Patient Perspectives on the Benefits and Challenges of Diabetes and Digital Technology.

Diabetes technology continues to evolve, advancing with our understanding of human biology and improving our ability to treat people with diabetes. Diabetes devices are broadly classified into the following categories: glucose sensors, insulin delivery devices, and digital health care technology (i.e., software and mobile applications). When supported by education and individually tailored, technology can play a key role in optimizing outcomes. Digital devices assist in diabetes management by tracking meals, exercise, sleep, and glycemic measurements in real time, all of which can guide physicians and other clinicians in their decision-making. Here, as people with diabetes and patient advocates, as well as diabetes specialists, primary care providers, and diabetes care and education specialists, we present our perspectives on the advances, benefits, and challenges of diabetes technology in primary care practices.

Prioritizing Patient Experiences in the Management of Diabetes and Its Complications: An Endocrine Society Position Statement.

Diabetes can be an arduous journey both for people with diabetes (PWD) and their caregivers. While the journey of every person with diabetes is unique, common themes emerge in managing this disease. To date, the experiences of PWD have not been fully considered to successfully implement the recommended standards of diabetes care in practice. It is critical for health-care providers (HCPs) to recognize perspectives of PWD to achieve optimal health outcomes. Further, existing tools are available to facilitate patient-centered care but are often underused. This statement summarizes findings from multistakeholder expert roundtable discussions hosted by the Endocrine Society that aimed to identify existing gaps in the management of diabetes and its complications and to identify tools needed to empower HCPs and PWD to address their many challenges. The roundtables included delegates from professional societies, governmental organizations, patient advocacy organizations, and social enterprises committed to making life better for PWD. Each section begins with a clinical scenario that serves as a framework to achieve desired health outcomes and includes a discussion of resources for HCPs to deliver patient-centered care in clinical practice. As diabetes management evolves, achieving this goal will also require the development of new tools to help guide HCPs in supporting PWD, as well as concrete strategies for the efficient uptake of these tools in clinical practice to minimize provider burden. Importantly, coordination among various stakeholders including PWD, HCPs, caregivers, policymakers, and payers is critical at all stages of the patient journey.

Person-first language in diabetes and obesity scientific publications.

AIMS: We aimed to quantify the use of person-first language (PFL) among scholarly articles focusing on diabetes or obesity. METHODS: PFL and condition-first language (CFL) terms for diabetes and obesity (e.g. diabetic, obese) were identified from existing guidelines and a review of the literature. Exact phrase literature searches were conducted between 2011 and 2020 and results were categorised as PFL, CFL or both. RESULTS: Among diabetes articles, 43% used PFL, 40% used CFL and 17% contained both. Among obesity articles, 0.5% used PFL, 99% used CFL and 0.2% used both. The use of PFL increased by 3% per year for diabetes articles, compared to 117% for obesity articles. The rate of adoption of PFL in diabetes articles was unchanged in 2018-2020 compared to the 3 years prior. CONCLUSIONS: While the use of person-first language in diabetes articles had increased over the review period, its rate of adoption has started to slow. Conversely, the use of PFL in obesity articles is nascent and increasing.

A Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) of Hypoglycemia and Hyperglycemia for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Validated by Clinician Ratings.

BACKGROUND: A composite metric for the quality of glycemia from continuous glucose monitor (CGM) tracings could be useful for assisting with basic clinical interpretation of CGM data. METHODS: We assembled a data set of 14-day CGM tracings from 225 insulin-treated adults with diabetes. Using a balanced incomplete block design, 330 clinicians who were highly experienced with CGM analysis and interpretation ranked the CGM tracings from best to worst quality of glycemia. We used principal component analysis and multiple regressions to develop a model to predict the clinician ranking based on seven standard metrics in an Ambulatory Glucose Profile: very low-glucose and low-glucose hypoglycemia; very high-glucose and high-glucose hyperglycemia; time in range; mean glucose; and coefficient of variation. RESULTS: The analysis showed that clinician rankings depend on two components, one related to hypoglycemia that gives more weight to very low-glucose than to low-glucose and the other related to hyperglycemia that likewise gives greater weight to very high-glucose than to high-glucose. These two components should be calculated and displayed separately, but they can also be combined into a single Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) that corresponds closely to the clinician rankings of the overall quality of glycemia (r = 0.95). The GRI can be displayed graphically on a GRI Grid with the hypoglycemia component on the horizontal axis and the hyperglycemia component on the vertical axis. Diagonal lines divide the graph into five zones (quintiles) corresponding to the best (0th to 20th percentile) to worst (81st to 100th percentile) overall quality of glycemia. The GRI Grid enables users to track sequential changes within an individual over time and compare groups of individuals. CONCLUSION: The GRI is a single-number summary of the quality of glycemia. Its hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia components provide actionable scores and a graphical display (the GRI Grid) that can be used by clinicians and researchers to determine the glycemic effects of prescribed and investigational treatments.

Consensus Recommendations for the Use of Automated Insulin Delivery Technologies in Clinical Practice.

The significant and growing global prevalence of diabetes continues to challenge people with diabetes (PwD), healthcare providers, and payers. While maintaining near-normal glucose levels has been shown to prevent or delay the progression of the long-term complications of diabetes, a significant proportion of PwD are not attaining their glycemic goals. During the past 6 years, we have seen tremendous advances in automated insulin delivery (AID) technologies. Numerous randomized controlled trials and real-world studies have shown that the use of AID systems is safe and effective in helping PwD achieve their long-term glycemic goals while reducing hypoglycemia risk. Thus, AID systems have recently become an integral part of diabetes management. However, recommendations for using AID systems in clinical settings have been lacking. Such guided recommendations are critical for AID success and acceptance. All clinicians working with PwD need to become familiar with the available systems in order to eliminate disparities in diabetes quality of care. This report provides much-needed guidance for clinicians who are interested in utilizing AIDs and presents a comprehensive listing of the evidence payers should consider when determining eligibility criteria for AID insurance coverage.

RESCUE Collaborative Community: A New Initiative to Reduce Rates of Intended Self-Injury and Suicide Among People with Diabetes.

Suicide is the leading cause of death among young people aged 20-34 and the second leading cause of death in adolescents aged 15-19. In the general population, among those attempting suicide 7% die by suicide and 23% reattempt with nonfatal consequences. Depression, closely associated with suicidal ideation, is diagnosed in 7%-25% of the United States and European populations. Individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) have a two to three times higher prevalence of depression and approximately double the rate of suicide compared to the general population. Rates of self-harm and suicide among people with diabetes are likely to be considerably underestimated due to poor identification. This information is critical to create interventions to decrease rates of suicide and self-harm. This is particularly important in the setting of advanced technologies in T1D, which offer both easier methods of self-injurious behaviors through insulin misuse and can act as identification tools to identify risk insulin behaviors and provide opportunities to develop interventions and prevention efforts in those with depression and suicidal ideation/behavior/acts. To this end, our goal was to identify any literature on coding diabetes correctly in individuals who die by suicide or engage in intentional self-harm. Furthermore, to describe the Reducing Suicide Rates Among Individuals with Diabetes (RESCUE) Collaborative Community and its goals of using multiple approaches to reduce rates of intended self-injury and suicide among people with diabetes. These include detection of cases, understanding support needs, identification of risk factors, and early intervention for individuals at risk.

The type 2 diabetes 'modern preventable pandemic' and replicable lessons from the COVID-19 crisis.

To frame the substantial prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) as a 'Modern Preventable Pandemic' (MPP) and present certain replicable policy lessons from the COVID-19 crisis to address it. A literature and policy review was performed to analyze data about the COVID-19 and T2D pandemics to establish their multi-factorial health, social, and economic impacts. With the global prevalence of T2D tripling in the last two decades, T2D has become an MPP largely due to modifiable human behaviors. Certain successful elements of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic provide important lessons that can be adapted for the growing T2D MPP. With proper education and access to resources, it is possible to mitigate the T2D MPP through focused government policies as illustrated by many of the lessons of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Without such government intervention, the T2D MPP will continue to grow at an unsustainable pace with enormous health, social and economic implications. Immediate action is necessary. The scale of the T2D pandemic warrants a robust response in health policy as outlined through eight coordinated efforts; the lessons of the COVID-19 crisis should be studied and applied to the T2D MPP.

Health Care Disparities in Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring.

Numerous studies have demonstrated that use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) improves glycemic control and reduces diabetes-related hospitalizations and emergency room service utilization in individuals with diabetes who are treated with intensive insulin regimens. Recent studies have revealed disparities in use of CGM within racially and ethnically diverse and lower socioeconomic populations, leading to underutilization of CGM in these populations. This article reviews the scope and impact of these disparities on utilization of CGM and explores the factors that may be contributing to this issue.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use in Clinical Trials for On-Market Diabetes Drugs.

To the best of our knowledge, there are no published data on the historical and recent use of CGM in clinical trials of pharmacological agents used in the treatment of diabetes. We analyzed 2,032 clinical trials of 40 antihyperglycemic therapies currently on the market with a study start date between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2019. According to ClinicalTrials.gov, 119 (5.9%) of these trials used CGM. CGM usage in clinical trials has increased over time, rising from <5% before 2005 to 12.5% in 2019. However, it is still low given its inclusion in the American Diabetes Association's latest guidelines and known limitations of A1C for assessing ongoing diabetes care.

Patient-reported outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes in global real-world clinical practice: The SAGE study.

AIMS: To conduct a secondary analysis of the SAGE study to evaluate the association between glycaemic control and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) across different age groups and regions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SAGE was a multinational, cross-sectional, observational study in adults with T1DM. Data were collected at a single visit, analysed according to predefined age groups (26-44, 45-64, and ≥65 years), and reported across different regions. PRO questionnaires were applied to assess hypoglycaemia fear (Hypoglycemia Fear Survey-II), diabetes-related distress (Problem Areas In Diabetes questionnaire), insulin treatment satisfaction (Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire), and diabetes-specific quality of life (QoL; Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life). Multivariable analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) target achievement (<7% and individualised targets) with PRO scores. RESULTS: The PRO scores showed relatively low levels of diabetes-related emotional distress and fear of hypoglycaemia, moderate to high treatment satisfaction, and low diabetes-related impact on QoL. Results were generally comparable across age groups with some regional variability. Achievement of the HbA1c <7% target was associated with less worry about hypoglycaemia, lower diabetes-related emotional distress, higher insulin treatment satisfaction, and higher QoL. Achievement of individualised HbA1c targets was associated with lower diabetes-related emotional distress and higher insulin treatment satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Better glycaemic control was most closely associated with low emotional distress due to diabetes and high patient-reported insulin treatment satisfaction.

Comparison of Protocols to Reduce Diabetic Ketoacidosis in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Prescribed a Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitor.

OBJECTIVE | Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are approved for type 1 diabetes in Europe and Japan, with off-label use in type 1 diabetes in the United States. Although there were no consistent approaches to risk mitigation in clinical trials of these agents, protocols have been developed to try to reduce the risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). However, a validated risk mitigation strategy does not exist. We reviewed available DKA risk mitigation protocols to better understand the various strategies currently in use. METHODS | We conducted a search of the published medical literature and other medical information sources, including conference presentations, for protocols. We then categorized the information provided into guidance on patient selection, initiation of SGLT2 inhibitors, ketone monitoring, necessary patient action in the event of ketosis or DKA, and inpatient treatment of ketosis or DKA. RESULTS | Patient selection is generally similar among the protocols, although some require a minimum BMI and insulin dose. All protocols advocate routine measurement of ketones, although some insist on blood ketone tests. Although action steps for ketosis varies, all protocols advocate rapid patient intervention. The importance of evaluating ketones and acid-base balance even in the absence of hyperglycemia is emphasized by all protocols, as is the need to continue administering insulin until ketosis has resolved. CONCLUSION | DKA risk mitigation must be pursued systematically in individuals with type 1 diabetes, although the best strategy remains to be determined. Given the ongoing need for adjunctive therapies in type 1 diabetes and current use of SGLT2 inhibitors for this purpose, additional education and research are crucial, especially in the hospital environment, where DKA may not be diagnosed promptly and treated appropriately.

The Digital/Virtual Diabetes Clinic: The Future Is Now-Recommendations from an International Panel on Diabetes Digital Technologies Introduction.

The increasing prevalence of diabetes, combined with a growing global shortage of health care professionals (HCP), necessitates the need to develop new approaches to diabetes care delivery to expand access to care, lessen the burden on people with diabetes, improve efficiencies, and reduce the unsustainable financial liability on health systems and payers. Use of digital diabetes technologies and telehealth protocols within a digital/virtual diabetes clinic has the potential to address these challenges. However, several issues must be resolved to move forward. In February 2020, organizers of the Advanced Technologies & Treatments for Diabetes Annual Conference convened an international panel of HCP, researchers, patient advocates, and industry representatives to review the status of digital diabetes technologies, characterize deficits in current technologies, and identify issues for consideration. Since that meeting, the importance of using telehealth and digital diabetes technologies has been demonstrated amid the global coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. This article summarizes the panel's discussion of the opportunities, obstacles, and requisites for advancing the use of these technologies as a standard of care for the management of diabetes.

Diabetes in ageing: pathways for developing the evidence base for clinical guidance.

Older adults with diabetes are heterogeneous in their medical, functional, and cognitive status, and require careful individualisation of their treatment regimens. However, in the absence of detailed information from clinical trials involving older people with varying characteristics, there is little evidence-based guidance, which is a notable limitation of current approaches to care. It is important to recognise that older people with diabetes might vary in their profiles according to age category, functional health, presence of frailty, and comorbidity profiles. In addition, all older adults with diabetes require an individualised approach to care, ranging from robust individuals to those residing in care homes with a short life expectancy, those requiring palliative care, or those requiring end-of-life management. In this Review, our multidisciplinary team of experts describes the current evidence in several important areas in geriatric diabetes, and outlines key research gaps and research questions in each of these areas with the aim to develop evidence-based recommendations to improve the outcomes of interest in older adults.

A care team-based classification and population management schema for connected diabetes care.

It has been proposed that telehealth may help to combat the epidemic of diabetes and other chronic diseases in the US. As a result of rapid technological advancement over the past decade, there has been an explosion in virtual diabetes management program offerings rooted in smartphone technology, connected devices for blood glucose monitoring, and remote coaching or support. Such offerings take many forms with unique features. We provide a care team-based classification system for connected diabetes care programs and highlight their strengths and limitations. We also include a framework for how the different classes of connected diabetes care may be deployed in a health system to promote improved population health.

Enhancing resources for healthcare professionals caring for people on intensive insulin therapy: Summary from a national workshop.

In June 2019, the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust and JDRF International (JDRF) co-sponsored the Healthcare Professional Resource Workshop in San Francisco, California. The workshop convened stakeholders in the diabetes field in order to: [1] review information and resources created for healthcare professionals (HCPs) caring for people with diabetes on intensive insulin therapy; [2] share knowledge to scale and decentralize diabetes care; [3] identify synergies across the leading diabetes information resources; and [4] determine the areas of unmet need for HCPs caring for people with diabetes on intensive insulin therapy. Here, we summarize the conclusions and recommendations from the workshop.

Reviewing U.S. Connected Diabetes Care: The Newest Member of the Team.

Recent years have brought about an explosion in the number of companies offering connected diabetes care products, defined as digital diabetes management systems based around (1) smartphone apps, (2) devices with built-in connectivity, and (3) remote human and automated coaching and support. These nascent models aim to provide more continuous and on-demand care, aligning with the 24/7 demands of chronic disease. It has been enabled by multiple factors, including the rising use of connected devices and apps to help people manage their chronic conditions, growing appreciation for the importance of outcomes beyond A1c, and the lofty and growing cost of health care. Despite the potential of these programs to improve the outcomes and well-being of people with diabetes and reduce the burdens on health care providers and systems, awareness and use of these programs and approaches remain low in the medical community. In this article, we present a snapshot of this dynamic field, including a taxonomy of various connected diabetes care products available to employers, health plans, health systems, and people with diabetes in the United States, and we identify meaningful distinctions among them: (1) health conditions managed, (2) peer support interactions, (3) prescribing providers on the care team, (4) provision of connected medical devices and/or continuous glucose monitors, (5) degree of treatment personalization, and (6) clinical and real-world evidence. We also discuss broad trends in connected diabetes care. Given the urgency and scale of the diabetes epidemic, it is vital that a range of medical and clinical communities find meaningful ways to scale individualized, timely care under reimbursement models that better align incentives for various stakeholders, particularly health care providers themselves. This would not only address deficiencies in care but could also make diabetes care more attractive to future clinicians.

Diabetes news.

Ursula Biba, Rhea W. Teng, Martin J. Kurian, Ann M. Carracher, and Kelly L. Close are of Close Concerns (http://www.closeconcerns.com), a healthcare information company focused exclusively on diabetes and obesity care. Close Concerns publishes Closer Look, a periodical that brings together news and insights in these areas. Each month, the Journal of Diabetes includes this News feature, in which Biba, Teng, Kurian, Carracher, and Close review the latest developments relevant to researchers and clinicians.

Practical ways to achieve targets in diabetes care conference.

Ursula Biba, Rhea W. Teng, Martin J. Kurian, and Kelly L. Close are of Close Concerns (http://www.closeconcerns.com), a healthcare information company focused exclusively on diabetes and obesity care. Close Concerns publishes Closer Look, a periodical that brings together news and insights in these areas. Each month, the Journal of Diabetes includes this News feature, in which Biba, Teng, Kurian, and Close review the latest developments relevant to researchers and clinicians.

Clinical Targets for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data Interpretation: Recommendations From the International Consensus on Time in Range.

Improvements in sensor accuracy, greater convenience and ease of use, and expanding reimbursement have led to growing adoption of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). However, successful utilization of CGM technology in routine clinical practice remains relatively low. This may be due in part to the lack of clear and agreed-upon glycemic targets that both diabetes teams and people with diabetes can work toward. Although unified recommendations for use of key CGM metrics have been established in three separate peer-reviewed articles, formal adoption by diabetes professional organizations and guidance in the practical application of these metrics in clinical practice have been lacking. In February 2019, the Advanced Technologies & Treatments for Diabetes (ATTD) Congress convened an international panel of physicians, researchers, and individuals with diabetes who are expert in CGM technologies to address this issue. This article summarizes the ATTD consensus recommendations for relevant aspects of CGM data utilization and reporting among the various diabetes populations.