Health provider perspectives of electronic medication monitoring in outpatient asthma care: a qualitative investigation using the consolidated framework for implementation research.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the implementation challenges health providers might face with the use of digital health in outpatient asthma care. To qualitatively explore the experience of health providers with electronic medication monitoring (EMM) using an implementation science framework. METHODS: Using the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR), we conducted interviews (n = 10) exploring health providers' experience with EMM with asthma patients from 5 primary care or specialty clinics. The EMM tracked albuterol and inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use, and health providers called parents whenever ICS adherence waned, or albuterol use increased. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and deductively analyzed using directed content analysis. RESULTS: Health providers reported the intervention's primary advantage, compared with current asthma care, was the ability to monitor medication use at-home. Most felt the intervention improved care delivery. Nurses and medical assistants described a process of phone calls and checking alerts, that had varying levels of administrative burden and complexity. Health providers felt that sustained implementation of the intervention model would require additional employees to handle the administrative and clinical workload. Half of the interviewed providers were unsure if patient needs were met by the intervention, while some cited technology syncing issues, others liked the enhanced interactions for asthma education. CONCLUSION: Health providers reported positive experiences supporting parents and children with asthma using EMM but also highlighted intervention components that needed improvement or refinement to yield successful implementation in outpatient pediatric clinics. Recommendations for enhancing the intervention for a scaled-up implementation were discussed.

"Back Rx, a personalized mobile phone application for discogenic chronic low back pain: a prospective pilot study".

BACKGROUND: Intervertebral disc pathology is the most common identifiable cause of chronic lower back pain (CLBP). There are limited conservative alternatives to treat discogenic axial CLBP. Back Rx is a mobile application (app) developed to treat patients with this condition, following the Back Rx exercise program, assisted by a virtual coach. METHODS: Patients 18 to 65 years of age, with axial CLBP (more than 3 months), and evidence of lumbar disc pathology by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were enrolled to the study. Patients' symptomatology was prospectively evaluated at baseline and after 3 months of using the Back Rx app. The main outcome of the study was back pain evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Secondary outcomes were the patient's functionality, the weekly pain medication intake, the patients' adherence to the app, and the patients´ satisfaction rate. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients with CLBP were enrolled in the study. All patients had a statistically significant improvement from baseline to final follow-up in the average VAS scores, and the functionality evaluations. Average VAS scores decreased from 5.17 ± 2.1 at baseline to 3.8 ± 2.6 at final follow-up (P = 0.016). Patients showed a significant decrease in the number of pain medications taken during a week (P = 0.001). Overall compliance with the app was 52%, and 65% of the patients rated the overall experience as good or excellent. CONCLUSION: The Back Rx app decreased pain and increased function in patients with discogenic axial CLBP compared to their baseline status. Further measures are needed to increase patients' compliance with the app and the Back Rx program. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered in 2/2/2017 NCT03040310 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Outpatient metformin use is associated with reduced severity of COVID-19 disease in adults with overweight or obesity.

Observational studies suggest outpatient metformin use is associated with reduced mortality from coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Metformin is known to decrease interleukin-6 and tumor-necrosis factor-α, which appear to contribute to morbidity in COVID-19. We sought to understand whether outpatient metformin use was associated with reduced odds of severe COVID-19 disease in a large US healthcare data set. Retrospective cohort analysis of electronic health record (EHR) data that was pooled across multiple EHR systems from 12 hospitals and 60 primary care clinics in the Midwest between March 4, 2020 and December 4, 2020. Inclusion criteria: data for body mass index (BMI) > 25 kg/m2 and a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test; age ≥ 30 and ≤85 years. Exclusion criteria: patient opt-out of research. Metformin is the exposure of interest, and death, admission, and intensive care unit admission are the outcomes of interest. Metformin was associated with a decrease in mortality from COVID-19, OR 0.32 (0.15, 0.66; p = .002), and in the propensity-matched cohorts, OR 0.38 (0.16, 0.91; p = .030). Metformin was associated with a nonsignificant decrease in hospital admission for COVID-19 in the overall cohort, OR 0.78 (0.58-1.04, p = .087). Among the subgroup with a hemoglobin HbA1c available (n = 1193), the adjusted odds of hospitalization (including adjustment for HbA1c) for metformin users was OR 0.75 (0.53-1.06, p = .105). Outpatient metformin use was associated with lower mortality and a trend towards decreased admission for COVID-19. Given metformin's low cost, established safety, and the mounting evidence of reduced severity of COVID-19 disease, metformin should be prospectively assessed for outpatient treatment of COVID-19.

Parental quality of life and self-efficacy in pediatric asthma.

Objective: Self-efficacy is the personal belief that a behavior can produce a desired result; and in asthma, self-efficacy in asthma care has been related to improvements in asthma outcomes and children's quality of life. To appreciate the full burden of asthma on families, the relationship between parental self-efficacy and quality of life also needs further study. We aim to characterize this relationship.Methods: Secondary analysis of measurements of parents of children with persistent asthma (n = 252; ages 4-17 years) from a large urban area were identified from a randomized trial; the association between baseline assessments of parental quality of life, measured by the Pediatric Asthma Caregiver's Quality of Life Questionnaire (PACQLQ), and parental self-efficacy, measured through the Parental Asthma Management Self-Efficacy Scale (PAMSES), were examined through multivariable linear regression.Results: Parental self-efficacy in asthma was positively associated with quality of life among parents of racially and ethnically diverse children (p = 0.01). Confidence in using medications correctly (p = 0.03), having inhalers during a child's serious breathing problem (p = 0.02), and knowing which medications to use during a child's serious breathing problem (p = 0.04) were associated with a clinically meaningful difference in parental quality of life. Other significant factors associated with parental quality of life included Hispanic/Latino ethnicity (p < 0.01) of the child and Asthma Control Test scores (p < 0.01).Conclusion: The findings suggest that improving parental confidence on when and how to use their child's asthma medications, particularly during an asthma attack, might be clinically meaningful in enhancing parent's quality of life.

Intensive remote monitoring versus conventional care in type 1 diabetes: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: While frequent contact with diabetes care providers may improve glycemic control among patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D), in-person visits are labor-intensive and costly. This study was conducted to assess the impact of an intensive remote therapy (IRT) intervention for pediatric patients with T1D. METHODS: Pediatric patients with T1D were randomized to IRT or conventional care (CC) for 6 months. Both cohorts continued routine quarterly clinic visits and uploaded device data; for the IRT cohort, data were reviewed and patients were contacted if regimen adjustments were indicated. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) change from baseline was assessed at 6 and 9 months. Diabetes-related quality of life (QoL), healthcare services utilization, and hypoglycemic events were also tracked. RESULTS: Among 117 enrollees (60 IRT, 57 CC), mean (SD) 6-month %HbA1c change for IRT vs CC was -0.34 (0.85) (-3.7 mmol/mol) vs -0.05 (0.74) (-0.5 mmol/mol) overall (P = .071); -0.15 (0.67) (1.6 mmol/mol) vs -0.02 (0.66) (0.2 mmol/mol) for ages 8 to 12 (P = .541); and -0.50 (0.95) (-5.5 mmol/mol) vs -0.06 (0.80) (-0.7 mmol/mol) for ages 13 to 17 (P = .056). Diabetes-related QoL increased by 6.5 and 1.3 points for IRT and CC, respectively (P = .062). Three months after intervention cessation, %HbA1c changed minimally among treated children aged 8 to 12 but increased by 0.22 (0.89) (2.4 mmol/mol) among those aged 13 to 17. CONCLUSIONS: IRT substantially affected diabetes metrics and improved QoL among pediatric patients with T1D. Adolescents experienced a stronger treatment effect, but had difficulty in sustaining improved control after intervention cessation.

Sensor-Based Electronic Monitoring for Asthma: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Although sensor-based monitoring of daily inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and short-acting ß-agonist medications may improve asthma outcomes, the effectiveness of these interventions in diverse pediatric populations remains unclear. METHODS: Caregiver and child dyads were randomly assigned to receive inhaler sensors that allowed for caregiver and clinician electronic monitoring of medications. End points included Asthma Control Test scores (≥19 indicated asthma control) and asthma health care use. Caregiver quality of life (QoL) and child ICS adherence were also assessed. Multilevel models were used to estimate adjusted changes from baseline. RESULTS: Dyads were assigned to the control (n = 127) or intervention (n = 125) arms. At the end line, the mean Asthma Control Test score increased from 19.1 (SE = 0.3) to 21.8 (SE = 0.4) among the intervention and from 19.4 (SE = 0.3) to 19.9 (SE = 0.4) among the control (Δintervention-control = 2.2; SE = 0.6; P < .01). Adjusted rates of emergency department visits and hospitalizations among the intervention were significantly greater (incidence rate ratioemergency department = 2.2; SE = 0.5; P < .01; incidence rate ratiohospital = 3.4; SE = 1.4; P < .01) at endline than the control. Caregiver QoL was greater among the intervention at the endline (Δintervention-control = 0.3; SE = 0.2; P = .1) than the control. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that sensor-based inhaler monitoring with clinical feedback may improve asthma control and caregiver QoL within diverse populations. Higher health care use was observed among the intervention participants relative to the control, indicating further refinement is warranted.

Integrating diabetes technologies with team-based primary care for type 2 diabetes: A pilot trial.

This pilot trial studied a novel intervention that integrated diabetes technologies into team-based primary care for type 2 diabetes. We found clinically significant reductions in blood pressure, weight, and glucose. The latter two were statistically significant.

Parent Experiences With Electronic Medication Monitoring in Pediatric Asthma Management: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Electronic medication monitoring (EMM) is a digital tool that can be used for tracking daily medication use. Previous studies of EMM in asthma management have been conducted in adults or have examined pediatric interventions that use EMM for less than 1 year. To understand how to improve EMM-enhanced interventions, it is necessary to explore the experiences of parents of children with asthma, recruited from outpatient practices, who completed a 12-month intervention trial. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to use qualitative inquiry to answer the following questions: (1) how did using an EMM-enhanced intervention change parents'/caregivers' experiences of managing their child's asthma, and (2) what do parents recommend for improving the intervention in the future? METHODS: Parents were recruited from the intervention arm of a multicomponent health intervention enhanced by Bluetooth-enabled sensors placed on inhaler medications. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 20 parents of children aged 4-12 years with asthma. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and inductively analyzed using a constant comparative approach. RESULTS: Interview participants reflected an even mix of publicly and privately insured children and a diverse racial-ethnic demographic. Parents discussed 6 key themes related to their experience with the EMM-enhanced intervention for the management of their child's asthma: (1) compatibility with the family's lifestyle, (2) impact on asthma management, (3) impact on the child's health, (4) emotional impact of the intervention, (5) child's engagement in asthma management with the intervention, and (6) recommendations for future intervention design. Overall, parents reported that the 12-month EMM intervention was compatible with their daily lives, positively influenced their preventive and acute asthma management, and promoted their child's engagement in their own asthma management. While parents found the intervention acceptable and generally favorable, some parents identified compatibility issues for families with multiple caregivers and frustration when the technology malfunctioned. CONCLUSIONS: Parents generally viewed the intervention as a positive influence on the management of their child's asthma. However, our study also highlighted technology challenges related to having multiple caregivers, which will need to be addressed in future iterations for families. Attention must be paid to the needs of parents from low socioeconomic households, who may have more limited access to reliable internet or depend on other relatives for childcare. Understanding these family factors will help refine how a digital tool can be adopted into daily disease management of pediatric asthma.

Association of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers With the Risk of Hospitalization and Death in Hypertensive Patients With COVID-19.

Background Despite its clinical significance, the risk of severe infection requiring hospitalization among outpatients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection who receive angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) remains uncertain. Methods and Results In a propensity score-matched outpatient cohort (January-May 2020) of 2263 Medicare Advantage and commercially insured individuals with hypertension and a positive outpatient SARS-CoV-2, we determined the association of ACE inhibitors and ARBs with COVID-19 hospitalization. In a concurrent inpatient cohort of 7933 hospitalized with COVID-19, we tested their association with in-hospital mortality. The robustness of the observations was assessed in a contemporary cohort (May-August). In the outpatient study, neither ACE inhibitors (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 0.53-1.13, P=0.18) nor ARBs (HR, 0.88; 0.61-1.26, P=0.48) were associated with hospitalization risk. ACE inhibitors were associated with lower hospitalization risk in the older Medicare group (HR, 0.61; 0.41-0.93, P=0.02), but not the younger commercially insured group (HR, 2.14; 0.82-5.60, P=0.12; P-interaction 0.09). Neither ACE inhibitors nor ARBs were associated with lower hospitalization risk in either population in the validation cohort. In the primary inpatient study cohort, neither ACE inhibitors (HR, 0.97; 0.81-1.16; P=0.74) nor ARBs (HR, 1.15; 0.95-1.38, P=0.15) were associated with in-hospital mortality. These observations were consistent in the validation cohort. Conclusions ACE inhibitors and ARBs were not associated with COVID-19 hospitalization or mortality. Despite early evidence for a potential association between ACE inhibitors and severe COVID-19 prevention in older individuals, the inconsistency of this observation in recent data argues against a role for prophylaxis.

Metformin and Covid-19: Focused Review of Mechanisms and Current Literature Suggesting Benefit.

Metformin is the first-line medication for type 2 diabetes, but it also has a long history of improved outcomes in infectious diseases, such as influenza, hepatitis C, and in-vitro assays of zika. In the current Covid-19 pandemic, which has rapidly spread throughout the world, 4 observational studies have been published showing reduced mortality among individuals with home metformin use. There are several potential overlapping mechanisms by which metformin may reduce mortality from Covid-19. Metformin's past anti-infectious benefits have been both against the infectious agent directly, as well as by improving the underlying health of the human host. It is unknown if the lower mortality suggested by observational studies in patients infected with Covid-19 who are on home metformin is due to direct activity against the virus itself, improved host substrate, or both.

Metformin and risk of mortality in patients hospitalised with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes and obesity, as states of chronic inflammation, are risk factors for severe COVID-19. Metformin has cytokine-reducing and sex-specific immunomodulatory effects. Our aim was to identify whether metformin reduced COVID-19-related mortality and whether sex-specific interactions exist. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort analysis, we assessed de-identified claims data from UnitedHealth Group (UHG)'s Clinical Discovery Claims Database. Patient data were eligible for inclusion if they were aged 18 years or older; had type 2 diabetes or obesity (defined based on claims); at least 6 months of continuous enrolment in 2019; and admission to hospital for COVID-19 confirmed by PCR, manual chart review by UHG, or reported from the hospital to UHG. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality from COVID-19. The independent variable of interest was home metformin use, defined as more than 90 days of claims during the year before admission to hospital. Covariates were comorbidities, medications, demographics, and state. Heterogeneity of effect was assessed by sex. For the Cox proportional hazards, censoring was done on the basis of claims made after admission to hospital up to June 7, 2020, with a best outcome approach. Propensity-matched mixed-effects logistic regression was done, stratified by metformin use. FINDINGS: 6256 of the 15 380 individuals with pharmacy claims data from Jan 1 to June 7, 2020 were eligible for inclusion. 3302 (52·8%) of 6256 were women. Metformin use was not associated with significantly decreased mortality in the overall sample of men and women by either Cox proportional hazards stratified model (hazard ratio [HR] 0·887 [95% CI 0·782-1·008]) or propensity matching (odds ratio [OR] 0·912 [95% CI 0·777-1·071], p=0·15). Metformin was associated with decreased mortality in women by Cox proportional hazards (HR 0·785, 95% CI 0·650-0·951) and propensity matching (OR 0·759, 95% CI 0·601-0·960, p=0·021). There was no significant reduction in mortality among men (HR 0·957, 95% CI 0·82-1·14; p=0·689 by Cox proportional hazards). INTERPRETATION: Metformin was significantly associated with reduced mortality in women with obesity or type 2 diabetes who were admitted to hospital for COVID-19. Prospective studies are needed to understand mechanism and causality. If findings are reproducible, metformin could be widely distributed for prevention of COVID-19 mortality, because it is safe and inexpensive. FUNDING: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; Minnesota Learning Health System Mentored Training Program, M Health Fairview Institutional Funds; National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences; and National Cancer Institute.

A comparison of health care worker-collected foam and polyester nasal swabs in convalescent COVID-19 patients.

Both polyester and foam nasal swabs were collected from convalescent COVID-19 patients at a single visit and stored in viral transport media (VTM), saline or dry. Sensitivity of each swab material and media combination were estimated, three by three tables were constructed to measure polyester and foam concordance, and cycle threshold (Ct) values were compared. 126 visits had polyester and foam swabs stored in viral transport media (VTM), 51 had swabs stored in saline, and 63 had a foam swab in VTM and a polyester swab stored in a dry tube. Polyester and foam swabs had an estimated sensitivity of 87.3% and 94.5% respectively in VTM, 87.5% and 93.8% respectively in saline, and 75.0% and 90.6% respectively for dry polyester and foam VTM. Polyester and foam Ct values were correlated, but polyester showed decreased performance for cases with a viral load near the detection threshold and higher Ct values on average.

Association of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers with the Risk of Hospitalization and Death in Hypertensive Patients with Coronavirus Disease-19.

BACKGROUND: Whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) Inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) mitigate or exacerbate SARS-CoV-2 infection remains uncertain. In a national study, we evaluated the association of ACE inhibitors and ARB with coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) hospitalization and mortality among individuals with hypertension. METHODS: Among Medicare Advantage and commercially insured individuals, we identified 2,263 people with hypertension, receiving ≥1 antihypertensive agents, and who had a positive outpatient SARS-CoV-2 test (outpatient cohort). In a propensity score-matched analysis, we determined the association of ACE inhibitors and ARBs with the risk of hospitalization for COVID-19. In a second study of 7,933 individuals with hypertension who were hospitalized with COVID-19 (inpatient cohort), we tested the association of these medications with in-hospital mortality. We stratified all our assessments by insurance groups. RESULTS: Among individuals in the outpatient and inpatient cohorts, 31.9% and 29.8%, respectively, used ACE inhibitors and 32.3% and 28.1% used ARBs. In the outpatient study, over a median 30.0 (19.0 - 40.0) days after testing positive, 12.7% were hospitalized for COVID-19. In propensity score-matched analyses, neither ACE inhibitors (HR, 0.77 [0.53, 1.13], P = 0.18), nor ARBs (HR, 0.88 [0.61, 1.26], P = 0.48), were significantly associated with risk of hospitalization. In analyses stratified by insurance group, ACE inhibitors, but not ARBs, were associated with a significant lower risk of hospitalization in the Medicare group (HR, 0.61 [0.41, 0.93], P = 0.02), but not the commercially insured group (HR: 2.14 [0.82, 5.60], P = 0.12; P-interaction 0.09). In the inpatient study, 14.2% died, 59.5% survived to discharge, and 26.3% had an ongoing hospitalization. In propensity score-matched analyses, neither use of ACE inhibitor (0.97 [0.81, 1.16]; P = 0.74) nor ARB (1.15 [0.95, 1.38]; P = 0.15) was associated with risk of in-hospital mortality, in total or in the stratified analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The use of ACE inhibitors and ARBs was not associated with the risk of hospitalization or mortality among those infected with SARS-CoV-2. However, there was a nearly 40% lower risk of hospitalization with the use of ACE inhibitors in the Medicare population. This finding merits a clinical trial to evaluate the potential role of ACE inhibitors in reducing the risk of hospitalization among older individuals, who are at an elevated risk of adverse outcomes with the infection.

Observational Study of Metformin and Risk of Mortality in Patients Hospitalized with Covid-19.

Background Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and obesity are significant risks for mortality in Covid19. Metformin has been hypothesized as a treatment for COVID19. Metformin has sex specific immunomodulatory effects which may elucidate treatment mechanisms in COVID-19. In this study we sought to identify whether metformin reduced mortality from Covid19 and if sex specific interactions exist. Methods De-identified claims data from UnitedHealth were used to identify persons with at least 6 months continuous coverage who were hospitalized with Covid-19. Persons in the metformin group had at least 90 days of metformin claims in the 12 months before hospitalization. Unadjusted and multivariate models were conducted to assess risk of mortality based on metformin as a home medication in individuals with T2DM and obesity, controlling for pre-morbid conditions, medications, demographics, and state. Heterogeneity of effect was assessed by sex. Results 6,256 persons were included; 52.8% female; mean age 75 years. Metformin was associated with decreased mortality in women by logistic regression, OR 0.792 (0.640, 0.979); mixed effects OR 0.780 (0.631, 0.965); Cox proportional-hazards: HR 0.785 (0.650, 0.951); and propensity matching, OR of 0.759 (0.601, 0.960). TNF-alpha inhibitors were associated with decreased mortality in the 38 persons taking them, by propensity matching, OR 0.19 (0.0378, 0.983). Conclusions Metformin was significantly associated with reduced mortality in women with obesity or T2DM in observational analyses of claims data from individuals hospitalized with Covid-19. This sex-specific finding is consistent with metformin reducing TNF-alpha in females over males, and suggests that metformin conveys protection in Covid-19 through TNF-alpha effects. Prospective studies are needed to understand mechanism and causality.

An mHealth App for Self-Management of Chronic Lower Back Pain (Limbr): Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Although mobile health (mHealth) interventions can help improve outcomes among patients with chronic lower back pain (CLBP), many available mHealth apps offer content that is not evidence based. Limbr was designed to enhance self-management of CLBP by packaging self-directed rehabilitation tutorial videos, visual self-report tools, remote health coach support, and activity tracking into a suite of mobile phone apps, including Your Activities of Daily Living, an image-based tool for quantifying pain-related disability. OBJECTIVE: The aim is to (1) describe patient engagement with the Limbr program, (2) describe patient-perceived utility of the Limbr program, and (3) assess the validity of the Your Activities of Daily Living module for quantifying functional status among patients with CLBP. METHODS: This was a single-arm trial utilizing a convenience sample of 93 adult patients with discogenic back pain who visited a single physiatrist from January 2016 to February 2017. Eligible patients were enrolled in 3-month physical therapy program and received the Limbr mobile phone app suite for iOS or Android. The program included three daily visual self-reports to assess pain, activity level, and medication/coping mechanisms; rehabilitation video tutorials; passive activity-level measurement; and chat-based health coaching. Patient characteristics, patient engagement, and perceived utility were analyzed descriptively. Associations between participant characteristics and program interaction were analyzed using multiple linear regression. Associations between Your Activities of Daily Living and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) assessments were examined using Pearson correlation and hierarchical linear modeling. RESULTS: A total of 93 participants were enrolled; of these, 35 (38%) completed the program (age: mean 46, SD 16 years; female: 22/35, 63%). More than half of completers finished assessments at least every 3 days and 70% (19/27) used the rehabilitation component at least once a week. Among respondents to a Web-based feedback survey, 76% (16/21) found the daily notifications helped them remember to complete their exercises, 81% (17/21) found the system easy to use, and 62% (13/21) rated their overall experience good or excellent. Baseline Your Activities of Daily Living score was a significant predictor of baseline ODI score, with ODI increasing by 0.30 units for every 1-unit increase in Your Activities of Daily Living (P<.001). Similarly, hierarchical linear modeling analysis indicated that Your Activities of Daily Living daily assessment scores were significant predictors of ODI scores over the course of the study (P=.01). CONCLUSIONS: Engagement among participants who completed the Limbr program was high, and program utility was rated positively by most respondents. Your Activities of Daily Living was significantly associated with ODI scores, supporting the validity of this novel tool. Future studies should assess the effect of Limbr on clinical outcomes, evaluate its use among a wider patient sample, and explore strategies for reducing attrition. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03040310; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03040310 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/722mEvAiv).

Comparative effectiveness and costs of insulin pump therapy for diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), or "insulin pump" therapy, is an alternative to multiple daily insulin injections (MDII) for management of diabetes. This study evaluates patterns of healthcare utilization, costs, and blood glucose control for patients with diabetes who initiate CSII. STUDY DESIGN: Pre-post with propensity-matched comparison design involving commercially insured US adults (aged 18-64 years) with insulin-requiring diabetes who transitioned from MDII to CSII between July 1, 2009, and June 30, 2012 ("CSII initiators"; n = 2539), or who continued using MDI (n = 2539). METHODS: Medical claims and laboratory results files obtained from a large US-wide health payer were used to construct direct medical expenditures, hospital use, healthcare encounters for hypoglycemia, and mean concentration of glycated hemoglobin (A1C). We fit difference-in-differences regression models to compare healthcare expenditures for 3 years following the switch to CSII. Stratified analyses were performed for prespecified patient subgroups. RESULTS: Over 3 years, mean per-person total healthcare expenditures were $1714 (95% confidence interval [CI], $1184-$2244) higher per quarter for CSII initiators compared with matched MDII patients (total mean 3-year difference of $20,565). Compared with matched controls, mean A1C concentrations became lower for CSII initiators by 0.46% in year 2 (P = .0003) and by 0.32% in year 3 (P = .047). CSII initiators also had a higher rate of hypoglycemia encounters in year 1 (P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: For adults with insulin-requiring diabetes, transitioning from MDII to CSII was associated with modest improvements in A1C but more hypoglycemia encounters and increased healthcare expenditures, without significant improvement in other potentially offsetting areas of healthcare consumption.