Diabetes management intervention studies: lessons learned from two studies.

INTRODUCTION: Several clinical studies investigated improvements of patient outcomes due to diabetes management interventions. However, chronic disease management is intricate with complex multifactorial behavior patterns. Such studies thus have to be well designed in order to allocate all observed effects to the defined intervention and to exclude effects of other confounders as well as possible. This article aims to provide challenges in interpreting diabetes management intervention studies and suggests approaches for optimizing study implementation and for avoiding pitfalls based on current experiences. MAIN BODY: Lessons from the STeP and ProValue studies demonstrated the difficulty in medical device studies that rely on behavioral changes in intervention group patients. To successfully engage patients, priority should be given to health care professionals being engaged, operational support in technical issues being available, and adherence being assessed in detail. Another difficulty is to avoid contamination of the control group with the intervention; therefore, strict allocation concealment should be maintained. However, randomization and blinding are not always possible. A limited effect size due to improvements regarding clinical endpoints in the control group is often caused by the Hawthorne effect. Improvements in the control group can also be caused with increased attention paid to the subjects. In order to reduce improvements in the control group, it is essential to identify the specific reasons and adjust study procedures accordingly. A pilot phase is indispensable for this. Another option is to include a third study arm to control for enhanced standard of care and study effects. Furthermore, retrospective data collection could be a feasible option. Adaptive study designs might reduce the necessity of a separate pilot study and combine the exploratory and confirmatory stages of an investigation in one single study. CONCLUSION: There are several aspects to consider in medical device studies when using interventions that rely on changes in behavior to achieve an effective implementation and significant study results. Improvements in the control group may reduce effect sizes and limit statistical significance; therefore, alternatives to the traditional randomized controlled trials may be considered.

A novel approach for obtaining 12-lead electrocardiograms in horses.

BACKGROUND: In equine medicine, 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECGs) rarely are used, which may in part be a result of shortcomings in the existing guidelines for obtaining 12-lead ECGs in horses. The guidelines recommend placing the limb leads on the extremities, which is inappropriate because the ventricular mean electrical axis is then perpendicular to the limb leads, leading to large variations in ECG configuration even among healthy horses. From an electrophysiological point of view, the leads instead should be parallel to the electrical axis to minimize variability. OBJECTIVE: Develop an improved method for obtaining 12-lead ECGs in horses based on electrophysiology and cardiac electrical vectors relevant to horses. ANIMALS: Thirty-five healthy Standardbred horses. METHODS: Two ECGs obtained at rest; 1 ECG with the electrodes placed according to the method developed in the present study, the Copenhagen method, and 1 ECG following existing guidelines. RESULTS: In the Copenhagen method, we repositioned the limb electrodes to the thorax to better capture the electrical activity of the heart. Variation in the mean electrical axis decreased dramatically with the Copenhagen method (SD decreased from 24.6° to 1.6°, P < .001). Consequently, this new method provided stable ECGs with repeatable configurations. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: With this novel method, the ECG is recorded with respect to the electric axis to fully realize the potential of 12-lead ECG in horses. The Copenhagen method delivered more consistent and reliable ECG recordings compared to existing guidelines. The Copenhagen method potentially allows for expanded use of 12-lead ECGs in equine medicine.

Open Source Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery Systems: A Clash of Cultures or Merging of Diverse Approaches?

Biomedical outcomes for people with diabetes remain suboptimal for many. Psychosocial care in diabetes does not fare any better. "Artificial pancreas" (also known as "closed-loop" and "automated insulin delivery") systems present a promising therapeutic option for people with diabetes (PWD)-simultaneously improving glycemic outcomes, reducing the burden of self-management, and improving health-related quality of life. In recent years there has emerged a growing movement of PWD innovators rallying behind the mantra #WeAreNotWaiting, developing "do-it-yourself artificial pancreas systems (DIY APS)." Self-reported results by DIY APS users show improved metabolic outcomes such as impressive stability of glucose profiles, significant reduction of A1c, and more time within their glycemic target range. However, the benefits remain unclear for the broader population of PWD beyond these highly engaged, highly tech-savvy users willing and able to engage in the demands of building and maintaining their DIY APS. We discuss the challenges faced by key stakeholder groups in terms of potential collaboration and open debate of these challenges.

Use of a Novel, Remotely Connected Diabetes Management System Is Associated with Increased Treatment Satisfaction, Reduced Diabetes Distress, and Improved Glycemic Control in Individuals with Insulin-Treated Diabetes: First Results from the Personal Diabetes Management Study.

BACKGROUND: The ability to automatically transfer data to clinicians and receive timely guidance in therapy adjustments through remote and in-office consults can positively impact patients' perceptions about quality of care, which is positively associated with clinical outcomes. We assessed the impact of using the Accu-Chek Connect diabetes management system on treatment satisfaction, diabetes distress, and glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes and insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This 6-month, prospective, multicenter, single-arm study assessed the impact of using the system on treatment satisfaction and glycemic control among 87 adults with insulin-treated diabetes (multiple daily insulin injections and basal only), with 8.8% ± 1.6% glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) at baseline. The Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire-status (DTSQs) and Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) were administered at baseline, and the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire-change (DTSQc) and DDS at 6 months. Changes in HbA1c, average blood glucose (BG), and other metrics were also assessed. RESULTS: Improvements in DTSQc scores were observed at 6 months with a total mean (standard deviation) score of 14.3 ± 5.1. Significant reductions in total mean DDS scores from baseline to 6 months were also observed, from 2.0 ± 0.8 to 1.7 ± 0.7, P < 0.0001. A significant reduction in regimen-related distress was notable, from "moderate distress" (2.4 ± 1.0) to "not distressed" (1.9 ± 0.9), P < 0.0001). Significant reductions in mean HbA1c (-0.9 ± 1.6, P < 0.0001) and mean BG (-24.8 ± 50.8, P < 0.0001) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the Accu-Chek Connect diabetes management system is associated with increased treatment satisfaction and improved glycemic control among individuals with insulin-treated diabetes. NCT02600845 ( www.clinicaltrials.gov ).

Randomized Cross-Over Study Comparing Two Infusion Sets for CSII in Daily Life.

BACKGROUND: Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy is a valuable option especially for people with type 1 diabetes. Although insulin infusion sets (IIS) are essential components of most insulin pump systems, only few studies have been conducted on their performance and safety. In this study 2 IIS with soft cannulas were compared. METHODS: In an open-label, randomized, crossover, multicenter 8-week study 80 type 1 diabetic subjects on CSII (20-74 years, mean 46.5 ± 12.9 years, 58.8% male) were enrolled to evaluate the use of 2 IIS. The Accu-Chek® FlexLink Plus (FL Plus) and the Accu-Chek® FlexLink infusion set (FL) were used 4 weeks each under real-life conditions at home. All patients had to record details about every IIS change in a diary. Insertion-related pain was assessed by means of a visual analogue scale (VAS). RESULTS: The mean pain noted during insertion was similar for both IIS (VAS 6.1 ± 6.4 mm for the FL Plus and 5.8 ± 6.3 mm for the FL, P = .92). 20.0% of the 895 IIS changes with FL Plus and 16.0% of the 854 with FL were unplanned. During the 4243 patient days of the study, 13 patients had adverse events. Among these, 2 serious adverse events occurred. Both serious events and 1 nonserious adverse event were considered as related to the IIS. Of the patients, 18.7% had kinked cannulas. Most patients were satisfied with both IIS. CONCLUSION: Both IIS are safe and effective. The 2 IIS did not differ from each other with respect to pain observed during insertion.

Frequent use of an automated bolus advisor improves glycemic control in pediatric patients treated with insulin pump therapy: results of the Bolus Advisor Benefit Evaluation (BABE) study.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between frequency and sustained bolus advisor (BA) use and glycemic improvement has not been well characterized in pediatric populations. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to assess the impact of frequent and persistent BA use on glycemic control among pediatric type 1 diabetes patients. METHODS: In this 6-month, single-center, retrospective cohort study, 104 children [61 girls, mean age: 12.7 yr, mean HbA1c 8.0 (1.6)% [64 (17.5) mmol/mol]], treated with the Accu-Chek Aviva Combo insulin pump, were observed. Frequency of BA use, HbA1c, hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL), therapy changes, mean blood glucose, and glycemic variability (standard deviation) was assessed at baseline and month 6. Sub-analyses of the adolescent patient use (12 months) and longitudinal use (24 months) were also conducted. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients reported high frequency (HF) device use (≥50%); 33 reported low frequency (LF) use (<50%) during the study. HF users achieved lower mean (SE) HbA1c levels than LF users: 7.5 (0.1)% [59 (1.1) mmol/mol] vs. 8.0 (0.2)% [64 (2.2) mmol/mol], p = 0.0252. No between-group differences in the percentage of hypoglycemia values were seen at 6 months. HF users showed less glycemic variability (84.0 vs. 94.7, p = 0.0045) than LF users. More HF patients reached HbA1c target of <7.5 at 6 months 66.2% (+16.9) vs. 27.3% (-9.1), p = 0.0056. Similar HbA1c results were seen in adolescents and BA users at 24 months. CONCLUSION: Frequent use of the Accu-Chek Aviva Combo insulin pump BA feature was associated with improved and sustained glycemic control with no increase in hypoglycemia in this pediatric population.

Use of an insulin bolus advisor facilitates earlier and more frequent changes in insulin therapy parameters in suboptimally controlled patients with diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injection therapy: results of the ABACUS trial.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the impact of using an automated bolus advisor integrated into a blood glucose meter on the timing and frequency of adjusting insulin therapy parameter settings and whether the availability of this technology would increase blood glucose test strip utilization in diabetes patients treated with multiple daily insulin injection (MDI) therapy. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The Automated Bolus Advisor Control and Usability Study (ABACUS) trial, a 26-week, prospective, randomized, controlled, multinational study that enrolled 218 type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients, demonstrated that use of an automated insulin bolus advisor helps improve glycemic control in suboptimally controlled, MDI-treated patients. Patient data were assessed to determine when and how often changes in insulin parameter settings occurred during the study. Patient meters were downloaded to determine blood glucose monitoring frequency. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-three patients completed the study: 93 control arm (CNL) and 100 intervention (experimental) arm (EXP). Significantly more EXP (47.5%) than CNL (30.7%) patients received one or more changes in their insulin sensitivity factor (ISF) settings during the study (P=0.0191). Changes in ISF settings occurred earlier and more frequently in EXP than CNL patients throughout the study. A similar trend was seen in changes in insulin-to-carbohydrate ratios. There were no differences in daily self-monitoring of blood glucose frequency [mean (SD)] between CNL and EXP patients: 4.7 (1.5) versus 4.6 (1.3) (P=0.4085). CONCLUSIONS: Use of an automated bolus advisor was associated with earlier, more frequent changes in key insulin parameters, which may have contributed to subsequent improvements in glycemic control but without increased glucose test strip utilization.

Use of an insulin bolus advisor improves glycemic control in multiple daily insulin injection (MDI) therapy patients with suboptimal glycemic control: first results from the ABACUS trial.

OBJECTIVE: Use of automated bolus advisors is associated with improved glycemic control in patients treated with insulin pump therapy. We conducted a study to assess the impact of using an insulin bolus advisor embedded in a blood glucose (BG) meter on glycemic control and treatment satisfaction in patients treated with multiple daily insulin injection (MDI) therapy. The study goal was to achieve >0.5% A1C reduction in most patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a 26-week, prospective, randomized, controlled, multinational study that enrolled 218 MDI-treated patients with poorly controlled diabetes (202 with type 1 diabetes, 16 with type 2 diabetes) who were 18 years of age or older. Participants had mean baseline A1C of 8.9% (SD, 1.2 [74 mmol/mol]), mean age of 42.4 years (SD, 14.0), mean BMI of 26.5 kg/m(2) (SD, 4.2), and mean diabetes duration of 17.7 years (SD, 11.1). Control group (CNL) patients used a standard BG meter and manual bolus calculation; intervention group (EXP) patients used the Accu-Chek Aviva Expert meter with an integrated bolus advisor to calculate insulin dosages. Glucose data were downloaded and used for therapy parameter adjustments in both groups. RESULTS: A total of 193 patients (CNL, n = 93; EXP, n = 100) completed the study. Significantly more EXP than CNL patients achieved >0.5% A1C reduction (56.0% vs. 34.4%; P < 0.01). Improvement in treatment satisfaction (Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire scale) was significantly greater in EXP patients (11.4 [SD, 6.0] vs. 9.0 [SD, 6.3]; P < 0.01). Percentage of BG values <50 mg/dL was <2% in both groups during the study. CONCLUSIONS: Use of an automated bolus advisor resulted in improved glycemic control and treatment satisfaction without increasing severe hypoglycemia.

Automated bolus advisor control and usability study (ABACUS): does use of an insulin bolus advisor improve glycaemic control in patients failing multiple daily insulin injection (MDI) therapy? [NCT01460446].

BACKGROUND: People with T1DM and insulin-treated T2DM often do not follow and/or adjust their insulin regimens as needed. Key contributors to treatment non-adherence are fear of hypoglycaemia, difficulty and lack of self-efficacy associated with insulin dose determination. Because manual calculation of insulin boluses is both complex and time consuming, people may rely on empirical estimates, which can result in persistent hypoglycaemia and/or hyperglycaemia. Use of automated bolus advisors (BA) has been shown to help insulin pump users to more accurately meet prandial insulin dosage requirements, improve postprandial glycaemic excursions, and achieve optimal glycaemic control with an increased time within optimal range. Use of a BA containing an early algorithm based on sliding scales for insulin dosing has also been shown to improve HbA1c levels in people treated with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI). We designed a study to determine if use of an automated BA can improve clinical and psychosocial outcomes in people treated with MDI. METHODS/DESIGN: The Automated Bolus Advisor Control and Usability Study (ABACUS) is a 6-month, prospective, randomised, multi-centre, multi-national trial to determine if automated BA use improves glycaemic control as measured by a change in HbA1c in people using MDI with elevated HbA1c levels (#62;7.5%). A total of 226 T1DM and T2DM participants will be recruited. Anticipated attrition of 20% will yield a sample size of 90 participants, which will provide #62;80% power to detect a mean difference of 0.5%, with SD of 0.9%, using a one-sided 5% t-test, with 5% significance level. Other measures of glycaemic control, self-care behaviours and psychosocial issues will also be assessed. DISCUSSION: It is critical that healthcare providers utilise available technologies that both facilitate effective glucose management and address concerns about safety and lifestyle. Automated BAs may help people using MDI to manage their diabetes more effectively and minimise the risk of long-term diabetes related complications. Findings from a recent study suggest that BA use positively addresses both safety and lifestyle concerns; however, randomised trials are needed to confirm these perceptions and determine whether bolus advisor use improves clinical outcomes. Our study is designed to make these assessments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01460446.

The impact of structured blood glucose testing on attitudes toward self-management among poorly controlled, insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with T2DM often view self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) as burdensome and pointless, which may affect their broader attitudes toward diabetes management. We examined how a structured SMBG protocol influenced diabetes self-efficacy and autonomous motivation over time, and linked these to changes in glycemic control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Structured Testing Program (STeP) is a 12-month, two-arm, cluster-randomized trial that assessed the efficacy of structured SMBG in 483 insulin-naïve T2DM patients. Measures included: Confidence in Diabetes Self-Care for Type 2 patients (CIDS-T2), Diabetes-related Autonomous Motivation (DRAM), self-management behaviors and HbA1c. RESULTS: Intent-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses showed significant increases in CIDS-T2 scores over time (main effects p<0.0001). PP analysis showed significant between-group differences (p<0.05), with adherent STG patients displaying greater CIDS-T2 improvement than ACG patients. PP analyses showed main and between-group effects in DRAM with similar findings. Changes in CIDS-T2 were related to HbA1c changes over time; no self-management variable mediated this relationship. CIDS-T2 and HbA1c displayed a significant time-concordant relationship. DISCUSSION: Structured SMBG leads to significant increases in self-confidence and autonomous motivation associated with diabetes self-management. Changes in self-confidence are linked to changes in glycemic control and share a time-concordant relationship.

A structured self-monitoring of blood glucose approach in type 2 diabetes encourages more frequent, intensive, and effective physician interventions: results from the STeP study.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated how a structured patient/physician self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) intervention influenced the timing, frequency, and effectiveness of primary care physicians' treatment changes with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients over 12 months. METHODS: The Structured Testing Program (STeP) study was a cluster-randomized, multicenter trial with 483 poorly controlled, insulin-naive T2DM subjects. Primary care practices were randomized to the Active Control Group (ACG) or the Structured Testing Group (STG), the latter of which included quarterly review of structured SMBG results. STG patients used a paper tool that graphs seven-point glucose profiles over 3 consecutive days; physicians received a treatment algorithm based on SMBG patterns. Impact of structured SMBG on physician treatment modification recommendations (TMRs) and glycemic outcomes was examined. RESULTS: More STG than ACG patients received a TMR at each study visit (P < 0.0001). Of patients who received at least one TMR, STG patients demonstrated a greater reduction in glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) than ACG patients (-1.2% vs. -0.8%, P < 0.03). Patients with a baseline HbA1c ≥8.5% who received a TMR at the Month 1 visit experienced greater reductions in HbA1c (P = 0.002) than patients without an initial TMR. More STG than ACG patients were started on incretins (P < 0.01) and on thiazolidinediones (P = 0.004). The number of visits with a TMR was unrelated to HbA1c change over time. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-provided SMBG data contribute to glycemic improvement when blood glucose patterns are easy to detect, and well-trained physicians take timely action. Collaborative use of structured SMBG data leads to earlier, more frequent, and more effective TMRs for poorly controlled, non-insulin-treated T2DM subjects.

Structured self-monitoring of blood glucose significantly reduces A1C levels in poorly controlled, noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetes: results from the Structured Testing Program study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of structured blood glucose testing in poorly controlled, noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This 12-month, prospective, cluster-randomized, multicenter study recruited 483 poorly controlled (A1C ≥ 7.5%), insulin-naïve type 2 diabetic subjects from 34 primary care practices in the U.S. Practices were randomized to an active control group (ACG) with enhanced usual care or a structured testing group (STG) with enhanced usual care and at least quarterly use of structured self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). STG patients and physicians were trained to use a paper tool to collect/interpret 7-point glucose profiles over 3 consecutive days. The primary end point was A1C level measured at 12 months. RESULTS: The 12-month intent-to-treat analysis (ACG, n = 227; STG, n = 256) showed significantly greater reductions in mean (SE) A1C in the STG compared with the ACG: -1.2% (0.09) vs. -0.9% (0.10); Δ = -0.3%; P = 0.04. Per protocol analysis (ACG, n = 161; STG, n = 130) showed even greater mean (SE) A1C reductions in the STG compared with the ACG: -1.3% (0.11) vs. -0.8% (0.11); Δ = -0.5%; P < 0.003. Significantly more STG patients received a treatment change recommendation at the month 1 visit compared with ACG patients, regardless of the patient's initial baseline A1C level: 179 (75.5%) vs. 61 (28.0%); <0.0001. Both STG and ACG patients displayed significant (P < 0.0001) improvements in general well-being (GWB). CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate use of structured SMBG significantly improves glycemic control and facilitates more timely/aggressive treatment changes in noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetes without decreasing GWB.

Multicenter user evaluation of ACCU-CHEK® Combo, an integrated system for continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate a newly developed system for insulin delivery incorporating a multifunctional blood glucose meter and a remotely controlled insulin pump (ACCU-CHEK® Combo system) in established pump users with type 1 diabetes. The technology was assessed both from device performance and subject usability perspectives. METHOD: A multicenter, prospective, single group study was carried out in five centers in the Netherlands and four centers in the United Kingdom for more than 6 months. The study was divided into two phases: Phase 1 (4 weeks) for device validation purposes and phase 2 (22 weeks) to observe the impact of the system on metabolic control, patient satisfaction [using the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ)] and device safety. RESULTS: Eighty subjects completed the planned study period. There were no unexpected device errors. Treatment satisfaction was high at baseline and further increased to study end (DTSQ change version: sum score, 10.6±7.2; scale score range, -18 to +18, p<0.0001). Hemoglobin A1c improved continuously over time, from 7.9% (±0.9%) to 7.7% (±0.8%) at month 3 (p<0.001) and 7.6% (±0.8%) at month 6 (p<0.0001). The frequency of severe hypoglycemia was 0.08 per patient years. There was no case of ketoacidosis. CONCLUSIONS: The new system was evaluated by experienced continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion users as safe in daily practice and associated with favorable treatment satisfaction and a modest improvement in glycemic control.

Comparison of continuous blood glucose measurement with conventional documentation of hypoglycemia in patients with Type 2 diabetes on multiple daily insulin injection therapy.

BACKGROUND: The primary objective of this study was to investigate the difference in the proportion of patients with conventionally detected hypoglycemia compared with continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS, Medtronic MiniMed, Sylmar, CA)-detected glucose values < or = 60 mg/dL (< or = 3.3 mmol/L), during the 72-h CGMS measurement period after 8 weeks' treatment with insulin glargine. METHODS: This was a multicenter (n = 125), open-label, single-arm study in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on multiple daily injections. Patients received NPH insulin (2-week run-in) followed by glargine (8-week treatment phase). Glucose levels were measured by CGMS and self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) profiles over the 72-h pre- and post-treatment phase. RESULTS: The full analysis set contained 367 patients [male 59%; mean age 59.2 years; mean body mass index 31.7 kg/m(2); mean hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 6.9%]. At end point, 209 patients (56.9%) experienced hypoglycemia according to CGMS; 97 (26.4%) recorded hypoglycemia by conventional methods. CGMS- and SMBG-determined mean daytime glucose levels were similar at baseline and end point; however, nocturnal glucose levels were significantly lower with CGMS versus SMBG at baseline [130.2 vs. 145.0 mg/dL (7.2 vs. 8.1 mmol/L)] and at end point [123.3 vs. 137.3 mg/dL (6.8 vs. 7.6 mmol/L)]. Glucose levels measured by CGMS and SMBG decreased, and HbA1c levels decreased from 6.90% at screening to 6.67% at end point (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that CGMS can be successfully employed in large clinical trial settings in patients with T2DM. This easy-to-implement method may provide additional insights into glucose levels and valuable information regarding the time patients spend within the preferred glucose range.