Driving-related glucose patterns among older adults with type 1 diabetes.

Older adults with type 1 diabetes may face challenges driving safely. Glucose "above 5 to drive" is often recommended for insulin-treated diabetes to minimize hypoglycemia while driving. However, the effectiveness of this recommendation among older adults has not been evaluated. Older drivers with type 1 diabetes were assessed while using sensor-augmented insulin pumps during a 2-week clinical trial run-in. Twenty-three drivers (median age 69 years [IQR 65-72]; diabetes duration 37 years [20-45]) undertook 618 trips (duration 10 min [5-21]). Most trips (n = 535; 87%) were <30-min duration; nine trips (1.5%) exceeded 90 min and three trips (0.5%) exceeded 120 min. Pre-trip continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) was >5.0 mmol/L for 577 trips (93%) and none of these had CGM <3.9 mmol/L during driving (including eight trips >90 min and three trips >120 min). During 41 trips with pre-trip CGM ≤5.0 mmol/L, 11 trips had CGM <3.9 mmol/L. Seventy-one CGM alerts occurred during 60 trips (10%), of which 54/71 (76%) were unrelated to hypoglycemia. Our findings support a glucose "above-5-to-drive" recommendation to avoid CGM-detected hypoglycemia among older drivers, including for prolonged drives, and highlight the importance of active CGM low-glucose alerts to prevent hypoglycemia during driving. Driving-related CGM usability and alert functionality warrants investigation.

Improved Satisfaction While Maintaining Safety and High Time in Range (TIR) With a Medtronic Investigational Enhanced Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop (e-AHCL) System.

OBJECTIVE: To determine feasibility and compare acceptance of an investigational Medtronic enhanced advanced hybrid closed-loop (e-AHCL) system in adults with type 1 diabetes with earlier iterations. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This nonrandomized three-stage (12 weeks each) exploratory study compared e-AHCL (Bluetooth-enabled MiniMed 780G insulin pump with automatic data upload [780G] incorporating an updated algorithm; calibration-free all-in-one disposable sensor; 7-day infusion set) preceded by a run-in (non-Bluetooth 780G [670G V4.0 insulin pump] requiring manual data upload; Guardian Sensor 3 [GS3] requiring calibration; 3-day infusion set), stage 1 (780G; GS3; 3-day infusion set), and stage 2 (780G; calibration-free Guardian Sensor 4; 3-day infusion set). Treatment satisfaction was assessed by Diabetes Technology Questionnaire (DTQ)-current (primary outcome) and other validated treatment satisfaction tools with glucose outcomes by continuous glucose monitoring metrics. RESULTS: Twenty-one of 22 (11 women) participants (baseline HbA1c 6.7%/50 mmol/mol) completed the study. DTQ-current scores favored e-AHCL (123.1 [17.8]) versus run-in (101.6 [24.2]) and versus stage 1 (110.6 [20.8]) (both P < 0.001) but did not differ from stage 2 (119.4 [16.0]; P = 0.271). Diabetes Medication System Rating Questionnaire short-form scores for "Convenience and Efficacy" favored e-AHCL over run-in and all stages. Percent time in range 70-180 mg/dL was greater with e-AHCL versus run-in and stage 2 (+2.9% and +3.6%, respectively; both P < 0.001). Percent times of <70 mg/dL for e-AHCL were significantly lower than run-in, stage 1, and stage 2 (-0.9%, -0.6%, and -0.5%, respectively; all P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: e-AHCL was feasible. User satisfaction increased compared with earlier Medtronic HCL iterations without compromising glucose control.

Treatment satisfaction with Omnipod DASH in adults with type 1 diabetes: A non-blinded 1:1 randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: We compared treatment satisfaction with a tubeless insulin pump (Omnipod DASH® Insulin Management System) to usual care (multiple daily injections [MDI] or tubed insulin pump therapy [IPT]) in adults with type 1 diabetes using self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Adults with type 1 diabetes on MDI (n = 40) or IPT (n = 25) from four diabetes centers in Australia were randomized in a 1:1 non-blinded manner to Omnipod DASH System (Omnipod group) or continue usual care (Usual Care group) for 12 weeks, followed by a further 12-week extension where all participants used the device. The primary outcome was treatment satisfaction assessed by change in Diabetes Technology Questionnaire 'current' (ΔDTQ-current) score at 12-weeks (study-end). Secondary outcomes included ΔDTQ-current following extension and other participant-reported outcomes (PROs) measuring quality of life, burden of disease treatment, glycemic and device-related outcomes at 12-weeks (study-end) and 24-weeks (end-extension). RESULTS: Treatment satisfaction improved more in Omnipod group vs. Usual Care group (ΔDTQ-current score of 16.4 [21.2] vs. 0.0 [12.8]; p < 0.001) at study-end. Significantly greater improvements in other PROs and HbA1c were also observed. Improvements in DTQ-current and other PROs comparing study-end and end-extension were similar. While %TIR change from baseline did not differ at study-end (-2.0 [12.7] %), it was significantly greater at end-extension (5.6 [10.9] %; p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Omnipod DASH System resulted in greater treatment satisfaction at 12 weeks in adults with type 1 diabetes using SMBG which was sustained after 24 weeks of device use without compromising sleep quality and fear of hypoglycemia. Improvements in glycemia were also observed.

"You can hide it if you want to, you can let it be seen if you want to": A qualitative study of the lived experiences of Australian adults with type 1 diabetes using the Omnipod DASH® system.

AIMS: Understanding the lived experience of using a tubeless insulin pump and how this differs compared to usual care (tubed insulin pump therapy (IPT) vs multiple daily injections (MDI)). METHODS: Interviews were conducted after 12-weeks of using the Omnipod DASH Insulin Management System (Insulet, Acton, MA) and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-eight adults (35 female; mean age 42;SD 13 years; 35 previous MDI) were interviewed. Most (84 %) wanted to continue using the device. Experiences fit two themes: 1. Taking back control of my diabetes: many previous MDI users perceived improved glycaemic control, explained by more "nuanced" control, with some reporting positive effects during exercise and sleep. Many previous MDI and IPT users endorsed positive experiences in concealing or disclosing their diabetes to others. However, some previous MDI users reported negative psychosocial experiences due to feeling continuously "attached" to their diabetes. 2. Barriers and facilitators of device acceptability: both MDI and IPT users cited wearability, alarms and the financial cost impacted their choice to continue device use. IPT users reported positive wearability experiences. CONCLUSIONS: The tubeless pump improved diabetes management perceptions for both MDI and tubed pump users. However, participants' prior glucose management affected perceptions of its advantages and disadvantages.

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.

What difference does sleep make? Continuous glucose monitoring metrics during fixed-overnight time versus sleep periods among older adults with type 1 diabetes.

Hypoglycaemia during sleep is a common and clinically important issue for people living with insulin-treated diabetes. Continuous glucose monitoring devices can help to identify nocturnal hypoglycaemia and inform treatment strategies. However, sleep is generally inferred, with diabetes researchers and physicians using a fixed-overnight period as a proxy for sleep-wake status when analysing and interpretating continuous glucose monitoring data. No study to date has validated such an approach with established sleep measures. Continuous glucose monitoring and research-grade actigraphy devices were worn and sleep diaries completed for 2 weeks by 28 older adults (mean age 67 years [SD 5]; 17 (59%) women) with type 1 diabetes. Using continuous glucose monitoring data from a total of 356 nights, fixed-overnight (using the recommended period of 00:00 hours-06:00 hours) and objectively-measured sleep periods were compared. The fixed-overnight period approach missed a median 57 min per night (interquartile range: 49-64) of sleep for each participant, including five continuous glucose monitoring-detected hypoglycaemia episodes during objectively-measured sleep. Twenty-seven participants (96%) had at least 1 night with continuous glucose monitoring time-in-range and time-above-range discrepancies both ≥ 10 percentage points, a clinically significant discrepancy. The utility of fixed-overnight time continuous glucose monitoring as a proxy for sleep-awake continuous glucose monitoring is inadequate as it consistently excludes actual sleep time, obscures glycaemic patterns, and misses sensor hypoglycaemia episodes during sleep. The use of validated measures of sleep to aid interpretation of continuous glucose monitoring data is encouraged.

Real-world lived experience of older adults with type 1 diabetes after an automated insulin delivery trial.

AIMS: First-generation closed-loop automated insulin delivery improves glycaemia and psychosocial outcomes among older adults with type 1 diabetes in clinical trials. However, no study has previously assessed real-world lived experience of older adults using closed-loop therapy outside a trial environment. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with older adults who were pre-existing insulin pump users and previously completed the OldeR Adult Closed-Loop (ORACL) randomised trial. Interviews focused on perceptions of diabetes technology use, and factors influencing decisions regarding continuation. RESULTS: Twenty-eight participants, mean age 70 years (SD 5), were interviewed at median 650 days (IQR 608-694) after their final ORACL trial visit. At interview, 23 participants (82%) were still using a commercial closed-loop system (requiring manual input for prandial insulin bolus doses). Themes discussed in interviews relating to closed-loop system use included sustained psychosocial benefits, cost and retirement considerations and usability frustrations relating to sensor accuracy and system alarms. Of the five participants who had discontinued, reasons included cost, continuous glucose monitoring-associated difficulties and usability frustrations. Cost was the largest consideration regarding continued use; most participants considered the increased ease of diabetes management to be worth the associated costs, though cost was prohibitive for some. CONCLUSIONS: Almost 2 years after completing a closed-loop clinical trial, closed-loop automated insulin delivery remains the preferred type 1 diabetes therapy for the majority of older adult participants. Chronological age is not a barrier to real-world successful use of diabetes technology. Identifying age-related barriers, and solutions, to diabetes technology use among older adults is warranted.

A pilot randomised controlled parallel arm trial evaluating treatment satisfaction with the Omnipod DASH® Insulin Management System compared with usual care in adults with type 1 diabetes in Australia: rationale, study design and methodologies.

BACKGROUND: Insulin pump therapy (IPT) improves glucose control in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) compared with multiple daily injections (MDI). However, their size, the tethered insulin infusion set, intrusiveness when operating the device and the need to disconnect during showering limit their acceptance to many who may benefit. The Omnipod DASH® Insulin Management System is a small waterproof tubeless device which is wirelessly controlled by a handheld device which may be an acceptable alternative. However, there are no randomised controlled trials focusing on the impact on user perceptions of tubeless insulin pump therapy. This pilot study aims to assess study feasibility and acceptability of patch pump therapy compared with usual care in adults with T1D in Australia to inform power calculations and progression to a large-scale multi-site randomised controlled study. METHODS: A pilot multi-site parallel randomised controlled study will be conducted in sixty-four adults with T1D who are managed on MDI or IPT and self-monitoring with finger-stick blood glucose from four specialist diabetes centres in Victoria, Australia. Following carbohydrate counting education, participants will be randomised to use Omnipod DASH® System (Omnipod group) or continue usual care (usual care group) for 12 weeks, followed by a 12-week extension phase where all participants will use Omnipod DASH® System. The primary outcome measure is feasibility determined by study completion rates with a threshold of 0.80. Acceptability of the intervention (Omnipod DASH® System) will be assessed by the difference in Diabetes Technology Questionnaire 'current' (DTQ-current) score at 12 weeks post-randomisation compared to baseline. Secondary outcomes will include other measures of user acceptance, process outcomes, resource outcomes, participant-centred outcomes, healthcare professional perceptions and glycaemic outcomes. DISCUSSION: This pilot study will provide insights regarding the feasibility of the study design and the first data regarding user acceptance of insulin patch pump technology in Australian T1D adults. We anticipate that this study will provide information informing the design of a larger study evaluating the impact of patch pumps on subjective outcomes that are of significance to the person living with T1D. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( https://anzctr.org.au/ ) ACTRN12621001195842 (8th September 2021). Please refer to Additional file 1: Appendix 1 for full details.

Lived experience of older adults with type 1 diabetes using closed-loop automated insulin delivery in a randomised trial.

AIM: To explore the lived experience of older adults with type 1 diabetes using closed-loop automated insulin delivery, an area previously receiving minimal attention. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with adults aged 60 years or older with long-duration type 1 diabetes who participated in a randomised, open-label, two-stage crossover trial comparing first-generation closed-loop therapy (MiniMed 670G) versus sensor-augmented pump therapy. Interview recordings were transcribed, thematically analysed and assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-one older adults participated in interviews after using closed-loop therapy. Twenty were functionally independent, without frailty or major cognitive impairment; one was dependent on caregiver assistance, including for diabetes management. Quality of life benefits were identified, including improved sleep and reduced diabetes-related psychological burden, in the context of experiencing improved glucose levels. Gaps between expectations and reality of closed-loop therapy were also experienced, encountering disappointment amongst some participants. The cost was perceived as a barrier to continued closed-loop access post-trial. Usability issues were identified, such as disruptive overnight alarms and sensor inaccuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The lived experience of older adults without frailty or major cognitive impairment using first-generation closed-loop therapy was mainly positive and concordant with glycaemic benefits found in the trial. Older adults' lived experience using automated insulin delivery beyond trial environments requires exploration; moreover, the usability needs of older adults should be considered during future device development.

Glucose profiles of older adults with type 1 diabetes using sensor-augmented pump therapy in Australia: pre-randomisation results from the ORACL study.

BACKGROUND: Older adults with type 1 diabetes are recommended modified glucose targets. However, data on the effects of diabetes technology in older age are scarce. We assessed older adults established on sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy during clinical trial run-in and compared their continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) profiles with consensus recommendations. We aimed to provide insight into the applicability of currently recommended CGM-based targets while accounting for current Diabetes UK guidelines. METHODS: In this analysis, adults aged 60 years or older with type 1 diabetes with a duration of at least 10 years and entering the Older Adult Closed Loop (ORACL) trial were studied. The trial was done at two tertiary hospitals in Australia. Individuals who were independent with diabetes self-management, as well as those receiving caregiver assistance for their diabetes management, were eligible for inclusion. Participants underwent baseline clinical assessment, which included medical history and examination, testing for frailty, functional ability, cognitive functioning, psychosocial wellbeing, and subjective sleep quality; fasting venous blood samples were collected for C-peptide, glucose, and glycated haemoglobin A1c measurement. Sensor-augmented pumps, carbohydrate-counting education, and diabetes education were provided to participants by diabetes nurse educators, dietitians, and endocrinologists experienced in type 1 diabetes clinical care. CGM data were subsequently collected for 2 weeks during sensor-augmented pump therapy. The ORACL trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, ACTRN12619000515190. FINDINGS: Our analysis included all 30 participants who completed the ORACL trial run-in-19 (63%) women and 11 (37%) men (mean age 67 years [SD 5], median diabetes duration 38 years [IQR 20-47], and insulin total daily dose 0·55 units [0·41-0·66] per kg bodyweight). Ten (33%) of 30 participants had impaired hypoglycaemia awareness and six (20%) were pre-frail; none were frail. The median CGM time in range 3·9-10·0 mmol/L was 71% (IQR 64-79). The time spent with glucose above 10·0 mmol/L was 27% (18-35) and above 13·9 mmol/L was 3·9% (2·4-10·2). The time with glucose below 3·9 mmol/L was 2·0% (1·2-3·1) and the time below 3·0 mmol/L was 0·2% (0·1-0·4). Only two (7%) of 30 participants met all CGM-based consensus recommendations modified for older adults. Time in hypoglycaemia was lower among the 16 participants with predictive low-glucose alerts enabled than among the 14 participants not using predictive low-glucose alerts (median difference -1·1 percentage points [95% CI -2·0 to -0·1]; p=0·038). This difference was even greater overnight (-2·3 percentage points [-3·2 to -1·0]; p=0·0018). One serious adverse event occurred (elective cardiac stent). INTERPRETATION: Using sensor-augmented pumps after multidisciplinary education, this group of older adults without frailty achieved a time in range far exceeding minimum consensus recommendations. However, the current stringent hypoglycaemia recommendations for all older adults were not met. Predictive low alerts could reduce hypoglycaemia, particularly overnight. Investigation into the effectiveness of CGM-based targets that consider frailty, functional status, and diabetes therapies for older adults is warranted. FUNDING: JDRF and Diabetes Australia.

Self-reported changes in aggressive driving within the past five years, and during COVID-19.

Aggressive driving is a significant road safety problem and is likely to get worse as the situations that provoke aggression become more prevalent in the road network (e.g. as traffic volumes and density increase and the grey fleet expands). In addition, driver frustration and stress, also recognised as triggers for aggression, are likely to stay high because of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated burdens, leading to increased aggression. However, although drivers report that other drivers are becoming more aggressive, self-report data suggests that the prevalence of aggression has not changed over time. This may be due to the methods used to define and measure aggression. This study sought to clarify whether self-reported aggression has increased over a five-year period and across three different types of aggression: verbal aggression, aggressive use of the vehicle and personal physical aggression. The influence of COVID-19 lockdowns on own and others' driving styles was also investigated. A total of 774 drivers (males = 66.5%, mean age = 48.7; SD = 13.9) who had been licensed for at least five years (M = 30.6, SD = 14.3), responded to an online survey and provided retrospective frequencies for their current aggression (considered pre-COVID-19 lockdowns) and five years prior. Two open ended questions were included to understand perceived changes in driving styles (own and others) during the COVID-19 pandemic. One third (33%) of drivers believed they were more aggressive now than five years ago but 61% of the sample believed other drivers were more aggressive now than five years ago. Logistic regression analyses on changes in self-reported aggression (same or decreased vs increased) showed the main factor associated with increases in aggressive driving was the perception that other drivers' aggression had increased. Further, almost half the sample (47%) reported that other drivers had become riskier and more dangerous during, and soon after, the COVID-19 lockdowns. These results show that the driving environment is seen as becoming more aggressive, both gradually and as a direct result of COVID-19 lockdowns. The data indicate that this perceived increase in aggression is likely to provoke higher levels of aggression in some drivers. Campaigns to reduce aggression on the roads need to focus on changing road culture and improving interactions, or perceived interactions, among road users.

Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery Effects on Glycemia During Sleep and Sleep Quality in Older Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: Results from the ORACL Trial.

Sleep-related effects of closed-loop therapy among older adults with type 1 diabetes have not been well established. In the OldeR Adult Closed-Loop (ORACL) randomized, crossover trial of first-generation closed-loop therapy (MiniMed 670G), participants wore actigraphy and completed sleep diaries for 14-day periods at stage end. During objectively measured sleep (actigraphy) with closed-loop versus sensor-augmented pump therapy, glucose time-in-range 70-180 mg/dL (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) was greater (90.3% vs. 78.7%, respectively; difference 8.2 percentage points [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.5 to 13.0]; P = 0.008), and there were fewer sensor hypoglycemia episodes (18 vs. 43, respectively; incident rate ratio 0.40 [95% CI 0.20 to 0.55]; P = 0.007). Sleep quality recorded daily was worse with closed-loop therapy (P = 0.006); Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index did not differ. There were 30% more system alarms during monitored sleep with closed-loop therapy (P < 0.001). First-generation closed-loop therapy has important glycemic benefits during sleep for older adults, with deterioration in some sleep quality measures. Sleep quality warrants prioritization and investigation during advancement of closed-loop technology.

Driving with Type 1 Diabetes: Real-World Evidence to Support Starting Glucose Level and Frequency of Monitoring During Journeys.

There is limited evidence supporting the recommendation that drivers with insulin-treated diabetes need to start journeys with glucose >90 mg/dL. Glucose levels of drivers with type 1 diabetes were monitored for 3 weeks using masked continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Eighteen drivers (median [IQR] age 40 [35, 51] years; 11 men) undertook 475 trips (duration 15 [13, 21] min). Hypoglycemia did not occur in any trip starting with glucose >90 mg/dL (92%; n = 436). Thirteen drivers recorded at least one trip (total n = 39) starting with glucose <90 mg/dL. Among these, driving glucose was <70 mg/dL in five drivers (38%) during 10 trips (26%). Among five drivers (28%), a ≥ 36 mg/dL drop was observed within 20 min of starting their journey. Journey duration was positively associated with maximum glucose change. These findings support current guidelines to start driving with glucose >90 mg/dL, and to be aware that glucose levels may change significantly within 20 min. A CGM-based, in-vehicle display could provide glucose information and alerts that are compatible with safe driving. Clinical Trial Registration number: ACTRN12617000520336.

Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery Versus Sensor-Augmented Pump Therapy in Older Adults With Type 1 Diabetes (ORACL): A Randomized, Crossover Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of closed-loop insulin delivery compared with sensor-augmented pump therapy among older adults with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This open-label, randomized (1:1), crossover trial compared 4 months of closed-loop versus sensor-augmented pump therapy. Eligible adults were aged ≥60 years, with type 1 diabetes (duration ≥10 years), using an insulin pump. The primary outcome was continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) time in range (TIR; 3.9-10.0 mmol/L). RESULTS: There were 30 participants (mean age 67 [SD 5] years), with median type 1 diabetes duration of 38 years (interquartile range [IQR] 20-47), randomized (n = 15 to each sequence); all completed the trial. The mean TIR was 75.2% (SD 6.3) during the closed-loop stage and 69.0% (9.1) during the sensor-augmented pump stage (difference of 6.2 percentage points [95% CI 4.4 to 8.0]; P < 0.0001). All prespecified CGM metrics favored closed loop over the sensor-augmented pump; benefits were greatest overnight. Closed loop reduced CGM time <3.9 mmol/L during 24 h/day by 0.5 percentage points (95% CI 0.3 to 1.1; P = 0.0005) and overnight by 0.8 percentage points (0.4 to 1.1; P < 0.0001) compared with sensor-augmented pump. There was no significant difference in HbA1c between closed-loop versus sensor-augmented pump stages (7.3% [IQR, 7.1-7.5] (56 mmol/mol [54-59]) vs. 7.5% [7.1-7.9] (59 mmol/mol [54-62]), respectively; P = 0.13). Three severe hypoglycemia events occurred during the closed-loop stage and two occurred during the sensor-augmented pump stage; no hypoglycemic events required hospitalization. One episode of diabetic ketoacidosis occurred during the sensor-augmented pump stage; no serious adverse events occurred during the closed-loop stage. CONCLUSIONS: Closed-loop therapy is an effective treatment option for older adults with long-duration type 1 diabetes, and no safety issues were identified. These older adults had higher TIR accompanied by less time below range during closed loop than during sensor-augmented pump therapy. Of particular clinical importance, closed loop reduced the time spent in hypoglycemic range overnight.

Meal-time glycaemia in adults with type 1 diabetes using multiple daily injections vs insulin pump therapy following carbohydrate-counting education and bolus calculator provision.

AIMS: To compare meal-time glycaemia in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) managed with multiple daily injections (MDI) vs. insulin pump therapy (IPT), using self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG), following diabetes education. METHODS: Adults with T1D received carbohydrate-counting education and a bolus calculator: MDI (Roche Aviva Expert) and IPT (pump bolus calculator). All then wore 3-weeks of masked-CGM (Enlite, Medtronic). Meal-times were assessed by two approaches: 1) Set time-blocks (breakfast 06:00-10:00hrs; lunch 11:00-15:00hrs; dinner 17:00-21:00hrs) and 2) Bolus-calculator carbohydrate entries signalling meal commencement. Post-meal masked-CGM time-in-range (TIR) 3.9-10.0 mmol/L was the primary outcome. RESULTS: MDI(n = 61) and IPT (n = 59) participants were equivalent in age, sex, diabetes duration and HbA1c. Median (IQR) education time provided did not differ (MDI: 1.1 h (0.75, 1.5) vs. IPT: 1.1 h (1.0, 2.0); p = 0.86). Overall, daytime (06:00-24:00hrs), lunch and dinner TIR did not differ for MDI vs. IPT participants but was greater for breakfast with IPT in both analyses with a mean difference of 12.8%, (95 CI 4.8, 20.9); p = 0.002 (time-block analysis). CONCLUSION: After diabetes education, MDI and IPT use were associated with similar day-time glycemia, though IPT users had significantly greater TIR during the breakfast period. With education, meal-time glucose levels are comparable with use of MDI vs. pumps.

Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of Personality Questionnaire: Factor Structure Based on CFA and ESEM, and Associations with ADHD.

Revised reinforcement sensitivity theory (r-RST) of personality is a major neuropsychological theory of motivation, emotion and personality. This paper presents the results of a study examining: (1) the factor structure of the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of Personality Questionnaire (RST-PQ) using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM); and (2) the relationships of the r-RST constructs in the RST-PQ with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptom groups of inattention (IA) and hyperactivity/impulsivity (HI). A total of 572 (Sample 1) and 309 (Sample 2) adults completed the RST-PQ. Participants in Sample 2 also completed a questionnaire measuring ADHD symptoms. Results revealed more support for the ESEM model with six factors than the CFA model. For both the ESEM and CFA models, both IA and HI symptom groups were associated positively with the RST-PQ constructs of behavioral inhibition system (BIS) and behavioral approach system (BAS) Impulsivity, with IA also associated negatively with the BAS-Goal-Drive Persistence. The theoretical implications of these findings for understanding the factor structure of the RST-PQ, and for ADHD (IA and HI) in terms of r-RST, are discussed.

Less Nocturnal Hypoglycemia but Equivalent Time in Range Among Adults with Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Pumps Versus Multiple Daily Injections.

Background: This prerandomization analysis from the Australian HCL-Adult trial (registration number: ACTRN12617000520336) compared masked continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics among adults using insulin pumps versus multiple daily injections (MDIs), who were all self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG). Methods: Adults with type 1 diabetes, using an insulin pump or MDIs without real-time CGM (and entering a trial of closed-loop technology), were eligible. MDI users were given an insulin dosage calculator. All participants received diabetes and carbohydrate-counting education, then wore masked CGM sensors for 3 weeks. Ethics Approval: HREC-D 088/16 Results: Adults using MDIs (n = 61) versus pump (n = 59) did not differ by age, sex, diabetes duration, insulin total daily dose, or HbA1c at baseline. After education, median (interquartile range) CGM time in range (TIR) 70-180 mg/dL (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) was 54% (47, 62) for those using MDIs and 56% (48, 66) for those using pump (P = 0.40). All CGM metrics were equivalent for 24 h/day for MDI and pump users. Overnight, those using MDIs (vs. pump) spent more time with glucose <54 mg/dL (<3.0 mmol/L): 1.4% (0.1, 5.1) versus 0.5% (0.0, 2.0), respectively (P = 0.012). They also had more CGM hypoglycemia episodes (121 vs. 54, respectively; incidence rate ratio [95% confidence interval] 2.48 [1.51, 4.06]; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Adults with type 1 diabetes using pumps versus MDIs in conjunction with SMBG experienced less nocturnal hypoglycemia, measured by masked CGM, after equivalent diabetes and dietary education in conjunction with insulin dosage calculator provision to all. However, both groups had equivalent TIR. This observation may reflect advantages afforded by flexibility in basal insulin delivery provided by pumps.

Six Months of Hybrid Closed-Loop Versus Manual Insulin Delivery With Fingerprick Blood Glucose Monitoring in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate glycemic and psychosocial outcomes with hybrid closed-loop (HCL) versus user-determined insulin dosing with multiple daily injections (MDI) or insulin pump (i.e., standard therapy for most adults with type 1 diabetes). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Adults with type 1 diabetes using MDI or insulin pump without continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) were randomized to 26 weeks of HCL (Medtronic 670G) or continuation of current therapy. The primary outcome was masked CGM time in range (TIR; 70-180 mg/dL) during the final 3 weeks. RESULTS: Participants were randomized to HCL (n = 61) or control (n = 59). Baseline mean (SD) age was 44.2 (11.7) years, HbA1c was 7.4% (0.9%) (57 [10] mmol/mol), 53% were women, and 51% used MDI. HCL TIR increased from (baseline) 55% (13%) to (26 weeks) 70% (10%) with the control group unchanged: (baseline) 55% (12%) and (26 weeks) 55% (13%) (difference 15% [95% CI 11, 19]; P < 0.0001). For HCL, HbA1c was lower (median [95% CI] difference -0.4% [-0.6, -0.2]; -4 mmol/mol [-7, -2]; P < 0.0001) and diabetes-specific positive well-being was higher (difference 1.2 [95% CI 0.4, 1.9]; P < 0.0048) without a deterioration in diabetes distress, perceived sleep quality, or cognition. Seventeen (9 device-related) versus 13 serious adverse events occurred in the HCL and control groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with type 1 diabetes, 26 weeks of HCL improved TIR, HbA1c, and their sense of satisfaction from managing their diabetes compared with those continuing with user-determined insulin dosing and self-monitoring of blood glucose. For most people living with type 1 diabetes globally, this trial demonstrates that HCL is feasible, acceptable, and advantageous.

What Do Adults with Type 2 Diabetes Want from the "Perfect" App? Results from the Second Diabetes MILES: Australia (MILES-2) Study.

Background: We investigated what Australian adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) want from the "perfect" diabetes self-management application. Methods: Adults with T2D completed a national online survey including an open-ended question: "If you were describing the perfect app to help you manage your diabetes, what would it do?" Qualitative responses were subjected to thematic analysis. Results: Of the 339 participants who provided usable responses, 153 (45%) were women, the mean age was 58 ± 10 years, and 139 participants (41%) managed their diabetes with insulin. Two primary themes emerged. First, participants expressed a desire for assistance with practical aspects of diabetes self-management to improve, and reduce the cognitive burden of, self-management; this included tracking and visualizing multiple sources of data, using data to inform automated, personalized coaching, reminders, and alarms, and automating upload and linking of data through connected devices. Second, they desired assistance with psychological and emotional aspects of diabetes self-management; this included ongoing encouragement and motivation, help with stress management or negative emotions, and complementing existing health care by facilitating interconnectivity with health professionals. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the clear desire of people with type 2 diabetes is for the "perfect app" to reduce not only the practical, but also the cognitive and emotional burden of diabetes self-management. They provide further evidence that understanding the desires of people living with diabetes needs to be the first step in app development to ensure that apps provide features, support, and benefits that people with diabetes value.