The Relative Effectiveness of Pumps Over MDI and Structured Education (REPOSE): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Introduction People with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) require insulin therapy to sustain life, and need optimal glycaemic control to prevent diabetic ketoacidosis and serious long-term complications. Insulin is generally administered using multiple daily injections but can also be delivered using an infusion pump (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion), a more costly option with benefits for some patients. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommend the use of pumps for patients with the greatest need, citing insufficient evidence to approve extension to a wider population. Far fewer UK adults use pumps than in comparable countries. Previous trials of pump therapy have been small and of short duration and failed to control for training in insulin adjustment. This paper describes the protocol for a large randomised controlled trial comparing pump therapy with multiple daily injections, where both groups are provided with high-quality structured education. Methods and analysis A multicentre, parallel group, cluster randomised controlled trial among 280 adults with T1DM. All participants attended the week-long dose adjustment for normal eating (DAFNE) structured education course, and receive either multiple daily injections or pump therapy for 2 years. The trial incorporates a detailed mixed-methods psychosocial evaluation and cost-effectiveness analysis. The primary outcome will be the change in glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) at 24 months in those participants whose baseline HbA1c is at or above 7.5% (58 mmol/mol). The key secondary outcome will be the proportion of participants reaching the NICE target of an HbA1c of 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) or less at 24 months. Ethics and dissemination The protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Committee North West, Liverpool East and received Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) clinical trials authorisation. Each participating centre gave National Health Service R&D approval. We shall disseminate study findings to study participants and through peer reviewed publications and conference presentations, including lay user groups. Trial registration number ISRCTN 61215213

Barriers and enablers to self-titration of insulin in adults with type 2 diabetes: a qualitative study

Aims The aim of this study was to identify the barriers and enablers to effective insulin selftitration in type 2 diabetes. Methods A qualitative semi-structured interview approach was employed. Questions were structured according to the Theoretical Domains Framework, which outlines 14 domains that can act as barriers and enablers to changing behaviour. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The data were coded according to the 14 domains, belief statements were created within each domain and a frequency count of the most reported barriers and enablers were then calculated. Analyses were conducted by two researchers, and discrepancies agreed with a third researcher. Results Eighteen adults with type 2 diabetes took part in an interview. A majority were South Asian (n=8), men (n=12), on average age 61 years old. Average duration of diabetes was 16 years and time on insulin 9 years. Inter-rater reliability for each of the domains varied (29%-100%). The most frequently reported domains were Social Influence and Beliefs about Consequences; the least frequently reported were Optimism and Reinforcement. Participants reported receiving support to self-titrate from a range of sources. Self-titrating was perceived to have a range of both positive and negative consequences, as was not titrating. Conclusions The findings highlight that participants experienced a range of barriers and enablers when attempting to self-titrate. Improved education and training when initiating insulin treatment among adults with type 2 diabetes, and throughout their journey on insulin therapy could help people identify and address these barriers in order to optimise self-titration. Novelty statement • This study is the first to comprehensively explore the reasons people with insulintreated type 2 diabetes struggle to self-titrate their insulin, using an established theoretical framework. • Important factors in facilitating self-titration were support from healthcare professionals and family members, having a target blood glucose reading and strategies to achieve this. • Barriers to self-titrating included difficulties experienced when at work or on holiday and concerns about the consequences of an increasing insulin dose. Holding strong but erroneous intentions to self-titrate, suggested a lack of knowledge about self-titration algorithms. • Providing educational resources and training when initiating insulin treatment in type 2 diabetes and throughout treatment, in order to address these barriers and enhance these facilitators is vital

DAFNE: authors' response to electronic letters from 5th October to 22nd October 2002

The rapid responses received following the publication of the DAFNE trial reflect the controversy surrounding the current inadequate management of Type 1 diabetes. [1] While it is true that the approach is not novel (Ullman, 5th Oct; Black,6th Oct; Reed, 9th Oct; Chaufan, 12th October, Cohen, 22nd Oct), it is new to the UK. The biomedical benefits of this intensified approach had been known for some time in parts of Europe [2,3] but is was unclear whether these could be transferred to a British health care setting. furthermore, the impact on quality of life was unknown, as psychological outcomes were not measured in the early German work

Developing a questionnaire to determine the impact of self-management in diabetes: giving people with diabetes a voice

Background The prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM) is increasing dramatically, placing considerable financial burden on the healthcare budget of each country. Patient self-management is crucial for the control of blood glucose, which largely determines the chances of developing diabetes-related complications. Self-management interventions vary widely, and a method is required for assessing the impact of self-management. This paper describes the development of a questionnaire intended for use to measure the impact of self-management in diabetes. Methods An iterative development process was undertaken to identify the attributes of self-management using 5 steps. First, a literature review was undertaken to identify and understand themes relating to self-management of DM to inform a topic guide. Second, the topic guide was further refined following consultation with a Patient and Public Involvement group. Third, the topic guide was used to inform semi-structured interviews with patients with Type 1 DM (T1DM) and Type 2 DM (T2DM) to identify how self-management of DM affects individuals. Fourth, the research team considered potential attributes alongside health attributes from an existing measure (Diabetes Health Profile, DHP) to produce an instrument reflecting both health and self-management outcomes simultaneously. Finally, a draft instrument was tested in a focus group to determine the wording and acceptability. Results Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 32 patients with T1DM and T2DM. Eight potential attributes were identified: fear/worry/anxiety, guilt, stress, stigma, hassle, control, freedom, and feeling supported. Four of these self-management attributes were selected with four health attributes (mood, worry about hypos (hypoglycaemic episodes), vitality and social limitations) to produce the Health and Self-Management in Diabetes (HASMID v1) questionnaire. Conclusions HASMID v1 is a short questionnaire that contains eight items each with four response levels to measure the impact of self-management in diabetes for both T1DM and T2DM. The measure was developed using a mixed-methods approach that involved semi-structured interviews with people with diabetes. The measure has high face validity. Ongoing research is being undertaken to assess the validity of this questionnaire for measuring the impact of self-management interventions in economic evaluation

Recent Updates on Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus Management for Clinicians

Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is a chronic autoimmune condition that requires life-long administration of insulin. Optimal management of T1DM entails a good knowledge and understanding of this condition both by the physician and the patient. Recent introduction of novel insulin preparations, technological advances in insulin delivery and glucose monitoring, such as continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and continuous glucose monitoring and improved understanding of the detrimental effects of hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia offer new opportunities and perspectives in T1DM management. Evidence from clinical trials suggests an important role of structured patient education. Our efforts should be aimed at improved metabolic control with concomitant reduction of hypoglycaemia. Despite recent advances, these goals are not easy to achieve and can put significant pressure on people with T1DM. The approach of physicians should therefore be maximally supportive. In this review, we provide an overview of the recent advances in T1DM management focusing on novel insulin preparations, ways of insulin administration and glucose monitoring and the role of metformin or sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors in T1DM management. We then discuss our current understanding of the effects of hypoglycaemia on human body and strategies aimed at mitigating the risks associated with hypoglycaemia

Self-management support interventions to reduce health care utilisation without compromising outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: There is increasing interest in the role of �self-management� interventions to support the management of long-term conditions in health service settings. Self-management may include patient education, support for decision-making, self-monitoring and psychological and social support. Self-management support has potential to improve the efficiency of health services by reducing other forms of utilisation (such as primary care or hospital use), but a shift to self-management may lead to negative outcomes, such as patients who feel more anxious about their health, are less able to cope, or who receive worse quality of care, all of which may impact on their health and quality of life. We sought to determine which models of self-management support are associated with significant reductions in health services utilisation without compromising outcomes among patients with long-term conditions. Methods: We used systematic review with meta-analysis. We included randomised controlled trials in patients with long-term conditions which included self-management support interventions and reported measures of service utilisation or costs, as well as measures of health outcomes (standardized disease specific quality of life, generic quality of life, or depression/anxiety).We searched multiple databases (CENTRAL, CINAHL, Econlit, EMBASE, HEED, MEDLINE, NHS EED and PsycINFO) and the reference lists of published reviews. We calculated effects sizes for both outcomes and costs, and presented the results in permutation plots, as well as conventional meta-analyses. Results: We included 184 studies. Self-management support was associated with small but significant improvements in health outcomes, with the best evidence of effectiveness in patients with diabetic, respiratory, cardiovascular and mental health conditions. Only a minority of self-management support interventions reported reductions in health care utilisation in association with decrements in health. Evidence for reductions in utilisation associated with self-management support was strongest in respiratory and cardiovascular problems. Studies at higher risk of bias were more likely to report benefits. Conclusions: Self-management support interventions can reduce health service utilization without compromising patient health outcomes, although effects were generally small, and the evidence was strongest in respiratory and cardiovascular disorders. Further work is needed to determine which components of self-management support are most effective