Search

Aim: Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) has several advantages over intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) but generally comes at a higher cost. Do-it-yourself rtCGM (DIY-rtCGM) potentially has benefits similar to those of rtCGM. This study compared outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes using DIY-rtCGM versus isCGM., Methods: In this crossover trial, adults with type 1 diabetes were randomized to use isCGM or DIY-rtCGM for eight weeks before crossover to use the other device for eight weeks, after a four-week washout period where participants reverted back to isCGM. The primary endpoint was time in range (TIR; 3.9-10 mmol/L). Secondary endpoints included other glycemic control measures, psychosocial outcomes, and sleep quality., Results: Sixty participants were recruited, and 52 (87%) completed follow-up. Glucose outcomes were similar in the DIY-rtCGM and isCGM groups, including TIR (53.1% vs 51.3%; mean difference -1.7% P = .593), glycosylated hemoglobin (57.0 ± 17.8 vs 61.4 ± 12.2 mmol/L; P = .593), and time in hypoglycemia <3.9 mmol/L (3.9 ± 3.8% vs 3.8 ± 4.0%; P = .947). Hypoglycemia Fear Survey total score (1.17 ± 0.52 vs 0.97 ± 0.54; P = .02) and fear of hypoglycemia score (1.18 ± 0.64 vs 0.97 ± 0.45; P = .02) were significantly higher during DIY-rtCGM versus isCGM. Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire status (DTSQS) score was also higher with DIY-rtCGM versus isCGM (28.7 ± 5.8 vs 26.0 ± 5.8; P = .04), whereas diabetes-related quality of life was slightly lower (DAWN2 Impact of Diabetes score: 3.11 ± 0.4 vs 3.32 ± 0.51; P = .045); sleep quality did not differ between the two groups., Conclusion: Although the use of DIY-rtCGM did not improve glycemic outcomes compared with isCGM, it positively impacted several patient-reported psychosocial variables. DIY-rtCGM potentially provides an alternative, cost-effective rtCGM option., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: S.S. has no conflicts of interest to disclose. B.J.W. has previously received research funding and expenses from Dexcom, Medtronic, and iSENS. M.B. has received research funding from Novo Nordisk, Medtronic, Dexcom, and Pfizer; research support from Medtronic, Dexcom, and SOOIL; and honoraria from Medtronic. R.P. has received research funding from Dexcom and is a member of New Zealand Advisory Boards for Dexcom, Abbott, Lilly, and Novo Nordisk. H.C. has no relevant disclosures. R.H. is a member of the NZ Advisory Board for Dexcom and has received research funding from NZMS.

Aims: We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) assessing separately and together the effect of the three distinct categories of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems (adjunctive, non-adjunctive and intermittently-scanned CGM [isCGM]), compared with traditional capillary glucose monitoring, on HbA1c and CGM metrics., Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Central register of clinical trials were searched. Inclusion criteria were as follows: randomised controlled trials; participants with type 1 diabetes of any age and insulin regimen; investigating CGM and isCGM compared with traditional capillary glucose monitoring; and reporting glycaemic outcomes of HbA1c and/or time-in-range (TIR). Glycaemic outcomes were extracted post-intervention and expressed as mean differences and 95%CIs between treatment and comparator groups. Results were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Rob2 tool., Results: This systematic review was conducted between January and April 2021; it included 22 RCTs (15 adjunctive, 5 non-adjunctive, and 2 isCGM)). The overall analysis of the pooled three categories showed a statistically significant absolute improvement in HbA1c percentage points (mean difference (95% CI): -0.22% [-0.31 to -0.14], I 2  = 79%) for intervention compared with comparator and was strongest for adjunctive CGM (-0.26% [-0.36, -0.16]). Overall TIR (absolute change) increased by 5.4% (3.5 to 7.2), I 2  = 71% for CGM intervention compared with comparator and was strongest with non-adjunctive CGM (6.0% [2.3, 9.7])., Conclusions: For individuals with T1D, use of CGM was beneficial for impacting glycaemic outcomes including HbA1c, TIR and time-below-range (TBR). Glycaemic improvement appeared greater for TIR for newer non-adjunctive CGM technology., (© 2022 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Diabetes UK.)

Purpose: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) management requires regular monitoring of glucose levels and judicious therapeutic administration of insulin to prevent both microvascular and macrovascular complications. Few people with diabetes are able to sustain the self-monitored blood glucose measurements needed for optimal care, and those that do, typically experience significant diabetes-related distress. Both intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) offer alternatives to reduce the overall burden, but both still have limitations. Given the expense of CGM, smart watch integrated do-it-yourself (DIY)-CGM has been developed as an alternative to commercial isCGM and CGM technologies. This study has been designed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of smart watch integrated DIY-CGM compared with isCGM in adults with T1D., Methods: This multicentre, randomised, crossover study will be conducted in New Zealand and aims to recruit 60 adults with established T1D who currently use isCGM. DIY-CGM will be compared to usual care with isCGM. Participants will be randomised to either arm of the study for 8 weeks followed by a 4-week washout period before crossing over to the other study arm for a further 8 weeks. The primary endpoint is glucose time in range (TIR) defined as percentage of time interstitial glucose is spent between 3.9 to 10 mmol/L for the entire intervention period. Secondary endpoints include diabetes-related quality of life, distress, and sleep quality in participants and their partners., Discussion: The results of this study will provide clinical trial data regarding smart watch integrated DIY-CGM versus isCGM for improving glycaemic control in adults with T1D, and also report a variety of key secondary outcomes, including changes in subjective outcome measures for both people with diabetes and their partners., Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12621000648820,31 May 2021); World Health Organisation International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (U1111-1262-2784, 3 rd December 2020)., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interestThe authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest., (© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021.)

Purpose: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is one of the most common chronic diseases of childhood and comes with considerable management and psychological burden for children and their families. Fear of hypoglycaemia (FOH), particularly nocturnal hypoglycaemia, is a common worry. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is a tool that may help reduce FOH, as well as reduce overall diabetes burden. However, CGM systems are expensive and often not publicly funded or subsidised. MiaoMiao (MM) is a novel relatively affordable third-party add-on technology to intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM). MM allows users to convert their isCGM to a form of "Do-it-yourself" (DIY)-CGM. Our hypothesis is that MM-CGM will result in significant reduction in parental fear from hypoglycaemia. The primary objective is to determine the impact of real-time DIY-CGM on parental fear of hypoglycaemia using Hypoglycaemia Fear Survey (HFS)., Methods: This is a multisite randomised cross-over study of 55 New Zealand children (ages 2-13 years) with established T1D and current users of isCGM (Abbott FreeStyle Libre). DIY-CGM will be compared to usual care with isCGM. Participants will be randomised to either arm of the study for 6 weeks followed by a 4-week wash-out period before crossing over to the other study arm for a further 6 weeks., Discussion: The results of this study will provide much needed clinical trial data regarding DIY-CGM effectiveness in reducing parental FOH, as measured by HFS, as well as various other secondary outcomes including traditional glycaemic metrics, and child and caregiver sleep. The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN 12619001551189) on 18 November 2019, and the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (Universal Trial Number U1111-1236-9189)., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interestThe authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020.)

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.

Objective: Wholegrain foods vary in the extent of processing. We investigated whether wholegrain particle size in bread influences postprandial glycemia in type 2 diabetes., Research Design and Methods: Postprandial glycemia (incremental area under the blood glucose curve [iAUC]) was measured after consumption of three breads made with roller-milled wholegrain flour and added grains and a fourth made with stone-ground flour. All flours and grains were 100% wholegrain wheat. Breads were nutrient matched., Results: Fifteen adults (64 ± 10 years, HbA 1c 58 ± 13 mmol/mol) completed the study. iAUC for the three breads made with roller-milled flour ranged from 376 to 641 mmol -1 min -1 , inverse linear trend for grain particle size P = 0.039. The iAUC for stone-ground wholegrain bread (503) was smaller than predicted from mean particle size., Conclusions: Wholegrain structural integrity in bread is a determinant of glycemic response. These findings have implications for dietary advice and the definition of the term "'wholegrain.", (© 2019 by the American Diabetes Association.)