scholarly journals Exploring Parental Experiences of Using a Do-It-Yourself Solution for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Among Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: A Qualitative Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 844-853 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mona Elbalshy ◽  
Sara Boucher ◽  
Hamish Crocket ◽  
Barbara Galland ◽  
Craig MacKenzie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Blood Glucose ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Smart Phone ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Easy Access ◽  
Continuous Glucose Monitor ◽  
Freestyle Libre ◽  
Do It Yourself

Background: MiaoMiao (MM) is a Bluetooth transmitter, which when paired with a smart phone/device, converts the Abbott FreeStyle Libre flash glucose monitoring system into a Do-It-Yourself (DIY) continuous glucose monitor (CGM). Families are increasingly adopting DIY CGM solutions, but little is known about parent and child experiences with these add-on technologies. We aimed to explore experiences of families using MM-CGM including challenges faced and their advice to others who may choose to use the technology. Methods: Between May and July 2019, we conducted 12 semistructured interviews (in person or via video conference) with parents of children (aged ≤16 years) with type 1 diabetes using MM-CGM. Interviews were audio recorded; professionally transcribed and key themes were identified through thematic analysis. Results: Overall, parents used MM-CGM to proactively manage their child’s blood glucose. In all participants, this led to a perceived decrease in frequency of hypoglycemia. Participants reported that the visibility and easy access to blood glucose readings, glucose trends, and customized alarms on parent’s phones decreased their disease burden and improved their sleep quality. Common barriers to using MM-CGM included difficulty of the setting up process, connectivity issues, and lack of support from medical teams. Conclusion: This study highlights the potential feasibility of using a DIY CGM system like MM-CGM, which could be an empowering and cost-effective tool for enabling remote monitoring of blood glucose in real time.

scholarly journals Sensor-Augmented Insulin Pumps and Hypoglycemia Prevention in Type 1 Diabetes

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabelle Steineck ◽  
Ajenthen Ranjan ◽  
Kirsten Nørgaard ◽  
Signe Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Blood Glucose ◽  
Insulin Pump ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Severe Hypoglycemia ◽  
Insulin Pumps ◽  
Continuous Glucose Monitor ◽  
Insulin Suspension ◽  
Multiple Daily Injections

Hypoglycemia can lead to seizures, unconsciousness, or death. Insulin pump treatment reduces the frequency of severe hypoglycemia compared with multiple daily injections treatment. The addition of a continuous glucose monitor, so-called sensor-augmented pump (SAP) treatment, has the potential to further limit the duration and severity of hypoglycemia as the system can detect and in some systems act on impending and prevailing low blood glucose levels. In this narrative review we summarize the available knowledge on SAPs with and without automated insulin suspension, in relation to hypoglycemia prevention. We present evidence from randomized trials, observational studies, and meta-analyses including nonpregnant individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus. We also outline concerns regarding SAPs with and without automated insulin suspension. There is evidence that SAP treatment reduces episodes of moderate and severe hypoglycemia compared with multiple daily injections plus self-monitoring of blood glucose. There is some evidence that SAPs both with and without automated suspension reduces the frequency of severe hypoglycemic events compared with insulin pumps without continuous glucose monitoring.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Self-monitoring of Blood Glucose in Children with Type 1 Diabetes—The Pros and Cons

2012 ◽  
Vol 08 (01) ◽  
pp. 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susana R Patton ◽  
Mark A Clements ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Blood Glucose ◽  
Insulin Dose ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Continuous Glucose Monitor ◽  
Self Monitoring ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Pros And Cons

Glucose monitoring is essential for modern diabetes treatment and the achievement of near-normal glycemic levels. Monitoring of blood glucose provides the data necessary for patients to make daily management decisions related to food intake, insulin dose, and physical exercise and it can enable patients to avoid potentially dangerous episodes of hypo- and hyperglycemia. Additionally, monitoring can provide healthcare providers with the information needed to identify glycemic patterns, educate patients, and adjust insulin. Presently, youth with type 1 diabetes can self-monitor blood glucose via home blood glucose meters, or monitor glucose concentrations nearly continuously using a continuous glucose monitor. There are advantages and disadvantages to the use of either of these technologies. This article describes the two technologies and the research supporting their use in the management of youth with type 1 diabetes in order to weigh their relative pros and cons.

scholarly journals Flash glucose monitoring with the FreeStyle Libre 2 compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose in suboptimally controlled type 1 diabetes: the FLASH-UK randomised controlled trial protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e050713
Author(s):  
Emma G Wilmot ◽  
Mark Evans ◽  
Katharine Barnard-Kelly ◽  
M Burns ◽  
Iain Cranston ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Blood Glucose ◽  
Glycaemic Control ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Self Monitoring ◽  
Flash Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Freestyle Libre ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionOptimising glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes (T1D) remains challenging. Flash glucose monitoring with FreeStyle Libre 2 (FSL2) is a novel alternative to the current standard of care self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). No randomised controlled trials to date have explored the potential benefits of FSL2 in T1D. We aim to assess the impact of FSL2 in people with suboptimal glycaemic control T1D in comparison with SMBG.MethodsThis open-label, multicentre, randomised (via stochastic minimisation), parallel design study conducted at eight UK secondary and primary care centres will aim to recruit 180 people age ≥16 years with T1D for >1 year and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 7.5%–11%. Eligible participants will be randomised to 24 weeks of FSL2 (intervention) or SMBG (control) periods, after 2-week of blinded sensor wear. Participants will be assessed virtually or in-person owing to the COVID-19 pandemic. HbA1c will be measured at baseline, 12 and 24 weeks (primary outcome). Participants will be contacted at 4 and 12 weeks for glucose optimisation. Control participants will wear a blinded sensor during the last 2 weeks. Psychosocial outcomes will be measured at baseline and 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes include sensor-based metrics, insulin doses, adverse events and self-report psychosocial measures. Utility, acceptability, expectations and experience of using FSL2 will be explored. Data on health service resource utilisation will be collected.AnalysisEfficacy analyses will follow intention-to-treat principle. Outcomes will be analysed using analysis of covariance, adjusted for the baseline value of the corresponding outcome, minimisation factors and other known prognostic factors. Both within-trial and life-time economic evaluations, informed by modelling from the perspective of the National Health Service setting, will be performed.EthicsThe study was approved by Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee (reference 19/NW/0081). Informed consent will be sought from all participants.Trial registration numberNCT03815006.Protocol version4.0 dated 29 June 2020.

scholarly journals Flash Glucose Monitoring Systems in Pediatric Populations With Diabetes

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Calvin Young ◽  
Aleksandra Grobelna
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Blood Glucose ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Diabetes Distress ◽  
Signal Loss ◽  
Flash Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Glucose Testing ◽  
Freestyle Libre ◽  
Pediatric Populations

Flash glucose monitoring (FGM) is a method of glucose testing where a sensor inserted into the skin continuously measures interstitial glucose levels. It can be used by people with diabetes to inform treatment decisions, such as insulin dosing, as an alternative or complement to blood glucose testing. Evidence of variable quality from 2 randomized controlled trials and 8 non-randomized studies, including those summarized within systematic reviews, suggests that FGM may improve quality of life, patient satisfaction, diabetes distress, self-efficacy, and frequency of glucose monitoring compared to self-monitoring blood glucose techniques in pediatric populations with type 1 diabetes. Findings related to other outcomes, such as hemoglobin A1C, glucose time in range metrics, and adverse events were mixed or inconclusive (i.e., in some studies the use of FGM was associated with improved outcomes, while in other studies it was not). While the results summarized in this report generally suggest that the use of FGM is associated with improved clinical outcomes in pediatric populations with type 1 diabetes, the limitations of the included literature should be considered when interpreting these findings. No studies were identified that compared the clinical effectiveness of FGM systems with hypoglycemic, hyperglycemia, or signal loss alarms (e.g., FreeStyle Libre 2) to FGM systems without these features (e.g., FreeStyle Libre) in people of any age with diabetes requiring insulin therapy.

scholarly journals A comparison of FreeStyle Libre 2 to self-monitoring of blood glucose in children with type 1 diabetes and sub-optimal glycaemic control: a 12-week randomised controlled trial protocol

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Styles ◽  
Ben Wheeler ◽  
Alisa Boucsein ◽  
Hamish Crocket ◽  
Michel de Lange ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Blood Glucose ◽  
Glycaemic Control ◽  
Second Generation ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Self Monitoring ◽  
Freestyle Libre ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Purpose Frequent glucose monitoring is necessary for optimal glycaemic control. Second-generation intermittently scanned glucose monitoring (isCGM) systems inform users of out-of-target glucose levels and may reduce monitoring burden. We aim to compare FreeStyle Libre 2 (Abbott Diabetes Care, Witney, U.K.) to self-monitoring of blood glucose in children with type 1 diabetes and sub-optimal glycaemic control. Methods This open-label randomised controlled trial will enrol 100 children (4–13 years inclusive, diagnosis of type 1 diabetes ≥ 6 months, HbA1c 58–110 mmol/mol [7.5–12.2%]), from 5 New Zealand diabetes centres. Following 2 weeks of blinded sensor wear, children will be randomised 1:1 to control or intervention arms. The intervention (duration 12 weeks) includes second-generation isCGM (FreeStyle Libre 2) and education on using interstitial glucose data to manage diabetes. The control group will continue self-monitoring blood glucose. The primary outcome is the difference in glycaemic control (measured as HbA1c) between groups at 12 weeks. Pre-specified secondary outcomes include change in glucose monitoring frequency, glycaemic control metrics and psychosocial outcomes at 12 weeks as well as isCGM acceptability. Discussion This research will investigate the effectiveness of the second-generation isCGM to promote recommended glycaemic control. The results of this trial may have important implications for including this new technology in the management of children with type 1 diabetes. Trial registration This trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry on 19 February 2020 (ACTRN12620000190909p) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (Universal Trial Number U1111-1237-0090).

136-OR: Nocturnal Hypoglycemia Prevention Strategies Used by People with Type 1 Diabetes According to Their Insulin Delivery and Blood Glucose Monitoring Technology

Diabetes ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 136-OR
Author(s):  
MERYEM K. TALBO ◽  
VIRGINIE MESSIER ◽  
KATHERINE DESJARDINS ◽  
RÉMI RABASA-LHORET ◽  
ANNE-SOPHIE BRAZEAU ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Blood Glucose ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Insulin Delivery ◽  
Blood Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Prevention Strategies ◽  
Monitoring Technology ◽  
Nocturnal Hypoglycemia

scholarly journals Alarm Settings of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems and Associations to Glucose Outcomes in Type 1 Diabetes

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Kuei Lin ◽  
Danielle Groat ◽  
Owen Chan ◽  
Man Hung ◽  
Anu Sharma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Continuous Glucose Monitor ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Therapeutic Goals ◽  
Glucose Levels ◽  
Alarm Threshold ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
Average Glucose

Abstract Context Little evidence exists regarding the positive and negative impacts of continuous glucose monitor system (CGM) alarm settings for diabetes control in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Objective Evaluate the associations between CGM alarm settings and glucose outcomes. Design and Setting A cross-sectional observational study in a single academic institution. Patients and Main Outcome Measures CGM alarm settings and 2-week CGM glucose information were collected from 95 T1D patients with > 3 months of CGM use and ≥ 86% active usage time. The associations between CGM alarm settings and glucose outcomes were analyzed. Results Higher glucose thresholds for hypoglycemia alarms (ie, ≥ 73 mg/dL vs < 73 mg/dL) were related to 51% and 65% less time with glucose < 70 and < 54 mg/dL, respectively (P = 0.005; P = 0.016), higher average glucose levels (P = 0.002) and less time-in-range (P = 0.005), but not more hypoglycemia alarms. The optimal alarm threshold for < 1% of time in hypoglycemia was 75 mg/dL. Lower glucose thresholds for hyperglycemia alarms (ie, ≤ 205 mg/dL vs > 205 mg/dL) were related to lower average glucose levels and 42% and 61% less time with glucose > 250 and > 320 mg/dL (P = 0.020, P = 0.016, P = 0.007, respectively), without more hypoglycemia. Lower alarm thresholds were also associated with more alarms (P < 0.0001). The optimal alarm threshold for < 5% of time in hyperglycemia and hemoglobin A1c ≤ 7% was 170 mg/dL. Conclusions Different CGM glucose thresholds for hypo/hyperglycemia alarms are associated with various hypo/hyperglycemic outcomes. Configurations to the hypo/hyperglycemia alarm thresholds could be considered as an intervention to achieve therapeutic goals.

scholarly journals Comparison between adherence assessments and blood glucose monitoring measures to predict A1c in type 1 diabetes

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriela Heiden Teló ◽  
Martina Schaan de Souza ◽  
Thaís Sturmer Andrade ◽  
Beatriz D'Agord Schaan
Keyword(s):  
Type 1 Diabetes ◽  
Blood Glucose ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Blood Glucose Monitoring
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document