Laurel H Messer1, Cari Berget1, Tim Vigers1,2, Laura Pyle1,2, Cristy Geno1, R Paul Wadwa1, Kimberly A Driscoll1,3, Gregory P Forlenza1. 1. Barbara Davis Center for Childhood Diabetes, School of Medicine, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO, USA. 2. Department of Biostatistics and Informatics, Colorado School of Public Health, Aurora, CO, USA. 3. Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe predictors of hybrid closed loop (HCL) discontinuation and perceived barriers to use in youth with type 1 diabetes. SUBJECTS: Youth with type 1 diabetes (eligible age 2-25 y; recruited age 8-25 y) who initiated the Minimed 670G HCL system were followed prospectively for 6 mo in an observational study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Demographic, glycemic (time-in-range, HbA1c), and psychosocial variables [Hypoglycemia Fear Survey (HFS); Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID)] were collected for all participants. Participants who discontinued HCL (<10% HCL use at clinical visit) completed a questionnaire on perceived barriers to HCL use. RESULTS: Ninety-two youth (15.7 ± 3.6 y, HbA1c 8.8 ± 1.3%, 50% female) initiated HCL, and 28 (30%) discontinued HCL, with the majority (64%) discontinuing between 3 and 6 mo after HCL start. Baseline HbA1c predicted discontinuation (P = .026) with the odds of discontinuing 2.7 times higher (95% CI: 1.123, 6.283) for each 1% increase in baseline HbA1c. Youth who discontinued HCL rated difficulty with calibrations, number of alarms, and too much time needed to make the system work as the most problematic aspects of HCL. Qualitatively derived themes included technological difficulties (error alerts, not working correctly), too much work (calibrations, fingersticks), alarms, disappointment in glycemic control, and expense (cited by parents). CONCLUSIONS: Youth with higher HbA1c are at greater risk for discontinuing HCL than youth with lower HbA1c, and should be the target of new interventions to support device use. The primary reasons for discontinuing HCL relate to the workload required to use HCL.
OBJECTIVE: To describe predictors of hybrid closed loop (HCL) discontinuation and perceived barriers to use in youth with type 1 diabetes. SUBJECTS: Youth with type 1 diabetes (eligible age 2-25 y; recruited age 8-25 y) who initiated the Minimed 670G HCL system were followed prospectively for 6 mo in an observational study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Demographic, glycemic (time-in-range, HbA1c), and psychosocial variables [Hypoglycemia Fear Survey (HFS); Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID)] were collected for all participants. Participants who discontinued HCL (<10% HCL use at clinical visit) completed a questionnaire on perceived barriers to HCL use. RESULTS: Ninety-two youth (15.7 ± 3.6 y, HbA1c 8.8 ± 1.3%, 50% female) initiated HCL, and 28 (30%) discontinued HCL, with the majority (64%) discontinuing between 3 and 6 mo after HCL start. Baseline HbA1c predicted discontinuation (P = .026) with the odds of discontinuing 2.7 times higher (95% CI: 1.123, 6.283) for each 1% increase in baseline HbA1c. Youth who discontinued HCL rated difficulty with calibrations, number of alarms, and too much time needed to make the system work as the most problematic aspects of HCL. Qualitatively derived themes included technological difficulties (error alerts, not working correctly), too much work (calibrations, fingersticks), alarms, disappointment in glycemic control, and expense (cited by parents). CONCLUSIONS: Youth with higher HbA1c are at greater risk for discontinuing HCL than youth with lower HbA1c, and should be the target of new interventions to support device use. The primary reasons for discontinuing HCL relate to the workload required to use HCL.
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Cari Berget; Sarah E Thomas; Laurel H Messer; Katelin Thivener; Robert H Slover; R Paul Wadwa; G Todd Alonso Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2019-03-12
Authors: Richard M Bergenstal; William V Tamborlane; Andrew Ahmann; John B Buse; George Dailey; Stephen N Davis; Carol Joyce; Bruce A Perkins; John B Welsh; Steven M Willi; Michael A Wood Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2011-09-20 Impact factor: 17.152
Authors: J Weissberg-Benchell; J B Shapiro; K Hood; L M Laffel; D Naranjo; K Miller; K Barnard Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2019-03-20 Impact factor: 4.359
Authors: Ram Weiss; Satish K Garg; Bruce W Bode; Timothy S Bailey; Andrew J Ahmann; Kenneth A Schultz; John B Welsh; John J Shin Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2015-06-02 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: Cari Berget; Laurel H Messer; Tim Vigers; Brigitte I Frohnert; Laura Pyle; R Paul Wadwa; Kimberly A Driscoll; Gregory P Forlenza Journal: Pediatr Diabetes Date: 2020-01-07 Impact factor: 4.866
Authors: Marc D Breton; Lauren G Kanapka; Roy W Beck; Laya Ekhlaspour; Gregory P Forlenza; Eda Cengiz; Melissa Schoelwer; Katrina J Ruedy; Emily Jost; Lori Carria; Emma Emory; Liana J Hsu; Mary Oliveri; Craig C Kollman; Betsy B Dokken; Stuart A Weinzimer; Mark D DeBoer; Bruce A Buckingham; Daniel Cherñavvsky; R Paul Wadwa Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2020-08-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Lauren G Kanapka; R Paul Wadwa; Marc D Breton; Katrina J Ruedy; Laya Ekhlaspour; Gregory P Forlenza; Eda Cengiz; Melissa J Schoelwer; Emily Jost; Lori Carria; Emma Emory; Liana J Hsu; Stuart A Weinzimer; Mark D DeBoer; Bruce A Buckingham; Mary Oliveri; Craig Kollman; Betsy B Dokken; Daniel Cherñavvsky; Roy W Beck Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2020-12-21 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Grenye O'Malley; Laurel H Messer; Carol J Levy; Jordan E Pinsker; Gregory P Forlenza; Elvira Isganaitis; Yogish C Kudva; Laya Ekhlaspour; Dan Raghinaru; John Lum; Sue A Brown Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2021-04 Impact factor: 6.118