Current provision and HCP experiences of remote care delivery and diabetes technology training for people with type 1 diabetes in the UK during the Covid‐19 pandemic

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has led to the rapid implementation of remote care delivery in type 1 diabetes. We studied current modes of care delivery, healthcare professional experiences and impact on insulin pump training in type 1 diabetes care in the United Kingdom (UK).MethodsThe UK Diabetes Technology Network designed a 48-question survey aimed at healthcare professionals providing care in type 1 diabetes.ResultsOne hundred and forty-three healthcare professionals (48% diabetes physicians, 52% diabetes educators and 88% working in adult services) from approximately 75 UK centres (52% university hospitals, 46% general and community hospitals), responded to the survey. Telephone consultations were the main modality of care delivery. There was a higher reported time taken for video consultations versus telephone (p ConclusionThis survey highlights UK healthcare professional experiences of remote care delivery. While supportive of virtual care models, a number of factors highlighted, especially patient digital literacy, need to be addressed to improve virtual care delivery and device training.</div

sj-docx-1-dst-10.1177_19322968221137335 – Supplemental material for Insulin Pumps and Hybrid Close Loop Systems Within Hospital: A Scoping Review and Practical Guidance From the Joint British Diabetes Societies for Inpatient Care

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-dst-10.1177_19322968221137335 for Insulin Pumps and Hybrid Close Loop Systems Within Hospital: A Scoping Review and Practical Guidance From the Joint British Diabetes Societies for Inpatient Care by Parizad Avari, Alistair Lumb, Daniel Flanagan, Gerry Rayman, Shivani Misra, Pratik Choudhary and Ketan Dhatariya in Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology</p

variation in the current use of technology to support diabetes management in UK hospitals: Results of a survey of healthcare professionals

Background: There has been a significant increase in the use of wearable diabetes technologies in the outpatient setting over recent years, but this has not consistently translated into inpatient use. Methods: An online survey was undertaken to understand the current use of technology to support inpatient diabetes care in the United Kingdom. Results: Responses were received from 42 different organizations representing 104 hospitals across the United Kingdom. Significant variation was found between organizations in the use of technology to support safe, effective inpatient diabetes care. Benefits of the use of technology were reported, and areas of good practice identified. Conclusion: Technology supports good inpatient diabetes care, but there is currently variation in its use. Guidance has been developed which should drive improvements in the use of technology and hence improvements in the safety and effectiveness of inpatient diabetes care. Key recommendations include implementation of this guidance (especially for continuous glucose monitoring), ensuring specialist support is available for the use of wearable diabetes technology in hospital, optimizing information sharing across the health care system, and making full use of data from networked glucose and ketone meters.</p

How Can Point-of-Care Technologies Support In-Hospital Diabetes Care?

People with diabetes admitted to hospital are at risk of diabetes related complications including hypoglycaemia and diabetic ketoacidosis. Point-of-care (POC) tests undertaken at the patient bedside, for glucose, ketones, and other analytes, are a key component of monitoring people with diabetes, to ensure safety. POC tests implemented with a quality framework are critical to ensuring accuracy and veracity of results and preventing erroneous clinical decision making. POC results can be used for self-management of glucose levels in those well-enough and/or by healthcare professionals to identify unsafe levels. Connectivity of POC results to electronic health records further offers the possibility of utilising these results proactively to identify patients ‘at risk’ in real-time and for audit purposes. In this article, the key considerations when implementing POC tests for diabetes in-patient management are reviewed and potential to drive improvements using networked glucose and ketone measurements are discussed. In summary, new advances in POC technology should allow people with diabetes and the teams looking after them whilst in hospital to integrate to provide safe and effective care

Hybrid Closed-loop therapy: Where are we in 2021?

Hybrid closed‐loop systems are characterized by the coexistence of algorithm‐driven automated insulin delivery combined with manual mealtime boluses. Used correctly, these insulin delivery systems offer better glucose control and reduced risk of hypoglycaemia and represent the most advanced form of insulin delivery available for people with type 1 diabetes. The aim of this paper was to compare the currently available commercial hybrid closed‐loop systems in the UK: the Medtronic 670G/780G, Tandem t:slim X2 Control IQ and CamAPS FX systems. The Medtronic 670G/780G systems use Guardian 3 sensor (7‐day use, two to four calibrations per day), while Tandem and CamAPS systems use the calibration‐free Dexcom G6 sensor (10 days). The CamAPS system is available as an android app, whereas the other two systems have the algorithm embedded in the insulin pump. During pivotal studies, depending on the study population and baseline glycated haemoglobin level, these systems achieve a time spent in the target range 3.9 to 10 mmol/L (70 to 180 mg/dL) of 65% to 76% with low burden of hypoglycaemia. All three systems allow a higher glucose target for announced exercise, while the Tandem system offers an additional night‐time tighter target. The CamAPS system offers fully customizable glucose targets and is the only system licensed for use during pregnancy. Additional education is required for both users and healthcare professionals to harness the best performance from these systems as well as to troubleshoot when “automode exits” occur. We provide consensus recommendations to develop pragmatic pathways to guide patients, clinicians and commissioners in making informed decisions on the appropriate use of the diabetes technology

Protocol for the Diabetes Technology Network UK and Association of British Clinical Diabetologists' closed-loop insulin delivery audit programme

Background: The Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) closed-loop audit aims to capture real-world out- comes from all who use hybrid closed-loop (HCL) insulin delivery systems in routine clinical care. In addition, NHS England has announced a pilot programme this year to expand access to HCL insulin delivery systems to people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) who are already using pump therapy and FreeStyle Libre with a HbA1c ≥ 69mmol/mol (≥ 8.5%). This group is often underrepresented in current randomised control trial evidence and, vitally, the planned audit will capture their data. Methods: The ABCD nationwide audit programme has Caldicott guardian approval and has also been approved by Confidentiality Advisory Group (CAG). Clinical teams collect anonymised user data using a secure online tool. Baseline characteristics and routinely collected outcome data at follow-up will include: assessment of glycaemic outcomes ( HbA1c, time in range, time below range); patient-reported outcome measures (Gold score and diabetes-related distress); and frequency of resource utilisation (hospital admissions, paramedic callouts, diabetic ketoacidosis [DKA] and severe hypoglycaemia). Discussion: The ABCD closed-loop audit will produce an inde- pendent real-world dataset of outcomes in closed-loop users across multiple systems. These data will provide insight into the real-world benefits and challenges of HCL systems used within the NHS in England.</p

Association of British Clinical Diabetologists, Diabetes Technology Network UK and Association of Children's Diabetes Clinicians Survey of UK Healthcare Professional Attitudes Towards Open-Source Automated Insulin Delivery Systems

Introduction: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems can enable improved glycaemic outcomes with reduced mental burden. Open-source AID (OS-AID) systems overcome some of the developmental and access barriers enabling a wider use of these systems. Limited data are available on healthcare professional (HCP) opinions and current practice regarding these systems. The aim of this survey was to gain insight into HCP perceptions and practices around OS-AID. Methods: This survey was developed collaboratively with OS-AID users and distributed to adult and children’s teams, using an online survey tool. Results were received between February and April 2019. Responses were assessed using simple descriptive statistics with analyses stratified by respondent characteristics. Results: 317 responses were obtained from a range of HCPs in both adult and paediatric services. Key results include: HCP perception of OS-AID as “risky in the wrong hands” (43%); 91% felt uncomfortable initiating discussions around OS-AID because of lack of regulation (67%) and/or their own lack of knowledge (63%). Half of HCPs (47%) reported that they would choose OS-AID if they themselves had type 1 diabetes. Conclusions: HCPs are generally supportive of OS-AID users but many feel uncomfortable with the technicalities of the systems given the lack of approval. Knowledge around the use of these systems was limited. Re-assessment of HCP perceptions should be performed in the future given the evolving landscape of diabetes technology, recent consensus statements and emerging ethical and legal perspectives

UK's Association of British Clinical Diabetologist's Diabetes Technology Network (ABCD-DTN): Best practice guide for hybrid closed-loop therapy

This best practice guide is written with the aim of providing an overview of current hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems in use within the United Kingdom's (UK) National Health Service (NHS) and to provide education and advice for their management on both an individual and clinical service level. The environment of diabetes technology, and particularly HCL systems, is rapidly evolving. The past decade has seen unprecedented advances in the development of HCL systems. These systems improve glycaemic outcomes and reduce the burden of treatment for people with type 1 diabetes (pwT1D). It is anticipated that access to these systems will increase in England as a result of updates in National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance providing broader support for the use of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for pwT1D. NICE is currently undertaking multiple-technology appraisal into HCL systems. Based on experience from centres involved in supporting advanced technologies as well as from the recent NHS England HCL pilot, this guide is intended to provide healthcare professionals with UK expert consensus on the best practice for initiation, optimisation and ongoing management of HCL therapy.</p

Time in range following flash glucose monitoring: Relationship with glycaemic control, diabetes-related distress and resource utilisation in the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists national audit

Aims: The aim of this study was to understand the relationship between time in range (TIR) achieved using the isCGM with changes in glycaemic control, diabetes-related distress (DRD) and resource utilisation in people living with diabetes. Methods: Clinicians from 106 National Health System (NHS) UK hospitals submitted isCGM user baseline and follow-up data in a web-based tool held within the UK NHS network. Linear regression analysis was used to identify the relationship between follow-up glucose TIR (3.9–10 mmol/L) categories (TIR% 50–70 and TIR% >70) with change in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), DRD and Gold score (measure of hypoglycaemia unawareness, where a score ≥4 suggests impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia). Results: Of 16,427 participants, 1241 had TIR follow-up data available. In this cohort, the mean TIR was 44.8% (±22.5). With the use of isCGM, at 7.9 months mean follow-up, improvements were observed in HbA1c (−6.9 [13.5] mmol/mol, p 70 with a −14 mmol/mol (±0.8, p 70 was associated with no hospital admissions due to hypoglycaemia, hyperglycaemia/diabetic ketoacidosis, and a 60% reduction in the paramedic callouts and 77% reduction in the incidence of severe hypoglycaemia. Conclusion: In a large cohort of UK isCGM users, we demonstrate a significant association of higher TIR% with improvement in HbA1c, hypoglycaemia awareness, DRD and resource utilisation

Real-world outcomes of Omnipod DASH system use in people with type 1 diabetes: Evidence from the Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) study

AimsTo evaluate real-world outcomes in people with Type 1 Diabetes (PwT1D) initiated on Omnipod DASH® Insulin Management System.MethodsAnonymized clinical data were submitted to a secure web-based tool within the National Health Service network. Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), sensor-derived glucometrics, total daily dose of insulin (TDD), and patient-reported outcome changes between baseline and follow-up were assessed. Individuals were classified to "new-to-pump" (switched from multiple daily injections) and "established-on-pump" (switched from a tethered insulin pump) groups.Results276 individuals from 11 centers [66.7 % female; 92 % White British; median age 41 years (IQR 20-50); diabetes duration 20 years (IQR 11-31); 49.3 % within "new-to-pump" group] were included. Baseline HbA1c was 8.0 ± 1.3 % (64 ± 14 mmol/mol). At follow-up [3 years (IQR 1.5-3.2)], HbA1c reduced by 0.3 % [(3 mmol/mol); p = 0.002] across the total population, 0.4 % [(5 mmol/mol); p = 0.001] in those "new-to-pump" and remained unchanged in those "established-on-pump". TDD decreased in the "new-to-pump" cohort (baseline:44.9 ± 21.0units vs follow-up:38.1 ± 15.4units, p = 0.002). Of those asked, 141/143 (98.6 %) stated Omnipod DASH had a positive impact on quality of life.ConclusionsOmnipod DASH was associated with improvements in HbA1c in PwT1D "new-to-pump" and maintained previous HbA1c levels in those "established-on-pump". User satisfaction in all groups and TDD reduction in those "new-to-pump" were reported