8 research outputs found

    Comparing Glucose Outcomes Following Face-to-Face and Remote Initiation of Flash Glucose Monitoring in People Living With Diabetes.

    Full text link
    Background: When launched, FreeStyle Libre (FSL; a flash glucose monitor) onboarding was mainly conducted face-to-face. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated a change to online starts with patients directed to online videos such as Diabetes Technology Network UK for education. We conducted an audit to evaluate glycemic outcomes in people who were onboarded face-to-face versus those who were onboarded remotely and to determine the impact of ethnicity and deprivation on those outcomes. Methods: People living with diabetes who started using FSL between January 2019 and April 2022, had their mode of onboarding recorded and had at least 90 days of data in LibreView with >70% data completion were included in the audit. Glucose metrics (percent time in ranges) and engagement statistics (previous 90-day averages) were obtained from LibreView. Differences between glucose variables and onboarding methods were compared using linear models, adjusting for ethnicity, deprivation, sex, age, percent active (where appropriate), and duration of FSL use. Results: In total, 935 participants (face-to-face 44% [n = 413]; online 56% [n = 522]) were included. There were no significant differences in glycemic or engagement indices between onboarding methods and ethnicities, but the most deprived quintile had significantly lower percent active time (b = −9.20, P = .002) than the least deprived quintile. Conclusions: Online videos as an onboarding method can be used without significant differences in glucose and engagement metrics. The most deprived group within the audit population had lower engagement metrics, but this did not translate into differences in glucose metrics.</p

    Sensing interstitial glucose to nudge active lifestyles (SIGNAL): feasibility of combining novel self-monitoring technologies for persuasive behaviour change

    Full text link
    Introduction Increasing physical activity (PA) reduces the risk of developing diabetes, highlighting the role of preventive medicine approaches. Changing lifestyle behaviours is difficult and is often predicated on the assumption that individuals are willing to change their lifestyles today to reduce the risk of developing disease years or even decades later. The self-monitoring technologies tested in this study will present PA feedback in real time, parallel with acute physiological data. Presenting the immediate health benefits of being more physically active may help enact change by observing the immediate consequences of that behaviour. The present study aims to assess user engagement with the self-monitoring technologies in individuals at moderate-to-high risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Methods and analysis 45 individuals with a moderate-to-high risk, aged ≄40 years old and using a compatible smartphone, will be invited to take part in a 7-week protocol. Following 1 week of baseline measurements, participants will be randomised into one of three groups: group 1 -glucose feedback followed by biobehavioural feedback (glucose plus PA); group 2 - PA feedback followed by biobehavioural feedback; group 3 - biobehavioural feedback. A PA monitor and a flash glucose monitor will be deployed during the intervention. Participants will wear both devices throughout the intervention but blinded to feedback depending on group allocation. The primary outcome is the level of participant engagement and will be assessed by device use and smartphone usage. Feasibility will be assessed by the practicality of the technology and screening for diabetes risk. Semistructured interviews will be conducted to explore participant experiences using the technologies. Trial registration number ISRCTN17545949. Registered on 15/05/2017

    Differential associations of risk factors with severe and non‐severe hypoglycaemia: the Hypoglycaemia Assessment Tool prospective observational study in people with insulin‐treated type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes

    Full text link
    Aim: To assess the differential association of risk factors with severe and non‐severe hypoglycaemia.Materials and Methods:The Hypoglycaemia Assessment Tool study evaluated the risk of hypoglycaemia over a 4‐week period in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) on insulin in 24 countries. Negative binomial regressions were applied to examine the associations of several risk factors with severe and non‐severe hypoglycaemia.Results: The median age was 41 years in 5949 patients with T1D and 62 years in 12 914 patients with T2D. The 4‐week rates of non‐severe hypoglycaemic were 5.57 and 1.40 episodes per person in T1D and T2D, respectively; the corresponding rates for severe hypoglycaemia were 0.94 and 0.30. The excess risk was 42% higher for severe than non‐severe hypoglycaemia in females versus males with T2D; 27% higher in patients with T2D with versus without a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM); and 47% lower in patients with T1D with versus without an insulin pump. The excess risk also differed across geographical areas and was marginally lower for severe than non‐severe hypoglycaemia for higher values of HbA1c in patients with T2D. Associations with severity of hypoglycaemia were not different for age, diabetes and insulin therapy duration, previous hypoglycaemic episodes and insulin regimen.Conclusions: The risk of severe versus non‐severe hypoglycaemia differs in patients with T1D and T2D; sex, the use of a CGM and insulin pump, and geographical areas were differently associated with one type of hypoglycaemia than the other.</p

    Examining the Use of Glucose and Physical Activity Self-Monitoring Technologies in Individuals at Moderate to High Risk of Developing Type 2 Diabetes: Randomized Trial

    Full text link
    Background: Self-monitoring of behavior (namely, diet and physical activity) and physiology (namely, glucose) has been shown to be effective in type 2 diabetes (T2D) and prediabetes prevention. By combining self-monitoring technologies, the acute physiological consequences of behaviors could be shown, prompting greater consideration to physical activity levels today, which impact the risk of developing diabetes years or decades later. However, until recently, commercially available technologies have not been able to show individuals the health benefits of being physically active. Objective: The objective of this study was to examine the usage, feasibility, and acceptability of behavioral and physiological self-monitoring technologies in individuals at risk of developing T2D. Methods: A total of 45 adults aged .40 years and at moderate to high risk of T2D were recruited to take part in a 3-arm feasibility trial. Each participant was provided with a behavioral (Fitbit Charge 2) and physiological (FreeStyle Libre flash glucose monitor) monitor for 6 weeks, masked according to group allocation. Participants were allocated to glucose feedback (4 weeks) followed by glucose and physical activity (biobehavioral) feedback (2 weeks; group 1), physical activity feedback (4 weeks) followed by biobehavioral feedback (2 weeks; group 2), or biobehavioral feedback (6 weeks; group 3). Participant usage (including time spent on the apps and number of glucose scans) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the feasibility (including recruitment and number of sensor displacements) and acceptability (including monitor wear time) of the intervention. Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted at the 6-week follow-up appointment. Results: For usage, time spent on the Fitbit and FreeStyle Libre apps declined over the 6 weeks for all groups. Of the FreeStyle Libre sensor scans conducted by participants, 17% (1798/10,582) recorded rising or falling trends in glucose, and 24% (13/45) of participants changed .1 of the physical activity goals. For feasibility, 49% (22/45) of participants completed the study using the minimum number of FreeStyle Libre sensors, and a total of 41 sensors were declared faulty or displaced. For acceptability, participants wore the Fitbit for 40.1 (SD 3.2) days, and 20% (9/45) of participants and 53% (24/45) of participants were prompted by email to charge or sync the Fitbit, respectively. Interviews unearthed participant perceptions on the study design by suggesting refinements to the eligibility criteria and highlighting important issues about the usability, wearability, and features of the technologies. Conclusions: Individuals at risk of developing T2D engaged with wearable digital health technologies providing behavioral and physiological feedback. Modifications are required to both the study and to commercially available technologies to maximize the chances of sustained usage and behavior change. The study and intervention were feasible to conduct and acceptable to most participants. Trial Registration: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) 17545949; isrctn.com/ISRCTN17545949

    The impact of socioeconomic factors, social determinants, and ethnicity on the utilization of glucose sensor technology among persons with diabetes mellitus: a narrative review

    Full text link
    Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) usage has been shown to improve disease outcomes in people living with diabetes by facilitating better glycemic management. However, previous research has suggested that access to these devices can be influenced by nonmedical factors such as socioeconomic status and ethnicity. It is critical that equitable access to CGM devices is ensured as people from those groups experience poorer diabetes-related health outcomes. In this narrative review, we provide an overview of the various healthcare systems worldwide and how socioeconomic status, social context, and ethnicity shape device usage and the associated health outcomes. In general, we found that having a lower socioeconomic status and belonging to an ethnic minority group negatively impact CGM usage. While financial means proved to be an important mediator in this process, it was not the sole driver as disparities persisted even after adjustment for factors such as income and insurance status. Recommendations to increase CGM usage for people of a lower socioeconomic status and ethnic minorities include increasing the availability of financial, administrative, and educational support, for both patients and healthcare providers. However, recommendations will vary due to local country-specific circumstances, such as reimbursement criteria and healthcare ecosystems.</p

    The impact of socioeconomic factors, social determinants, and ethnicity on the utilization of glucose sensor technology among persons with diabetes mellitus: a narrative review

    Full text link
    Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) usage has been shown to improve disease outcomes in people living with diabetes by facilitating better glycemic management. However, previous research has suggested that access to these devices can be influenced by nonmedical factors such as socioeconomic status and ethnicity. It is critical that equitable access to CGM devices is ensured as people from those groups experience poorer diabetes-related health outcomes. In this narrative review, we provide an overview of the various healthcare systems worldwide and how socioeconomic status, social context, and ethnicity shape device usage and the associated health outcomes. In general, we found that having a lower socioeconomic status and belonging to an ethnic minority group negatively impact CGM usage. While financial means proved to be an important mediator in this process, it was not the sole driver as disparities persisted even after adjustment for factors such as income and insurance status. Recommendations to increase CGM usage for people of a lower socioeconomic status and ethnic minorities include increasing the availability of financial, administrative, and educational support, for both patients and healthcare providers. However, recommendations will vary due to local country-specific circumstances, such as reimbursement criteria and healthcare ecosystems.</p

    A more intense examination of the intensity of physical activity in people living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Insights from threshold-free markers of activity intensity

    Full text link
    Physical activity (PA) intensity of people living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is typically evaluated using intensity thresholds developed in younger, healthier populations with greater exercise capacity and free from respiratory symptoms. This study therefore compared (i) PA differences between COPD and non-COPD controls using both traditional intensity thresholds and threshold-free metrics that represent the volume and intensity of the whole PA profile, and (ii) explored the influence of exercise capacity on observed differences. Moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), average acceleration (proxy for volume, mg) and intensity distribution of activity were calculated for 76 individuals with COPD and 154 non-COPD controls from wrist-worn ActiGraph accelerometry. PA profiles representing the minimum intensity (acceleration, mg) during the most active accumulated 5–960 min were plotted. Estimated VO2peak and relative intensity were derived from the incremental shuttle walk test distance. Compared to the non-COPD control group, individuals with COPD recorded fewer MVPA minutes (59 vs. 83 min/day), lower overall waking activity (29.1 vs. 36.4 mg) and a poorer waking intensity distribution (−2.73 vs. −2.57). Individuals with COPD also recorded a lower absolute intensity (acceleration, mg) for their most active 5–960 min, but higher intensity relative to their estimated exercise capacity derived from the ISWT. People with COPD have a lower volume and absolute intensity of PA than controls but perform PA at a higher relative intensity. There is a need to move away from absolute intensity thresholds, and towards personalised or relative-intensity thresholds, to reflect reduced exercise capacity in COPD populations

    A Case for Unifying Accelerometry-Derived Movement Behaviors and Tests of Exercise Capacity for the Assessment of Relative Physical Activity Intensity.

    Full text link
    Albert Einstein taught us that "everything is relative." People's experience of physical activity (PA) is no different, with "relativism" particularly pertinent to the perception of intensity. Markers of absolute and relative intensities of PA have different but complimentary utilities, with absolute intensity considered best for PA guideline adherence and relative intensity for personalized exercise prescription. Under the paradigm of exercise and PA as medicine, our Technical Note proposes a method of synchronizing accelerometry with the incremental shuttle walking test to facilitate description of the intensity of the free-living PA profile in absolute and relative terms. Our approach is able to generate and distinguish "can do" or "cannot do" (based on exercise capacity) and "does do" or "does not do" (based on relative intensity PA) classifications in a chronic respiratory disease population, facilitating the selection of potential appropriate individually tailored interventions. By synchronizing direct assessments of exercise capacity and PA, clearer insights into the intensity of PA performed during everyday life can be gleaned. We believe the next steps are as follows: (1) to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of using relative and absolute intensities in combination to personalize the approach, (2) to determine its sensitivity to change following interventions (eg, exercise-based rehabilitation), and (3) to explore the use of this approach in healthier populations and in other long-term conditions
    corecore