Uptake of self-management education programmes for people with type 2 diabetes in primary care through the embedding package: a cluster randomised control trial and ethnographic study.

BACKGROUND: Self-management education programmes are cost-effective in helping people with type 2 diabetes manage their diabetes, but referral and attendance rates are low. This study reports on the effectiveness of the Embedding Package, a programme designed to increase type 2 diabetes self-management programme attendance in primary care. METHODS: Using a cluster randomised design, 66 practices were randomised to: (1) a wait-list group that provided usual care for nine months before receiving the Embedding Package for nine months, or (2) an immediate group that received the Embedding Package for 18 months. 'Embedders' supported practices and self-management programme providers to embed programme referral into routine practice, and an online 'toolkit' contained embedding support resources. Patient-level HbA1c (primary outcome), programme referral and attendance data, and clinical data from 92,977 patients with type 2 diabetes were collected at baseline (months - 3-0), step one (months 1-9), step 2 (months 10-18), and 12 months post-intervention. An integrated ethnographic study including observations, interviews, and document analysis was conducted using interpretive thematic analysis and Normalisation Process Theory. RESULTS: No significant difference was found in HbA1c between intervention and control conditions (adjusted mean difference [95% confidence interval]: -0.10 [-0.38, 0.18] mmol/mol; -0.01 [-0.03, 0.02] %). Statistically but not clinically significantly lower levels of HbA1c were found in people of ethnic minority groups compared with non-ethnic minority groups during the intervention condition (-0.64 [-1.08, -0.20] mmol/mol; -0.06% [-0.10, -0.02], p = 0.004), but not greater self-management programme attendance. Twelve months post-intervention data showed statistically but not clinically significantly lower HbA1c (-0.56 [95% confidence interval: -0.71, -0.42] mmol/mol; -0.05 [-0.06, -0.04] %; p < 0.001), and higher self-management programme attendance (adjusted odds ratio: 1.13; 95% confidence interval: 1.02, 1.25; p = 0.017) during intervention conditions. Themes identified through the ethnographic study included challenges for Embedders in making and sustaining contact with practices and providers, and around practices' interactions with the toolkit. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to implementing the Embedding Package may have compromised its effectiveness. Statistically but not clinically significantly improved HbA1c among ethnic minority groups and in longer-term follow-up suggest that future research exploring methods of embedding diabetes self-management programmes into routine care is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN23474120, registered 05/04/2018.

Diabetes Research Matters: A Three-Round Priority-Setting Survey Consultation with Adults Living with Diabetes and Family Members in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify the health and quality-of-life research priorities of Australians with diabetes or family members. METHODS: Through an iterative, three-step, online survey process we (1) qualitatively generated research topics (long list) in response to one question "What research is needed to support people with diabetes to live a better life?"; (2) determined the most important research questions (short list); and (3) ranked research questions in order of importance (priorities). We aimed to recruit N = 800 participants, with approximate equal representation of diabetes type and family members. RESULTS: Participants (N = 661) were adults (aged 18+ years) in Australia with a self-reporting diagnosis of diabetes (type 1, n = 302; type 2, n = 204; prior/current gestational, n = 58; less common types, n = 22, or a family member, n = 75). Retention rates for Surveys 2 and 3 were 47% (n = 295) and 50% (n = 316), respectively. From 1549 open-text responses, 25 topics and 125 research questions were identified thematically. Research priorities differed by cohort, resulting in specific lists developed and ranked by each cohort. The top-ranked research question for the type 1 diabetes cohort was "How can diabetes technology be improved …?" and for the type 2 diabetes cohort: "How can insulin resistance be reversed …?". One question was common to the final lists of all cohorts: "What are the causes or triggers of diabetes?" Within cohorts, the top priorities were perceived as being of similar importance. CONCLUSIONS: The research priorities differ substantially by diabetes type and for family members. These findings should inform funding bodies and researchers, to align future research and its communication with community needs.

Hybrid Closed Loop in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes and Severely Impaired Hypoglycemia Awareness.

BACKGROUND: Benefits of hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems in a high-risk group with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) have not been well-explored. METHODS: Adults with Edmonton HYPO scores ≥1047 were randomized to 26-weeks HCL (MiniMed™ 670G) vs standard therapy (multiple daily injections or insulin pump) without continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) (control). Primary outcome was percentage CGM time-in-range (TIR; 70-180 mg/dL) at 23 to 26 weeks post-randomization. Major secondary endpoints included magnitude of change in counter-regulatory hormones and autonomic symptom responses to hypoglycemia at 26-weeks post-randomization. A post hoc analysis evaluated glycemia risk index (GRI) comparing HCL with control groups at 26 weeks post-randomization. RESULTS: Nine participants (median [interquartile range (IQR)] age 51 [41, 59] years; 44% male; enrolment HYPO score 1183 [1058, 1308]; Clarke score 6 [6, 6]; n = 5 [HCL]; n = 4 [control]) completed the study. Time-in-range was higher using HCL vs control (70% [68, 74%] vs 48% [44, 50%], P = .014). Time <70 mg/dL did not differ (HCL 3.8% [2.7, 3.9] vs control 6.5% [4.3, 8.6], P = .14) although hypoglycemia episode duration was shorter (30 vs 50 minutes, P < .001) with HCL. Glycemia risk index was lower with HCL vs control (38.1 [30.0, 39.2] vs 70.8 [58.5, 72.4], P = .014). Following 6 months of HCL use, greater dopamine (24.0 [12.3, 27.6] vs -18.5 [-36.5, -4.8], P = .014), and growth hormone (6.3 [4.6, 16.8] vs 0.5 [-0.8, 3.0], P = .050) responses to hypoglycemia were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Six months of HCL use in high-risk adults with severe IAH increased glucose TIR and improved GRI without increased hypoglycemia, and partially restored counter-regulatory responses. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12617000520336.

Associations Between Hypoglycemia Awareness Status and Symptoms of Hypoglycemia Among Adults with Type 1 or Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes Using the Hypo-METRICS Smartphone Application.

Introduction: This study examined associations between hypoglycemia awareness status and hypoglycemia symptoms reported in real-time using the novel Hypoglycaemia-MEasurement, ThResholds and ImpaCtS (Hypo-METRICS) smartphone application (app) among adults with insulin-treated type 1 (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: Adults who experienced at least one hypoglycemic episode in the previous 3 months were recruited to the Hypo-METRICS study. They prospectively reported hypoglycemia episodes using the app for 10 weeks. Any of eight hypoglycemia symptoms were considered present if intensity was rated between "A little bit" to "Very much" and absent if rated "Not at all." Associations between hypoglycemia awareness (as defined by Gold score) and hypoglycemia symptoms were modeled using mixed-effects binary logistic regression, adjusting for glucose monitoring method and diabetes duration. Results: Of 531 participants (48% T1D, 52% T2D), 45% were women, 91% white, and 59% used Flash or continuous glucose monitoring. Impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) was associated with lower odds of reporting autonomic symptoms than normal awareness of hypoglycemia (NAH) (T1D odds ratio [OR] 0.43 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.25-0.73], P = 0.002); T2D OR 0.51 [95% CI 0.26-0.99], P = 0.048), with no differences in neuroglycopenic symptoms. In T1D, relative to NAH, IAH was associated with higher odds of reporting autonomic symptoms at a glucose concentration <54 than >70 mg/dL (OR 2.18 [95% CI 1.21-3.94], P = 0.010). Conclusion: The Hypo-METRICS app is sensitive to differences in hypoglycemia symptoms according to hypoglycemia awareness in both diabetes types. Given its high ecological validity and low recall bias, the app may be a useful tool in research and clinical settings. The clinical trial registration number is NCT04304963.

A Comparison of the Rates of Clock-Based Nocturnal Hypoglycemia and Hypoglycemia While Asleep Among People Living with Diabetes: Findings from the Hypo-METRICS Study.

Introduction: Nocturnal hypoglycemia is generally calculated between 00:00 and 06:00. However, those hours may not accurately reflect sleeping patterns and it is unknown whether this leads to bias. We therefore compared hypoglycemia rates while asleep with those of clock-based nocturnal hypoglycemia in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) or insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: Participants from the Hypo-METRICS study wore a blinded continuous glucose monitor and a Fitbit Charge 4 activity monitor for 10 weeks. They recorded details of episodes of hypoglycemia using a smartphone app. Sensor-detected hypoglycemia (SDH) and person-reported hypoglycemia (PRH) were categorized as nocturnal (00:00-06:00 h) versus diurnal and while asleep versus awake defined by Fitbit sleeping intervals. Paired-sample Wilcoxon tests were used to examine the differences in hypoglycemia rates. Results: A total of 574 participants [47% T1D, 45% women, 89% white, median (interquartile range) age 56 (45-66) years, and hemoglobin A1c 7.3% (6.8-8.0)] were included. Median sleep duration was 6.1 h (5.2-6.8), bedtime and waking time ∼23:30 and 07:30, respectively. There were higher median weekly rates of SDH and PRH while asleep than clock-based nocturnal SDH and PRH among people with T1D, especially for SDH <70 mg/dL (1.7 vs. 1.4, P < 0.001). Higher weekly rates of SDH while asleep than nocturnal SDH were found among people with T2D, especially for SDH <70 mg/dL (0.8 vs. 0.7, P < 0.001). Conclusion: Using 00:00 to 06:00 as a proxy for sleeping hours may underestimate hypoglycemia while asleep. Future hypoglycemia research should consider the use of sleep trackers to record sleep and reflect hypoglycemia while asleep more accurately. The trial registration number is NCT04304963.

Preventing severe hypoglycemia in adults with type 2 diabetes (PHT2): Design, delivery and evaluation framework for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Severe hypoglycemia is a common and feared complication of medications used to lower blood glucose levels in individuals with diabetes. Psychoeducational interventions can prevent severe hypoglycemia in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D). We aim to determine the effectiveness of this approach among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) at elevated risk for severe hypoglycemia. METHODS: Preventing Hypoglycemia in Type 2 diabetes (PHT2) is a two-arm, parallel, randomized controlled trial. Participants are eligible if they are adults with T2D receiving care at an integrated group practice in Washington state and have experienced one or more episodes of severe hypoglycemia in the prior 12 months or have impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (Gold score ≥ 4). Participants are randomized to proactive nurse care management with or without my hypo compass, an evidence-based, psychoeducational intervention combining group and individual self-management training. For this study, my hypo compass was adapted to be suitable for adults with T2D and from an in-person to a virtual intervention over videoconference and telephone. The primary outcome is any self-reported severe hypoglycemia in the 12 months following the start of the intervention. Secondary outcomes include biochemical measures of hypoglycemia, self-reported hypoglycemia awareness, fear of hypoglycemia, and emergency department visits and hospitalizations for severe hypoglycemia. The study includes a process evaluation to assess implementation fidelity and clarify the causal pathway. CONCLUSION: The PHT2 trial will compare the effectiveness of two approaches for reducing severe hypoglycemia in adults with T2D. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov, # NCT04863872.

The diabetes management experiences questionnaire: Psychometric validation among adults with type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To examine the psychometric properties of the Diabetes Management Experiences Questionnaire (DME-Q). Adapted from the validated Glucose Monitoring Experiences Questionnaire, the DME-Q captures satisfaction with diabetes management irrespective of treatment modalities. METHODS: The DME-Q was completed by adults with type 1 diabetes as part of a randomized controlled trial comparing hybrid closed loop (HCL) to standard therapy. Most psychometric properties were examined with pre-randomization data (n = 149); responsiveness was examined using baseline and 26-week follow-up data (n = 120). RESULTS: Pre-randomization, participants' mean age was 44 ± 12 years, 52% were women. HbA1c was 61 ± 11 mmol/mol (7.8 ± 1.0%), diabetes duration was 24 ± 12 years and 47% used an insulin pump prior to the trial. A forced three-factor analysis revealed three expected domains, that is, 'Convenience', 'Effectiveness' and 'Intrusiveness', and a forced one-factor solution was also satisfactory. Internal consistency reliability was strong for the three subscales ( α range = 0.74-0.84) and 'Total satisfaction' ( α = 0.85). Convergent validity was demonstrated with moderate correlations between DME-Q 'Total satisfaction' and diabetes distress (PAID: rs = -0.57) and treatment satisfaction (DTSQ; rs = 0.58). Divergent validity was demonstrated with a weak correlation with prospective/retrospective memory (PRMQ: rs = -0.16 and - 0.13 respectively). Responsiveness was demonstrated, as participants randomized to HCL had higher 'Effectiveness' and 'Total satisfaction' scores than those randomized to standard therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The 22-item DME-Q is a brief, acceptable, reliable measure with satisfactory structural and construct validity, which is responsive to intervention. The DME-Q is likely to be useful for evaluation of new pharmaceutical agents and technologies in research and clinical settings.

Hypoglycaemia symptom frequency, severity, burden, and utility among adults with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia: Baseline and 24-week findings from the HypoCOMPaSS study.

AIMS: To determine the frequency, severity, burden, and utility of hypoglycaemia symptoms among adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IAH) at baseline and week 24 following the HypoCOMPaSS awareness restoration intervention. METHODS: Adults (N = 96) with T1D (duration: 29 ± 12 years; 64% women) and IAH completed the Hypoglycaemia Burden Questionnaire (HypoB-Q), assessing experience of 20 pre-specified hypoglycaemia symptoms, at baseline and week 24. RESULTS: At baseline, 93 (97%) participants experienced at least one symptom (mean ± SD 10.6 ± 4.6 symptoms). The proportion recognising each specific symptom ranged from 15% to 83%. At 24 weeks, symptom severity and burden appear reduced, and utility increased. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with T1D and IAH experience a range of hypoglycaemia symptoms. Perceptions of symptom burden or utility are malleable. Although larger scale studies are needed to confirm, these findings suggest that changing the salience of the symptomatic response may be more important in recovering protection from hypoglycaemia through regained awareness than intensifying symptom frequency or severity.

Bringing an end to diabetes stigma and discrimination: an international consensus statement on evidence and recommendations.

People with diabetes often encounter stigma (ie, negative social judgments, stereotypes, prejudice), which can adversely affect emotional, mental, and physical health; self-care, access to optimal health care; and social and professional opportunities. To accelerate an end to diabetes stigma and discrimination, an international multidisciplinary expert panel (n=51 members, from 18 countries) conducted rapid reviews and participated in a three-round Delphi survey process. We achieved consensus on 25 statements of evidence and 24 statements of recommendations. The consensus is that diabetes stigma is driven primarily by blame, perceptions of burden or sickness, invisibility, and fear or disgust. On average, four in five adults with diabetes experience diabetes stigma and one in five experience discrimination (ie, unfair and prejudicial treatment) due to diabetes, such as in health care, education, and employment. Diabetes stigma and discrimination are harmful, unacceptable, unethical, and counterproductive. Collective leadership is needed to proactively challenge, and bring an end to, diabetes stigma and discrimination. Consequently, we achieved unanimous consensus on a pledge to end diabetes stigma and discrimination.

Psychosocial Outcomes Among Users and Nonusers of Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery Systems: Multinational Survey of Adults With Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Emerging research suggests that open-source automated insulin delivery (AID) may reduce diabetes burden and improve sleep quality and quality of life (QoL). However, the evidence is mostly qualitative or uses unvalidated, study-specific, single items. Validated person-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have demonstrated the benefits of other diabetes technologies. The relative lack of research investigating open-source AID using PROMs has been considered a missed opportunity. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the psychosocial outcomes of adults with type 1 diabetes using and not using open-source AID systems using a comprehensive set of validated PROMs in a real-world, multinational, cross-sectional study. METHODS: Adults with type 1 diabetes completed 8 validated measures of general emotional well-being (5-item World Health Organization Well-Being Index), sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), diabetes-specific QoL (modified DAWN Impact of Diabetes Profile), diabetes-specific positive well-being (4-item subscale of the 28-item Well-Being Questionnaire), diabetes treatment satisfaction (Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire), diabetes distress (20-item Problem Areas in Diabetes scale), fear of hypoglycemia (short form of the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey II), and a measure of the impact of COVID-19 on QoL. Independent groups 2-tailed t tests and Mann-Whitney U tests compared PROM scores between adults with type 1 diabetes using and not using open-source AID. An analysis of covariance was used to adjust for potentially confounding variables, including all sociodemographic and clinical characteristics that differed by use of open-source AID. RESULTS: In total, 592 participants were eligible (attempting at least 1 questionnaire), including 451 using open-source AID (mean age 43, SD 13 years; n=189, 41.9% women) and 141 nonusers (mean age 40, SD 13 years; n=90, 63.8% women). Adults using open-source AID reported significantly better general emotional well-being and subjective sleep quality, as well as better diabetes-specific QoL, positive well-being, and treatment satisfaction. They also reported significantly less diabetes distress, fear of hypoglycemia, and perceived less impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their QoL. All were medium-to-large effects (Cohen d=0.5-1.5). The differences between groups remained significant after adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with type 1 diabetes using open-source AID report significantly better psychosocial outcomes than those not using these systems, after adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Using validated, quantitative measures, this real-world study corroborates the beneficial psychosocial outcomes described previously in qualitative studies or using unvalidated study-specific items.

Relationships between personality, emotional well-being, self-efficacy and weight management among adults with type 2 diabetes: Results from a cross-sectional survey.

The objective of this study was to examine the associations between personality, general and diabetes-specific well-being and self-efficacy, and weight management indicators, among adults with type 2 diabetes. In addition, to examine whether personality provides incremental explanation of variance in weight management indicators. Australian adults with type 2 diabetes (N = 270; 56% women; age: 61±12 years) were recruited via the national diabetes registry. An online survey included measures of: personality (HEXACO-PI-R), weight management indicators (physical activity, healthy diet, body mass index [BMI]), general well-being (WHO-5), general self-efficacy (GSE), diabetes distress (DDS) and diabetes self-efficacy (DMSES). Analyses included bivariate correlations and linear regression, adjusted for demographic, clinical, and psychological variables. All six personality domains showed significant correlation with at least one weight management indicator: physical activity with extraversion (r = .28), conscientiousness (r = .18) and openness (r = .19); healthy diet with honesty-humility (r = .19), extraversion (r = .24), and agreeableness (r = .14); and BMI with emotionality (r = .20) and extraversion (r = -.20). The strongest associations with general and diabetes-specific well-being and self-efficacy were apparent for extraversion, emotionality and conscientiousness (range: r = -.47-.66). Beyond covariates, personality domains explained additional variance for physical activity (Adjusted R2 = .31, R2 difference = .03, p = .03; openness: ß = .16, p = .02, emotionality: ß = .15, p = .04) and healthy diet (Adjusted R2 = .19, R2 difference = .03, p = .02; honesty-humility: ß = .20, p = .002, extraversion: ß = .19, p = .04) but not BMI. This study shows that personality is associated with weight management indicators and psychological factors among adults with type 2 diabetes. Further research is needed, including objective measurement of weight management indictors, to examine how personality influences the experience of type 2 diabetes.

Validation of Igls Criteria for Islet Transplant Functional Status Using Person-Reported Outcome Measures in a Cross-Sectional Study.

Associations between islet graft function and well-being in islet transplant recipients requiring exogenous insulin remain unclear. This cross-sectional analysis compared person-reported outcome measures in 15 adults with type 1 diabetes whose islet transplants were classified according to Igls criteria as "Good" (n = 5), "Marginal" (n = 4) and "Failed" (n = 6) graft function. At a mean of 6.2 years post-first islet transplant, 90% reduction in severe hypoglycaemia was maintained in all groups, with HbA1c (mean ± SD mmol/mol) 49 ± 4 in recipients with "Good" function; 56 ± 5 ("Marginal"); and 69 ± 25 ("Failed"). Self-reported impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia persisted in all groups but those with "Good" function were more likely to experience symptoms during hypoglycaemia. "Marginal" function was associated with greater fear of hypoglycaemia (HFS-II score: "Marginal": 113 [95, 119]; "Failed": 63 [42, 93] (p = 0.082); "Good": 33 [29, 61]) and severe anxiety (GAD7: "Marginal"): 21 [17, 21]; "Failed": 6 [6, 6] "Good": 6 [3, 11]; (p = 0.079)), diabetes distress and low mood. Despite clear evidence of ongoing clinical benefit, Igls criteria 'Marginal' function is associated with sub-optimal well-being, including greater fear of hypoglycaemia and severe anxiety. This study provides person-reported validation that "Good" and "Marginal" graft function are differentiated by general and diabetes-specific subjective well-being, suggesting those with "Marginal" function may benefit from further intervention, including re-transplantation.

Assessing the Content Validity, Acceptability, and Feasibility of the Hypo-METRICS App: Survey and Interview Study.

BACKGROUND: The Hypoglycaemia - MEasurement, ThResholds and ImpaCtS (Hypo-METRICS) smartphone app was developed to investigate the impact of hypoglycemia on daily functioning in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus or insulin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus. The app uses ecological momentary assessments, thereby minimizing recall bias and maximizing ecological validity. It was used in the Hypo-METRICS study, a European multicenter observational study wherein participants wore a blinded continuous glucose monitoring device and completed the app assessments 3 times daily for 70 days. OBJECTIVE: The 3 aims of the study were to explore the content validity of the app, the acceptability and feasibility of using the app for the duration of the Hypo-METRICS study, and suggestions for future versions of the app. METHODS: Participants who had completed the 70-day Hypo-METRICS study in the United Kingdom were invited to participate in a brief web-based survey and an interview (approximately 1h) to explore their experiences with the app during the Hypo-METRICS study. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data was conducted using both deductive and inductive methods. RESULTS: A total of 18 adults with diabetes (type 1 diabetes: n=10, 56%; 5/10, 50% female; mean age 47, SD 16 years; type 2 diabetes: n=8, 44%; 2/8, 25% female; mean age 61, SD 9 years) filled out the survey and were interviewed. In exploring content validity, participants overall described the Hypo-METRICS app as relevant, understandable, and comprehensive. In total, 3 themes were derived: hypoglycemia symptoms and experiences are idiosyncratic; it was easy to select ratings on the app, but day-to-day changes were perceived as minimal; and instructions could be improved. Participants offered suggestions for changes or additional questions and functions that could increase engagement and improve content (such as providing more examples with the questions). In exploring acceptability and feasibility, 5 themes were derived: helping science and people with diabetes; easy to fit in, but more flexibility wanted; hypoglycemia delaying responses and increasing completion time; design, functionality, and customizability of the app; and limited change in awareness of symptoms and impact. Participants described using the app as a positive experience overall and as having a possible, although limited, intervention effect in terms of both hypoglycemia awareness and personal impact. CONCLUSIONS: The Hypo-METRICS app shows promise as a new research tool to assess the impact of hypoglycemia on an individual's daily functioning. Despite suggested improvements, participants' responses indicated that the app has satisfactory content validity, overall fits in with everyday life, and is suitable for a 10-week research study. Although developed for research purposes, real-time assessments may have clinical value for monitoring and reviewing hypoglycemia symptom awareness and personal impact.

"Empowering Us": A community-led survey of real-world perspectives of adults with type 1 diabetes using insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitoring to manage their glucose levels.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct an Australian community-led survey of adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D), identifying priorities for, and barriers to, optimal use of advanced glucose management technologies. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A 30-question online survey of current or past users of insulin pump therapy (IPT), real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM), or intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM) explored perceptions regarding device design, access, education, outcomes, and support. RESULTS: Between November 2021 and January 2022, surveys were completed by 3,380 participants (age [mean ± SD] 45 ± 16 years; 62% female; 20 ± 14 years diabetes), with 55%, 82%, and 55% reporting experience with IPT, RT-CGM, and isCGM, respectively. Overall, most considered diabetes technology '(extremely) important' for maintaining target glucose levels (98%) and reducing hypoglycaemia severity and frequency (93%). For most, technology contributed positively to emotional well-being (IPT 89%; RT-CGM 91%; isCGM 87%), which was associated with device effectiveness in maintaining glucose in range, comfort, and convenience. Barriers included affordability (IPT 68%; RT-CGM 81%; isCGM 69%) and insufficient information for informed choices about device suitability (IPT 39%; RT-CGM 41%; isCGM 36%). CONCLUSIONS: Technology is perceived by adults with T1D as important for managing glycaemia and emotional well-being. Modifiable barriers to use include affordability, and information regarding device suitability.

Feasibility and acceptability of 'low-intensity mental health support via a telehealth-enabled network' for adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: the LISTEN pilot study.

BACKGROUND: This study examined the feasibility and acceptability of the low-intensity mental health support via telehealth-enabled network (LISTEN) intervention, for adults with diabetes, facilitated by diabetes health professionals (HPs). METHODS: LISTEN training. Three HPs participated in three half-day online workshops and applied their learnings during training cases (maximum four). Competency was assessed with a validated tool and achieved 'satisfactory' ratings for three consecutive sessions. LISTEN pilot. A single-group, pre-post study (up to four LISTEN sessions) with online assessments at baseline, post-intervention, and 4-week follow-up. Eligible participants were adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, with diabetes distress, but excluded if they had moderate/severe depressive and/or anxiety symptoms. Feasibility was assessed via recruitment and session completion rates. Acceptability was assessed with post-intervention self-report data. Changes in diabetes distress and general emotional well-being from baseline (T1) were explored at post-intervention (T2) and at 4-week follow-up (T3). RESULTS: Two HPs achieved competency (median training case sessions required: 7) and progressed to deliver LISTEN in the pilot study. In the pilot, N = 16 adults (Med [IQR] age: 60 [37-73] years; 13 women) with diabetes participated (median sessions per participant: 2). Twelve participants (75%) completed the post-intervention assessment (T2): 92% endorsed the number of sessions offered as 'just right', 75% felt comfortable talking with the HP, and 67% were satisfied with LISTEN. Perceived limitations were the structured format and narrow scope of problems addressed. Diabetes distress scores were lower post-intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot demonstrates the feasibility of training HPs to deliver LISTEN, and the acceptability and potential benefits of LISTEN for adults with diabetes. The findings highlight adaptations that may enhance the delivery of, and satisfaction with, LISTEN that will be tested in a hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial.

The impact of structured self-monitoring of blood glucose on clinical, behavioral, and psychosocial outcomes among adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is considered of little clinical benefit for adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, but no comprehensive review of a structured approach to SMBG has been published to date. Purpose: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of sSMBG on HbA1c, treatment modifications, behavioral and psychosocial outcomes, and; examine the moderating effects of sSMBG protocol characteristics on HbA1c. Data sources: Four databases searched (November 2020; updated: February 2022). Study selection: Inclusion criteria: non-randomized and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective observational studies; reporting effect of sSMBG on stated outcomes; among adults (≥18 years) with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. Studies excluded if involving children or people with insulin-treated or other forms of diabetes. Data extraction and analysis: Outcome data extracted, and risk of bias/quality assessed independently by two researchers. Meta-analysis was conducted for RCTs, and moderators explored (HbA1c only). Data synthesis: From 2,078 abstracts, k=23 studies were included (N=5,372). Risk of bias was evident and study quality was low. Outcomes assessed included: HbA1c (k=23), treatment modification (k=16), psychosocial/behavioral outcomes (k=12). Meta-analysis revealed a significant mean difference favoring sSMBG in HbA1c (-0·29%, 95% CI: -0·46 to -0·11, k=13) and diabetes self-efficacy (0.17%, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.33, k=2). Meta-analysis revealed no significant moderating effects by protocol characteristics. Limitations: Findings limited by heterogeneity in study designs, intervention characteristics, and psychosocial assessments. Conclusion: A small positive effect of sSMBG on HbA1c and diabetes self-efficacy was observed. Narrative synthesis of sSMBG intervention characteristics may guide future implementation. PROSPERO registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020208857, identifier CRD42020208857.

Low-Intensity mental health Support via a Telehealth Enabled Network for adults with diabetes (LISTEN): protocol for a hybrid type 1 effectiveness implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Mental health problems are common among people with diabetes. However, evidence-based strategies for the prevention and early intervention of emotional problems in people with diabetes are lacking. Our aim is to assess the real-world effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and implementation of a Low-Intensity mental health Support via a Telehealth Enabled Network (LISTEN), facilitated by diabetes health professionals (HPs). METHODS: A hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation trial, including a two-arm parallel randomised controlled trial, alongside mixed methods process evaluation. Recruited primarily via the National Diabetes Services Scheme, Australian adults with diabetes (N = 454) will be eligible if they are experiencing elevated diabetes distress. Participants are randomised (1:1 ratio) to LISTEN-a brief, low-intensity mental health support program based on a problem-solving therapy framework and delivered via telehealth (intervention) or usual care (web-based resources about diabetes and emotional health). Data are collected via online assessments at baseline (T0), 8 weeks (T1) and 6 months (T2, primary endpoint) follow-up. The primary outcome is between-group differences in diabetes distress at T2. Secondary outcomes include the immediate (T1) and longer-term (T2) effect of the intervention on psychological distress, general emotional well-being, and coping self-efficacy. A within-trial economic evaluation will be conducted. Implementation outcomes will be assessed using mixed methods, according to the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Data collection will include qualitative interviews and field notes. DISCUSSION: It is anticipated that LISTEN will reduce diabetes distress among adults with diabetes. The pragmatic trial results will determine whether LISTEN is effective, cost-effective, and should be implemented at scale. Qualitative findings will be used to refine the intervention and implementation strategies as required. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial has been registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN: ACTRN12622000168752) on 1 February, 2022.

'Is Insulin Right for Me?': Web-based intervention to reduce psychological barriers to insulin therapy among adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes-A randomised controlled trial.

AIMS: To test 'Is Insulin Right for Me?', a theory-informed, self-directed, web-based intervention designed to reduce psychological barriers to insulin therapy among adults with type 2 diabetes. Further, to examine resource engagement and associations between minimum engagement and outcomes. METHODS: Double-blind, two-arm randomised controlled trial (1:1), comparing the intervention with freely available online information (control). Eligible participants were Australian adults with type 2 diabetes, taking oral diabetes medications, recruited primarily via national diabetes registry. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: prior use of injectable medicines; being 'very willing' to commence insulin. Data collections were completed online at baseline, 2-week and 6-month follow-up. PRIMARY OUTCOME: negative insulin treatment appraisal scale (ITAS) scores; secondary outcomes: positive ITAS scores and hypothetical willingness to start insulin. ANALYSES: intention-to-treat (ITT); per-protocol (PP) examination of outcomes by engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12621000191897. RESULTS: No significant ITT between-arm (intervention: n = 233; control: n = 243) differences were observed in primary (2 weeks: Mdiff [95% CI]: -1.0 [-2.9 to 0.9]; 6 months: -0.01 [-1.9 to 1.9]), or secondary outcomes at either follow-up. There was evidence of lower Negative ITAS scores at 2-week, but not 6-month, follow-up among those with minimum intervention engagement (achieved by 44%) compared to no engagement (-2.7 [-5.1 to -0.3]). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to existing information, 'Is insulin right for me?' did not improve outcomes at either timepoint. Small intervention engagement effects suggest it has potential. Further research is warranted to examine whether effectiveness would be greater in a clinical setting, following timely referral among those for whom insulin is clinically indicated.