multiple imputation for missing values) as well as a per-protocol approach for sensitivity analysis. DISCUSSION: To the best of our knowledge, this study will be one of the largest diabetes-specific evaluations of a digital health application supporting people with diabetes in their diabetes self-management that follow the requirements of the German Digital Healthcare Act. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trial Register DRKS00022923 . Registered on 22 October 2020.

Trends in diabetes self-management education: where are we coming from and where are we going? A narrative review.

AIMS: To summarize the history, development and efficacy of diabetes self-management education on glycaemic control and mental health in adults and children or adolescents with type 1 diabetes and people with type 2 diabetes. A further aim was to review the status of implementation of diabetes self-management education into routine care and outline current gaps in implementation and research. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Google scholar for German- and English-language articles regarding diabetes self-management education, glycaemic control and mental health, and restricted this search to meta-analyses. RESULTS: Diabetes education has evolved from a compliance- and knowledge-oriented approach to an empowerment- and self-management-oriented approach. Diabetes self-management education seems to have a greater impact on glycaemic outcomes than on mental health outcomes, but the latter are rarely assessed. Technological development and digitalization can provide chances and challenges for diabetes self-management education. Digital solutions show promising results and great potential for improving the efficacy of diabetes self-management education further and providing ongoing support. The implementation of diabetes self-management education into routine clinical care frequently remains a challenge. CONCLUSION: Diabetes self-management education has been acknowledged as an essential part of diabetes therapy; however, current gaps regarding the efficacy of diabetes self-management education on mental health, and the need for education on the use of diabetes technology, are future avenues for research.

The effect of an education programme (MEDIAS 2 BSC) of non-intensive insulin treatment regimens for people with Type 2 diabetes: a randomized, multi-centre trial.

AIMS: A self-management oriented education programme (MEDIAS 2 BSC) for people with Type 2 diabetes who are on a non-intensive insulin treatment regimen was developed. In a randomized, multi-centre trial, the effect of MEDIAS 2 BSC was compared with an established education programme that acted as a control group. METHODS: The primary outcome was the impact of MEDIAS 2 BSC on glycaemic control. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of severe hypoglycaemia, hypoglycaemia unawareness, diabetes-related distress, diabetes knowledge, quality of life and self-care behaviour. RESULTS: In total, 182 participants were randomized to the control group or MEDIAS 2 BSC [median age 64.0 (interquartile range 58.0-68.5) vs. 63.5 (57.0-70.0) years; HbA1c 62.8 ± 12.7 mmol/mol vs. 63.7 ± 14.0 mmol/mol; 7.9% ± 1.2% vs. 8.0% ± 1.3%]. After a 6-month follow-up, there was a mean decrease in HbA1c of 3.5 mmol/mol (0.32%) in the control group and 6.7 mmol/mol (0.61%) in MEDIAS 2 BSC. After adjusting for baseline differences and study centre, the mean difference between the groups was -3.3 mmol/mol [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.54 to -5.90 mmol/mol] [-0.30% (95% CI -0.05 to -0.54)] in favour of MEDIAS 2 BSC (P = 0.018). There were no increases in severe hypoglycaemia or hypoglycaemia unawareness. The education programmes had no significant effects on psychosocial outcome variables. CONCLUSION: MEDIAS 2 BSC was more effective in lowering HbA1c than the control condition. MEDIAS 2 BSC is a safe educational tool that improves glycaemic control without increasing the risk for hypoglycaemia. (Clinical Trials Registry No; NCT 02748239).

Assessment of diabetes acceptance can help identify patients with ineffective diabetes self-care and poor diabetes control.

AIMS: To estimate the associations between insufficient diabetes acceptance and relevant diabetes outcomes. METHODS: A total of 320 patients completed questionnaires on diabetes non-acceptance (the Acceptance and Action Diabetes Questionnaire), diabetes distress (the Problem Areas in Diabetes Scale), depressive mood (the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale), coping with illness (the Freiburg Questionnaire of Coping with Illness), self-care activities (the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities Measure) and quality of life (the Short Form-36 Health Questionnaire). A six-item version of the Acceptance and Action Diabetes Questionnaire showing good reliability and validity was established, and the associations between insufficient acceptance and clinical outcomes were estimated. RESULTS: Higher diabetes non-acceptance correlated significantly with less active coping (-0.37), reduced self-care (-0.43) and higher HbA1c levels (0.31), higher diabetes distress (0.53) and more depressive symptoms (0.36). Correlations of diabetes non-acceptance with diabetes self-care/glycaemic control were significantly higher than were those of depressive mood or diabetes distress with these criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Low diabetes acceptance is associated with impaired self-care and glycaemic control. Assessment of diabetes acceptance may facilitate the detection of patients at high risk and may present an essential target for treatments to improve diabetes control that is more relevant than elevated depressive mood or diabetes distress.

Real-world patient-reported rates of non-severe hypoglycaemic events in Germany.

AIMS: Hypoglycaemia is a common side effect of insulin therapy in diabetes patients, with negative physical and emotional impacts. Despite this, there are few studies investigating the frequency of non-severe hypoglycaemic events from the perspective of patients in the real-world setting. We investigated self-reported NSHE frequency and levels of hypoglycaemia awareness in Germany. METHODS: Respondents > 15 years with Type 1 or insulin-treated Type 2 diabetes (receiving basal only, basal-bolus or other insulin regimens) were recruited using online panels to complete ≤ 4 questionnaires. Questionnaires collected demographics, non-severe hypoglycaemic event rates and patient-reported level of hypoglycaemia awareness. Non-severe hypoglycaemic event rates are reported as respondent-week records and calculated using data from all respondents completing at least one questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 1,771 respondent-week records were obtained from 614 participants. Mean non-severe hypoglycaemic event rates per respondent-week were 1.6 for Type 1 and 0.6-0.8 for Type 2, with estimated annual rates of 83 and 31-42 respectively. Two-thirds of Type 1 (65%) and Type 2 (61-72%) respondents reported impaired levels of awareness or unawareness of hypoglycaemic events (inability or impaired ability to recognise the symptoms of hypoglycaemia). Respon­dents' self-reported hypoglycaemia-awareness was significantly associated with the proportion of asymptomatic non-severe hypoglycaemic events; respondents classified as being unaware of hypoglycaemia had a higher proportion of asymptomatic non-severe hypoglycaemic events than aware respondents. CONCLUSION: Non-severe hypoglycaemic events are common in people with Type 1 or insulin-treated Type 2 diabetes in the real-world setting in Germany but may still be underestimated due to an inability to recognise the symptoms of hypoglycaemia.

A European evidence-based guideline for the prevention of type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence and socioeconomic burden of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and associated co-morbidities are rising worldwide. AIMS: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for preventing T2DM. METHODS: A European multidisciplinary consortium systematically reviewed the evidence on the effectiveness of screening and interventions for T2DM prevention using SIGN criteria. RESULTS: Obesity and sedentary lifestyle are the main modifiable risk factors. Age and ethnicity are non-modifiable risk factors. Case-finding should follow a step-wise procedure using risk questionnaires and oral glucose tolerance testing. Persons with impaired glucose tolerance and/or fasting glucose are at high-risk and should be prioritized for intensive intervention. Interventions supporting lifestyle changes delay the onset of T2DM in high-risk adults (number-needed-to-treat: 6.4 over 1.8-4.6 years). These should be supported by inter-sectoral strategies that create health promoting environments. Sustained body weight reduction by >or= 5 % lowers risk. Currently metformin, acarbose and orlistat can be considered as second-line prevention options. The population approach should use organized measures to raise awareness and change lifestyle with specific approaches for adolescents, minorities and disadvantaged people. Interventions promoting lifestyle changes are more effective if they target both diet and physical activity, mobilize social support, involve the planned use of established behaviour change techniques, and provide frequent contacts. Cost-effectiveness analysis should take a societal perspective. CONCLUSIONS: Prevention using lifestyle modifications in high-risk individuals is cost-effective and should be embedded in evaluated models of care. Effective prevention plans are predicated upon sustained government initiatives comprising advocacy, community support, fiscal and legislative changes, private sector engagement and continuous media communication.

[Diabetes mellitus: how important is it to measure the quality of life?]. / Diabetes mellitus: Wie wichtig ist die Messung der Lebensqualität?

Maintaining the quality of life (QoL) of diabetics is a decisive outcome variable in the treatment of diabetes. It should be used as an important indicator of quality in assessing efficacy and effectiveness of therapeutic measures. QoL of diabetics is reduced compared with non-diabetics. Diabetics with impaired QoL more frequently suffer from subclinical or clinical depression, which clearly impairs the short-term and chronic prognosis of the disease. The WHO-5 questionnaire has proven valuable for measuring QoL and in screening for depression. It is a simple and valid method of assessment which is recommended in international and national guidelines.

How to screen for depression and emotional problems in patients with diabetes: comparison of screening characteristics of depression questionnaires, measurement of diabetes-specific emotional problems and standard clinical assessment.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: We compared the screening performance of different measures of depression: the standard clinical assessment (SCA); the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI); the Center of Epidemiological Studies-Depression Scale (CES-D); and the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) questionnaire, which assesses diabetes-specific distress. We also studied the ability of these measures to detect diabetes-related distress. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 376 diabetic patients (37.2% type 1; 23.9% type 2 without insulin treatment, 38.8% type 2 with insulin) completed the BDI and CES-D; patients who screened positive participated in a diagnostic interview, the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). Also, all patients completed the PAID questionnaire. Results of the SCA that related to depression diagnosis were reviewed to correct for false negative screening results. RESULTS: The prevalence of clinical depression was 14.1%, with an additional 18.9% of patients receiving a diagnosis of subclinical depression. Sensitivity for clinical depression in SCA (56%) was moderate, whereas BDI, CES-D and the PAID questionnaire showed satisfactory sensitivity (87, 79 and 81%, respectively). For subclinical depression, the sensitivity of the PAID questionnaire (79%) was sufficient, whereas that of SCA (25%) was poor. All methods showed low sensitivity for the detection of diabetes-specific emotional problems (SCA 19%, CIDI 34%, BDI 60%, CES-D 49%). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The screening performance of SCA for clinical and subclinical depression was modest. Additional screening for depression using the PAID or another depression questionnaire seems reasonable. The ability of depression screening measures to identify diabetes-related distress is modest, suggesting that the PAID questionnaire could be useful when screening diabetic patients for both depression and emotional problems.

Assessment of hypoglycaemia awareness using continuous glucose monitoring.

AIMS: To investigate the possibility of assessing hypoglycaemia awareness in patients with Type 1 diabetes using continuous glucose monitoring. METHODS: Twenty patients with Type 1 diabetes were investigated. Ten patients with Type 1 diabetes and strongly impaired hypoglycaemia awareness were compared with 10 patients with intact hypoglycaemia awareness regarding quality of hypoglycaemia perception (number of undetected hypoglycaemic episodes per 24 h, glucose level < 3.3 mmol/l). Hypoglycaemia detection was assessed using the event function of the Continuous Glucose Monitoring System (CGMS; Medtronic MiniMed, Northridge, CA, USA). Patients were instructed to enter an event upon suspecting being hypoglycaemic. RESULTS: Satisfactory CGMS performance could be achieved [mean r = 0.893 between calibration measurements and CGMS data, mean absolute difference (MAD) = 20.6%], although artefacts were observable and had to be controlled. Hypoglycaemia unaware patients showed a significantly higher total number of hypoglycaemic episodes (P < 0.05), number of undetected hypoglycaemic episodes (P < 0.01), and mean glucose levels (P < 0.05). Even in aware patients, undetected hypoglycaemia was observable. No significant differences regarding occurrence of nocturnal hypoglycaemia were observable. CONCLUSIONS: The possibility of direct assessment of hypoglycaemia awareness using continuous glucose monitoring was demonstrated. Its application in clinical practice could be of use for assessing hypoglycaemia perception and evaluating the impact of treatment changes on hypoglycaemia awareness.