Multidrug-resistant Uro-associated Escherichia coli Populations and Recurrent Urinary Tract Infections in Patients Performing Clean Intermittent Self-catheterisation.

BACKGROUND: The AnTIC trial linked continuous low-dose antibiotic prophylaxis treatments to a lower incidence of symptomatic urinary tract infections (UTIs) among individuals performing clean intermittent self-catheterisation (CISC). OBJECTIVE: To explore potential mechanisms underlying the protective effects of low-dose antibiotic prophylaxis treatments, blood and urine samples and uro-associated Escherichia coli isolates from AnTIC participants were analysed. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Blood samples (n = 204) were analysed for TLR gene polymorphisms associated with UTI susceptibility and multiple urine samples (n = 558) were analysed for host urogenital responses. E.coli sequence data for 45 temporal isolates recovered from the urine samples of 16 trial participants in the prophylaxis (n = 9) and no-prophylaxis (n = 7) study arms, and characterised by multidrug resistance (MDR), were used to classify individual strains. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: TLR polymorphism data were analysed using Poisson regression. Concentrations of urine host defence markers were analysed using linear mixed-effects models, which accounted for repeated urine samples. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Urine samples from CISC users, irrespective of antibiotic treatment regimens, were associated with robust urothelial innate responses. No links were identified between TLR genotype and CISC user susceptibility to recurrent UTIs. Microbiological study data were limited to the predominant MDR E. coli population; participants prescribed low-dose prophylactic antibiotics were predominantly colonised by a single uro-associated E. coli strain, while participants given acute antibiotic treatments were each colonised by more than one E. coli strain. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic treatments did not impact urogenital responses to infection in CISC users. Host genetics in terms of TLR polymorphisms played no role in determining CISC user susceptibility to or protection from recurrent UTIs. Prophylactic antibiotic treatments associated with MDR E. coli were associated with colonisation by stable uro-associated E. coli genotypes. PATIENT SUMMARY: Our findings show that the natural urogenital defences of clean intermittent self-catheterisation (CISC) users were not impacted by antibiotic treatments. For some CISC users, prophylaxis with low-dose antibiotics selected for a stable, predominantly, Esherichia coli rich uromicrobiota.

ALternatives To prophylactic Antibiotics for the treatment of Recurrent urinary tract infection in women (ALTAR): study protocol for a multicentre, pragmatic, patient-randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: At least half of all adult women will experience infective cystitis (urinary tract infection: UTI) at least once in their life and many suffer from repeated episodes. Recurrent urinary tract infection (rUTI) in adult women is usually treated with long-term, low-dose antibiotics and current national and international guidelines recommend this as the 'gold standard' preventative treatment. Although they are reasonably effective, long-term antibiotics can result in bacteria becoming resistant not only to the prescribed antibiotic but to other antimicrobial agents. The problem of antimicrobial resistance is recognised as a global threat and the recent drive for antibiotic stewardship has emphasised the need for careful consideration prior to prescribing antibiotics. This has led clinicians and patients alike to explore potential non-antibiotic options for recurrent UTI prevention. DESIGN /METHODS: This is a multicentre, pragmatic, patient-randomised, non-inferiority trial comparing a non-antibiotic preventative treatment for rUTI in women, methenamine hippurate, against the current standard of daily low-dose antibiotics. Women who require preventative treatment for rUTI are the target population. This group is comprised of those with a diagnosis of rUTI, defined as three episodes in 1 year or two episodes in 6 months, and those with a single severe infection requiring hospitalisation. Participants will be recruited from secondary care urology / urogynaecology departments in the UK following referral with rUTI. Participants will be followed up during a 12-month period of treatment and in the subsequent 6 months following completion of the prophylactic medication. Outcomes will be assessed from patient recorded symptoms, quality of life questionnaires and microbiological examination of urine and perineal swabs. The primary outcome is the incidence of symptomatic antibiotic-treated UTI self-reported by participants during the 12-month period of preventative treatment. Health economic outcomes will also be assessed to define the cost-effectiveness of both treatments. A qualitative study will be conducted in the first 8 months of the trial to explore with participants/non-participants' and recruiting clinicians' views on trial processes and identify potential barriers to recruitment, reasons for participating and non-participation and for dropping out of the study. DISCUSSION: The study was commissioned and funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and approved under the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) notification scheme as a 'Type A' study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN), registry number: ISRCTN70219762 . Registered on 31 May 2016.

Continuous low-dose antibiotic prophylaxis for adults with repeated urinary tract infections (AnTIC): a randomised, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Repeated symptomatic urinary tract infections (UTIs) affect 25% of people who use clean intermittent self-catheterisation (CISC) to empty their bladder. We aimed to determine the benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of continuous low-dose antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of recurrent UTIs in adult users of CISC. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, superiority trial, we enrolled participants from 51 UK National Health Service organisations. These participants were community-dwelling (as opposed to hospital inpatient) users of CISC with recurrent UTIs. We randomly allocated participants (1:1) to receive either antibiotic prophylaxis once daily (prophylaxis group) or no prophylaxis (control group) for 12 months by use of an internet-based system with permuted blocks of variable length. Trial and laboratory staff who assessed outcomes were masked to allocation but participants were aware of their treatment group. The primary outcome was the incidence of symptomatic, antibiotic-treated UTIs over 12 months. Participants who completed at least 6 months of follow-up were assumed to provide a reliable estimate of UTI incidence and were included in the analysis of the primary outcome. Change in antimicrobial resistance of urinary and faecal bacteria was monitored as a secondary outcome. The AnTIC trial is registered at ISRCTN, number 67145101; and EudraCT, number 2013-002556-32. FINDINGS: Between Nov 25, 2013, and Jan 29, 2016, we screened 1743 adult users of CISC for eligibility, of whom 404 (23%) participants were enrolled between Nov 26, 2013, and Jan 31, 2016. Of these 404 participants, 203 (50%) were allocated to receive prophylaxis and 201 (50%) to receive no prophylaxis. 1339 participants were excluded before randomisation. The primary analysis included 181 (89%) adults allocated to the prophylaxis group and 180 (90%) adults in the no prophylaxis (control) group. 22 participants in the prophylaxis group and 21 participants in the control group were not included in the primary analysis because they were missing follow-up data before 6 months. The incidence of symptomatic antibiotic-treated UTIs over 12 months was 1·3 cases per person-year (95% CI 1·1-1·6) in the prophylaxis group and 2·6 (2·3-2·9) in the control group, giving an incidence rate ratio of 0·52 (0·44-0·61; p<0·0001), indicating a 48% reduction in UTI frequency after treatment with prophylaxis. Use of prophylaxis was well tolerated: we recorded 22 minor adverse events in the prophylaxis group related to antibiotic prophylaxis during the study, predominantly gastrointestinal disturbance (six participants), skin rash (six participants), and candidal infection (four participants). However, resistance against the antibiotics used for UTI treatment was more frequent in urinary isolates from the prophylaxis group than in those from the control group at 9-12 months of trial participation (nitrofurantoin 12 [24%] of 51 participants from the prophylaxis group vs six [9%] of 64 participants from the control group with at least one isolate; p=0·038), trimethoprim (34 [67%] of 51 vs 21 [33%] of 64; p=0·0003), and co-trimoxazole (26 [53%] of 49 vs 15 [24%] of 62; p=0·002). INTERPRETATION: Continuous antibiotic prophylaxis is effective in reducing UTI frequency in CISC users with recurrent UTIs, and it is well tolerated in these individuals. However, increased resistance of urinary bacteria is a concern that requires surveillance if prophylaxis is started. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research.

Continuous low-dose antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent urinary tract infection in adults who perform clean intermittent self-catheterisation: the AnTIC RCT.

BACKGROUND: People carrying out clean intermittent self-catheterisation (CISC) to empty their bladder often suffer repeated urinary tract infections (UTIs). Continuous once-daily, low-dose antibiotic treatment (antibiotic prophylaxis) is commonly advised but knowledge of its effectiveness is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess the benefit, harms and cost-effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent UTIs in people who perform CISC. DESIGN: Parallel-group, open-label, patient-randomised 12-month trial of allocated intervention with 3-monthly follow-up. Outcome assessors were blind to allocation. SETTING: UK NHS, with recruitment of patients from 51 sites. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred and four adults performing CISC and predicted to continue for ≥ 12 months who had suffered at least two UTIs in the previous year or had been hospitalised for a UTI in the previous year. INTERVENTIONS: A central randomisation system using random block allocation set by an independent statistician allocated participants to the experimental group [once-daily oral antibiotic prophylaxis using either 50 mg of nitrofurantoin, 100 mg of trimethoprim (Kent Pharmaceuticals, Ashford, UK) or 250 mg of cefalexin (Sandoz Ltd, Holzkirchen, Germany); n = 203] or the control group of no prophylaxis (n = 201), both for 12 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary clinical outcome was relative frequency of symptomatic, antibiotic-treated UTI. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by cost per UTI avoided. The secondary measures were microbiologically proven UTI, antimicrobial resistance, health status and participants' attitudes to antibiotic use. RESULTS: The frequency of symptomatic antibiotic-treated UTI was reduced by 48% using prophylaxis [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.61; n = 361]. Reduction in microbiologically proven UTI was similar (IRR 0.49, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.60; n = 361). Absolute reduction in UTI episodes over 12 months was from a median (interquartile range) of 2 (1-4) in the no-prophylaxis group (n = 180) to 1 (0-2) in the prophylaxis group (n = 181). The results were unchanged by adjustment for days at risk of UTI and the presence of factors giving higher risk of UTI. Development of antimicrobial resistance was seen more frequently in pathogens isolated from urine and Escherichia coli from perianal swabs in participants allocated to antibiotic prophylaxis. The use of prophylaxis incurred an extra cost of £99 to prevent one UTI (not including costs related to increased antimicrobial resistance). The emotional and practical burden of CISC and UTI influenced well-being, but health status measured over 12 months was similar between groups and did not deteriorate significantly during UTI. Participants were generally unconcerned about using antibiotics, including the possible development of antimicrobial resistance. LIMITATIONS: Lack of blinding may have led participants in each group to use different thresholds to trigger reporting and treatment-seeking for UTI. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this large randomised trial, conducted in accordance with best practice, demonstrate clear benefit for antibiotic prophylaxis in terms of reducing the frequency of UTI for people carrying out CISC. Antibiotic prophylaxis use appears safe for individuals over 12 months, but the emergence of resistant urinary pathogens may prejudice longer-term management of recurrent UTI and is a public health concern. Future work includes longer-term studies of antimicrobial resistance and studies of non-antibiotic preventative strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN67145101 and EudraCT 2013-002556-32. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment Vol. 22, No. 24. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Sustained Reduction in Severe Hypoglycemia in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes Complicated by Impaired Awareness of Hypoglycemia: Two-Year Follow-up in the HypoCOMPaSS Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Severe hypoglycemia is a feared complication of type 1 diabetes; yet, few trials have targeted prevention using optimized self-management (educational, therapeutic, and technological support). We aimed to investigate whether improved awareness and reduced severe hypoglycemia, achieved during an intensive randomized clinical trial (RCT), were sustained after return to routine care. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Ninety-six adults with type 1 diabetes (29 ± 12 years' duration) and impaired awareness of hypoglycemia at five U.K. tertiary referral diabetes centers were recruited into a 24-week 2 × 2 factorial RCT (HypoCOMPaSS). Participants were randomized to pump (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion [CSII]) or multiple daily injections (MDIs) and real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) or self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), with equal education/attention to all groups. At 24 weeks, participants returned to routine care with follow-up until 24 months, including free choice of MDI/CSII; RT-CGM vs. SMBG comparison continued to 24 months. Primary outcome was mean difference (baseline to 24 months [between groups]) in hypoglycemia awareness. RESULTS: Improvement in hypoglycemia awareness was sustained (Gold score at baseline 5.1 ± 1.1 vs. 24 months 3.7 ± 1.9; P < 0.0001). Severe hypoglycemia rate was reduced from 8.9 ± 12.8 episodes/person-year over the 12 months prestudy to 0.4 ± 0.8 over 24 months (P < 0.0001). HbA1c improved (baseline 8.2 ± 3.2% [66 ± 12 mmol/mol] vs. 24 months 7.7 ± 3.1% [61 ± 10 mmol/mol]; P = 0.003). Improvement in treatment satisfaction and reduced fear of hypoglycemia were sustained. There were no significant differences between interventions at 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: Optimized insulin replacement and glucose monitoring underpinned by hypoglycemia-focused structured education should be provided to all with type 1 diabetes complicated by impaired awareness of hypoglycemia.

Understanding variations in patient screening and recruitment in a multicentre pilot randomised controlled trial: a vignette-based study.

BACKGROUND: The INVESTIGATE-I study was designed to inform a future definitive randomised trial of invasive urodynamic testing, compared to basic clinical assessment with noninvasive tests prior to surgical treatment, in women with stress urinary incontinence or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence. In a pilot randomised controlled trial, women from seven participating sites were screened, consented and randomised. Overall, 771 patients were identified from clinic notes and correspondence as being potential recruits and were sent the Patient Information Leaflet. Of those screened, 284 were deemed eligible, giving an overall 'screen positive' rate of 37 %. The numbers screened at individual centres varied between 14 and 399; the 'screen positive' rate varied between 22 and 79 % and the percentage of eligible women recruited varied between 55 and 100 %. The aim of this additional substudy was to explore why 'screen positive' rates may have varied so widely between apparently similar sites. RESULTS: All 11 trial staff involved in screening in the seven recruiting sites were asked to evaluate a series of 20 identical vignettes, mainly based on actual general practitioner referral letters. Of the vignettes, 16 mentioned one or more definite inclusion criteria; the remainder had possible inclusions. Four had definite exclusions; 12 had possible exclusions. Free-text comments were sought to clarify the screeners' decisions. For six vignettes everyone agreed that the patient was eligible; for one all agreed she was not eligible; the breakdown for the remainder was mixed. Free-text comments illuminated uncertainties that may have led to variability in judging potential eligibility. CONCLUSIONS: Variability in judgements about potential trial eligibility highlights the importance of explicit and objective inclusion and exclusion criteria, and of agreed strategies for making judgements when information is missing. During the development and planning of trials, vignettes might be a valuable tool for training those involved in screening and recruiting patients, for identifying potential problems and ensuring greater consistency in the application of eligibility criteria. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISTCTN registry: ISRCTN71327395 , registered on 7 June 2010.

Antibiotic treatment for intermittent bladder catheterisation with once daily prophylaxis (the AnTIC study): Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Clean intermittent self-catheterisation is an important management option for people who cannot empty their bladder effectively. Recurrent urinary tract infections are common in these patients. Data from recent studies suggest that antibiotic prophylaxis may be beneficial in reducing infection risk, but the effectiveness of this intervention remains uncertain. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a 52-site, patient randomised superiority trial set in routine care comparing an experimental strategy of once daily antibiotic prophylaxis for 12 months against a control strategy of no prophylaxis in people who carry out self-catheterisation and suffer recurrent urinary tract infections. The primary outcome is number of urinary tract infections during a 12-month treatment period. Both groups will otherwise receive usual care including on demand treatment courses of antibiotics for urinary tract infection. Participants and their clinicians will not be blinded to the allocated intervention, but central trial staff managing and analysing trial data will, as far as possible, be unaware of participant allocation. The analysis will follow intention-to-treat principles. DISCUSSION: This trial was commissioned and funded by the United Kingdom National Health Service following prioritisation of the research question by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN67145101 EUDRACT2013-002556-32. Registered on 25 October 2013.

A mixed methods study to assess the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of invasive urodynamic testing versus clinical assessment and non-invasive tests prior to surgery for stress urinary incontinence in women: the INVESTIGATE-I study.

BACKGROUND: The position of invasive urodynamic testing (IUT) in diagnostic pathways for urinary incontinence is unclear, and systematic reviews have called for further trials evaluating clinical utility. The objective of this study was to inform the decision whether to proceed to a definitive randomised trial of IUT compared to clinical assessment with non-invasive tests, prior to surgery in women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence (MUI). METHODS: A mixed methods study comprising a pragmatic multicentre randomised pilot trial, a qualitative face-to face interview study with patients eligible for the trial, an exploratory economic evaluation including value of information study, a survey of clinicians' views about IUT, and qualitative telephone interviews with purposively sampled survey respondents. Only the first and second of these elements are reported here. Trial participants were randomised to either clinical assessment with non-invasive tests (control arm) or clinical assessment with non-invasive tests plus IUT (intervention arm). The main outcome measures of these feasibility studies were confirmation that units can identify and recruit eligible women, acceptability of investigation strategies and data collection tools, and acquisition of outcome data to determine the sample size for a definitive trial. The primary outcome proposed for a definitive trial was ICIQ-FLUTS (total score) 6 months after surgery or the start of nonsurgical treatment. RESULTS: Of 284 eligible women, 222 (78%) were recruited, 165/219 (75%) returned questionnaires at baseline, and 125/200 returned them (63%) at follow-up. Most women underwent surgery; management plans were changed in 19 (19%) participants following IUT. Participants interviewed were positive about the trial and the associated documentation. CONCLUSIONS: All elements of a definitive trial were rehearsed. Such a trial would require between 232 and 922 participants, depending on the target difference in the primary outcome. We identified possible modifications to our protocol for application in a definitive trial including clarity over inclusion/exclusions, screening processes, reduction in secondary outcomes, and modification to patient questionnaire booklets and bladder diaries. A definitive trial of IUT versus clinical assessment prior to surgery for SUI or stress predominant MUI is feasible and remains relevant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN 71327395, registered 7 June 2010.

INVESTIGATE-I (INVasive Evaluation before Surgical Treatment of Incontinence Gives Added Therapeutic Effect?): a mixed-methods study to assess the feasibility of a future randomised controlled trial of invasive urodynamic testing prior to surgery for stress urinary incontinence in women.

BACKGROUND: The position of invasive urodynamic testing in the diagnostic pathway for urinary incontinence (UI) is unclear. Systematic reviews have called for further trials evaluating clinical utility, although a preliminary feasibility study was considered appropriate. OBJECTIVES: To inform the decision whether or not to proceed to a definitive randomised trial of invasive urodynamic testing compared with clinical assessment with non-invasive tests, prior to surgery in women with stress UI (SUI) or stress predominant mixed UI (MUI). DESIGN: A mixed-methods study comprising a pragmatic multicentre randomised pilot trial; economic evaluation; survey of clinicians' views about invasive urodynamic testing; qualitative interviews with clinicians and trial participants. SETTING: Urogynaecology, female urology and general gynaecology units in Newcastle, Leicester, Swansea, Sheffield, Northumberland, Gateshead and South Tees. PARTICIPANTS: Trial recruits were women with SUI or stress predominant MUI who were considering surgery after unsuccessful conservative treatment. Relevant clinicians completed two online surveys. Subsets of survey respondents and trial participants took part in separate qualitative interview studies. INTERVENTIONS: Pilot trial participants were randomised to undergo clinical assessment with non-invasive tests (control arm); or assessment as controls, plus invasive urodynamic testing (intervention arm). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Confirmation that units can identify and recruit eligible women; acceptability of investigation strategies and data collection tools; acquisition of outcome data to determine the sample size for a definitive trial. The proposed primary outcome for the definitive trial was International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire (ICIQ) Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (ICIQ-FLUTS) (total score) 6 months after surgery or the start of non-surgical treatment; secondary outcomes included: ICIQ-FLUTS (subscales); ICIQ Urinary Incontinence Short Form; ICIQ Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Quality of Life; Urogenital Distress Inventory; EuroQol-5D; costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost per QALY, Short Form 12; 3-day bladder diary. RESULTS: Of 284 eligible women, 222 (78%) were recruited; 165/219 (75%) returned questionnaires at baseline and 125/200 (63%) who were sent questionnaires at follow-up. There were few missing data items in returned questionnaires, with individual outcome scales calculable for 81%-94%. Most women underwent surgery; management plans were changed in 19 (19%) participants following invasive urodynamic testing. Participant Costs Questionnaires were returned by 53% 6 months after treatment; complete data to undertake cost-utility analysis were available in 27% (intervention) and 47% (control). While insufficient to recommend changes in practice, the results suggest further research would be valuable. All clinicians responding to the survey had access to invasive urodynamic testing, and most saw it as essential prior to surgery in women with SUI with or without other symptoms; nevertheless, 70% considered the research question underlying INVESTIGATE important and most were willing to randomise patients in a definitive trial. Participants interviewed were positive about the trial and associated documentation; the desire of some women to avoid invasive urodynamic testing contrasted with opinions expressed by clinicians through both survey and interview responses. CONCLUSIONS: All elements of a definitive trial and economic evaluation were rehearsed; several areas for protocol modification were identified. Such a trial would require to 400-900 participants, depending on the difference in primary outcome sought. FUTURE WORK: A definitive trial of invasive urodynamic testing versus clinical assessment prior to surgery for SUI or stress predominant MUI should be undertaken. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN71327395. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Recovery of hypoglycemia awareness in long-standing type 1 diabetes: a multicenter 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial comparing insulin pump with multiple daily injections and continuous with conventional glucose self-monitoring (HypoCOMPaSS).

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) can be improved and severe hypoglycemia (SH) prevented in type 1 diabetes, we compared an insulin pump (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion [CSII]) with multiple daily injections (MDIs) and adjuvant real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT) with conventional self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A 24-week 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial in adults with type 1 diabetes and IAH was conducted. All received comparable education, support, and congruent therapeutic targets aimed at rigorous avoidance of biochemical hypoglycemia without relaxing overall control. Primary end point was between-intervention difference in 24-week hypoglycemia awareness (Gold score). RESULTS: A total of 96 participants (mean diabetes duration 29 years) were randomized. Overall, biochemical hypoglycemia (≤3.0 mmol/L) decreased (53 ± 63 to 24 ± 56 min/24 h; P = 0.004 [t test]) without deterioration in HbA1c. Hypoglycemia awareness improved (5.1 ± 1.1 to 4.1 ± 1.6; P = 0.0001 [t test]) with decreased SH (8.9 ± 13.4 to 0.8 ± 1.8 episodes/patient-year; P = 0.0001 [t test]). At 24 weeks, there was no significant difference in awareness comparing CSII with MDI (4.1 ± 1.6 vs. 4.2 ± 1.7; difference 0.1; 95% CI -0.6 to 0.8) and RT with SMBG (4.3 ± 1.6 vs. 4.0 ± 1.7; difference -0.3; 95% CI -1.0 to 0.4). Between-group analyses demonstrated comparable reductions in SH, fear of hypoglycemia, and insulin doses with equivalent HbA1c. Treatment satisfaction was higher with CSII than MDI (32 ± 3 vs. 29 ± 6; P = 0.0003 [t test]), but comparable with SMBG and RT (30 ± 5 vs. 30 ± 5; P = 0.79 [t test]). CONCLUSIONS: Hypoglycemia awareness can be improved and recurrent SH prevented in long-standing type 1 diabetes without relaxing HbA1c. Similar biomedical outcomes can be attained with conventional MDI and SMBG regimens compared with CSII/RT, although satisfaction was higher with CSII.