Challenges in establishing optimal pediatric palliative care at the university hospital in Slovenia.

The integration of pediatric palliative care (PPC) should become a standard of care for all children with life-limiting and life-threatening illnesses. There are many barriers and misperceptions in pediatrics which hinder the early implementation of PPC. The aim of the study was to design starting points for the establishment of accessible PPC with early involvement of patients in a tertiary-level children's hospital. An intervention, presentation, and discussion on PPC were offered by the hospital PPC team to all employees in the hospital. A total of 237 participants (physicians 30.4%, nurses 49.4%, psychologists 8.4%, and others) completed a questionnaire before and after the intervention. The personnel's knowledge, self-assessment of their ability to perform PPC, attitude to participate in PPC, and their awareness and understanding of the need for PPC were evaluated. The results were analyzed using Pandas and SciPy libraries in Python. The knowledge, awareness, and attitude of the physicians, nurses, and other professionals improved significantly after the intervention. However, the self-assessment of their ability to perform PPC did not increase. Previous experience with the death of a patient has proven to be a stimulus for self-initiative in acquiring knowledge in PPC and was linked with a better attitude and higher awareness of the need for PPC.Conclusions: More education and practical work tailored to the different professional profiles are needed, with adjustments for specific subspecialist areas, especially where patients could be included in early PPC. Although additional studies are needed, we identified the main directions for the further implementation of PPC in clinical practice in our setting.

Faster Compared With Standard Insulin Aspart During Day-and-Night Fully Closed-Loop Insulin Therapy in Type 1 Diabetes: A Double-Blind Randomized Crossover Trial.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the safety and efficacy of day-and-night fully closed-loop insulin therapy using faster (Faster-CL) compared with standard insulin aspart (Standard-CL) in young adults with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized, crossover trial, 20 participants with type 1 diabetes on insulin pump therapy (11 females, aged 21.3 ± 2.3 years, HbA1c 7.5 ± 0.5% [58.5 ± 5.5 mmol/mol]) underwent two 27-h inpatient periods with unannounced afternoon moderate-vigorous exercise and unannounced/uncovered meals. We compared Faster-CL and Standard-CL in random order. During both interventions, the fuzzy-logic control algorithm DreaMed GlucoSitter was used. Glucose sensor data were analyzed by intention-to-treat principle with the difference (between Faster-CL and Standard-CL) in proportion of time in range 70-180 mg/dL (TIR) over 27 h as the primary end point. RESULTS: The proportion of TIR was similar for both arms: 53.3% (83% overnight) in Faster-CL and 57.9% (88% overnight) in Standard-CL (P = 0.170). The proportion of time in hypoglycemia <70 mg/dL was 0.0% for both groups. Baseline-adjusted interstitial prandial glucose increments 1 h after meals were greater in Faster-CL compared with Standard-CL (P = 0.017). The gaps between measured plasma insulin and estimated insulin-on-board levels at the beginning, at the end, and 2 h after the exercise were smaller in the Standard-CL group (P = 0.029, P = 0.003, and P = 0.004, respectively). No severe adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Fully closed-loop insulin delivery using either faster or standard insulin aspart was safe and efficient in achieving near-normal glucose concentrations outside postprandial periods. The closed-loop algorithm was better adjusted to the standard insulin aspart.

Closed-loop glucose control in young people with type 1 diabetes during and after unannounced physical activity: a randomised controlled crossover trial.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Hypoglycaemia during and after exercise remains a challenge. The present study evaluated the safety and efficacy of closed-loop insulin delivery during unannounced (to the closed-loop algorithm) afternoon physical activity and during the following night in young people with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: A randomised, two-arm, open-label, in-hospital, crossover clinical trial was performed at a single site in Slovenia. The order was randomly determined using an automated web-based programme with randomly permuted blocks of four. Allocation assignment was not masked. Children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes who were experienced insulin pump users were eligible for the trial. During four separate in-hospital visits, the participants performed two unannounced exercise protocols: moderate intensity (55% of [Formula: see text]) and moderate intensity with integrated high-intensity sprints (55/80% of [Formula: see text]), using the same study device either for closed-loop or open-loop insulin delivery. We investigated glycaemic control during the exercise period and the following night. The closed-loop insulin delivery was applied from 15:00 h on the day of the exercise to 13:00 h on the following day. RESULTS: Between 20 January and 16 June 2016, 20 eligible participants (9 female, mean age 14.2 ± 2.0 years, HbA1c 7.7 ± 0.6% [60.0 ± 6.6 mmol/mol]) were included in the trial and performed all trial-mandated activities. The median proportion of time spent in hypoglycaemia below 3.3 mmol/l was 0.00% for both treatment modalities (p = 0.7910). Use of the closed-loop insulin delivery system increased the proportion of time spent within the target glucose range of 3.9-10 mmol/l when compared with open-loop delivery: 84.1% (interquartile range 70.0-85.5) vs 68.7% (59.0-77.7), respectively (p = 0.0057), over the entire study period. This was achieved with significantly less insulin delivered via the closed-loop (p = 0.0123). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Closed-loop insulin delivery was safe both during and after unannounced exercise protocols in the in-hospital environment, maintaining glucose values mostly within the target range without an increased risk of hypoglycaemia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02657083 FUNDING: University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Slovenian National Research Agency, and ISPAD Research Fellowship.