Search

Diabetes distress is experienced by up to 36% of adults with type 2 diabetes. Australian type 2 diabetes guidelines recommend annual assessment of diabetes distress in general practice. This study explores general practitioners' knowledge, current practice, and factors influencing implementation of guidelines, including Person Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) use.A cross-sectional online survey was disseminated via e-mail to 4776 Australian general practitioners listed on the Australasian Medical Publishing Company database.264 (5%) surveys were returned. 75% indicated that general practitioners were the most appropriate professionals to assess diabetes distress. Sixteen percent reported asking about diabetes distress during type 2 diabetes consultations more than half the time, with 13% using a PROM more than half the time: 64% use the Kessler-10, and 1.9% use the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) scale. While general practitioners had positive beliefs about the consequences of assessing and addressing diabetes distress, they also reported barriers in motivation, environment, and knowledge of guidelines.Most respondents endorsed general practitioners' role in assessing diabetes distress, but few ask about or assess diabetes distress in routine consultations. To support uptake of guideline recommendations for diabetes-specific PROM use, environmental factors, specifically time, need to be addressed.

To explore the preferences of adults with type 2 diabetes regarding the approach to weight management discussions in clinical care.Online survey of Australian adults with type 2 diabetes, recruited via a national diabetes registry. Three open-ended questions explored participants' experiences and ideal approach to discussing weight management with health professionals. Data subjected to inductive thematic template analysis.Participants were 254 adults, 58% aged 60+ years, 52% women and 35% insulin-treated. Five themes were developed to categorise participants' preferences for, as well as differing experiences of, weight management discussions: (1) collaborative, person-centred care: working together to make decisions and achieve outcomes, taking personal context into consideration; (2) balanced communication: open, clear messages encouraging action, empathy and kindness; (3) quality advice: knowledgeable health professionals, providing specific details or instructions; (4) weight management intervention: suitable modalities to address weight management and (5) system-wide support: referral and access to appropriate multi-disciplinary care.Participants expressed preferences for discussing weight management in collaborative, person-centred consultations, with quality advice and personalised interventions across the health system, delivered with empathy. By adopting these recommendations, health professionals may build constructive partnerships with adults with type 2 diabetes and foster weight management.

Contains fulltext : 286827.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) AIM: To conduct a systematic review of published studies reporting on the longitudinal impacts of hypoglycaemia on quality of life (QoL) in adults with type 2 diabetes. METHOD: Database searches with no restrictions by language or date were conducted in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and PsycINFO. Studies were included for review if they used a longitudinal design (e.g. cohort studies, randomised controlled trials) and reported on the association between hypoglycaemia and changes over time in patient-reported outcomes related to QoL. RESULTS: In all, 20 longitudinal studies published between 1998 and 2020, representing 50,429 adults with type 2 diabetes, were selected for review. A descriptive synthesis following Synthesis Without Meta-analysis guidelines indicated that self-treated symptomatic hypoglycaemia was followed by impairments in daily functioning along with elevated symptoms of generalised anxiety, diabetes distress and fear of hypoglycaemia. Severe hypoglycaemic events were associated with reduced confidence in diabetes self-management and lower ratings of perceived health over time. Frequent hypoglycaemia was followed by reduced energy levels and diminished emotional well-being. There was insufficient evidence, however, to conclude that hypoglycaemia impacted sleep quality, depressive symptoms, general mood, social support or overall diabetes-specific QoL. CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal evidence in this review suggests hypoglycaemia is a common occurrence among adults with type 2 diabetes that impacts key facets in the physical and psychological domains of QoL. Nonetheless, additional longitudinal research is needed-in particular, studies targeting diverse forms of hypoglycaemia, more varied facets of QoL and outcomes assessed using hypoglycaemia-specific measures.

Aims\ud \ud Research on hypoglycaemia and quality of life (QoL) has focused mostly on severe hypoglycaemia and psychological outcomes, with less known about other aspects of hypoglycaemia (e.g., self-treated episodes) and impacts on other QoL domains (e.g., relationships). Therefore, we examined the impact of all aspects of hypoglycaemia on QoL in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1DM).\ud \ud \ud \ud Methods\ud \ud Participants completed an online survey, including assessment of hypoglycaemia-specific QoL (using the 12-item Hypoglycaemia Impact Profile). Mann-Whitney U tests examined differences in hypoglycaemia-specific QoL by hypoglycaemia frequency, severity, and awareness. Hierarchical linear regression examined associations with QoL.\ud \ud \ud \ud Results\ud \ud Participants were 1028 adults with T1DM (M ± SD age: 47 ± 15 years; diabetes duration: 27 ± 16 years). Severe and self-treated hypoglycaemia and impaired awareness negatively impacted on overall QoL and several QoL domains, including leisure activities, physical health, ability to keep fit/be active, sleep, emotional well-being, spontaneity, independence, work/studies, and dietary freedom. Diabetes distress was most strongly associated with hypoglycaemia-specific QoL, followed by generic emotional well-being, fear of hypoglycaemia, and confidence in managing hypoglycaemia. Hypoglycaemia frequency and awareness were no longer significantly associated with QoL once psychological factors were considered.\ud \ud \ud \ud Conclusions\ud \ud Hypoglycaemia negatively impacts on several QoL domains. Psychological factors supersede the effect of hypoglycaemia frequency and awareness in accounting for this negative impact.

A response to the ADA/EASD consensus report on the definition of "remission" of type 2 diabetes.

Background: Glucose monitoring is an essential aspect of self-care for people with type 1 diabetes. With technologies developing rapidly, valid assessment of user experiences and satisfaction is needed. Our aim was to develop a novel measure: the Glucose Monitoring Experiences Questionnaire (GME-Q). Methods: Questionnaire design was informed by exploratory and cognitive debriefing interviews. The GME-Q was included in a large online survey enabling psychometric validation. Results: The interview sample included 17 adults (aged [mean ± SD] 46 ± 11 years, 53% women) with type 1 diabetes duration of 26 ± 14 years. The proposed conceptual framework included three domains: "Effectiveness", "Intrusiveness", and "Convenience", assessed with 25 items plus a single, overview item. The validation sample included 589 adults (aged 44 ± 15 years; 64% women) with type 1 diabetes (duration: 22 ± 14 years, self-monitoring blood glucose [SMBG] using finger-prick devices: median [IQR] 6 [4-7] daily checks). Questionnaire acceptability was indicated: 98% (n = 578) completion rate. After deleting 3 redundant items, principal components analysis supported a 22-item questionnaire with 3 domains ("Effectiveness" [9 items]; "Intrusiveness" [6 items]; "Convenience" [7 items]), accounting for 55% of variance, with good internal consistency reliability (α = 0.83-0.88). Subscales correlated significantly (rs = ±0.44-0.66, P

Aim To assess the cost-effectiveness of professional-mode flash glucose monitoring in adults with type 2 diabetes in general practice compared with usual clinical care. Methods An economic evaluation was conducted as a component of the GP-OSMOTIC trial, a pragmatic multicentre 12-month randomised controlled trial enrolling 299 adults with type 2 diabetes in Victoria, Australia. The economic evaluation was conducted from an Australian healthcare sector perspective with a lifetime horizon. Health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) and total healthcare costs were compared between the intervention and the usual care group within the trial period. The 'UKPDS Outcomes Model 2' was used to simulate post-trial lifetime costs, life expectancy and quality adjusted life years (QALYs). Results No significant difference in health-related quality of life and costs was found between the two groups within the trial period. Professional-mode flash glucose monitoring yielded greater QALYs (0.03 (95% CI: 0.02, 0.04)) and a higher cost (A$3,807 (95% CI: 3,604, 4,007)) compared with usual clinical care using a lifetime horizon under the trial-based monitoring frequency, considered not cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio =A$120,228). The intervention becomes cost-effective if sensor price is reduced to lower than 50%, or monitoring frequency is decreased to once per year while maintaining the same treatment effect on HbA1c. Conclusions Including professional-mode flash glucose monitoring every three months as part of a management plan for people with type 2 diabetes in general practice is not cost-effective, but could be if the sensor price or monitoring frequency can be reduced.

Contains fulltext : 286868.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) OBJECTIVE: Hypoglycaemic episodes and fear of hypoglycaemia can be burdensome for adults with type 1 diabetes. This study explored support needs relating to hypoglycaemia among adults with type 1 diabetes living in Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Respondents participated in a web-based qualitative study involving four open-ended questions that asked what they wished other people understood about hypoglycaemia and what other people could do differently to support them with hypoglycaemia. Responses were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants were 219 adults with type 1 diabetes (mean ± SD age 39 ± 13 years; mean ± SD diabetes duration 20 ± 14 years). They described unmet needs relating to: (1) Clinical support, involving access to new diabetes technologies, training on hypoglycaemia prevention, personalised care and psychological support; (2) Practical support, involving family and friends better supporting them with hypoglycaemia management and prevention; (3) Education for other people, involving others becoming more informed about hypoglycaemia; and (4) An appreciation of the burden, involving others recognizing the experience and impact of episodes, and the burden of living with the risk of hypoglycaemia. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with type 1 diabetes report several unmet support needs relating to hypoglycaemia. Service delivery should be person-centred and prioritise the individual's support needs. Clinical conversations are needed to identify the individual's support needs and develop tailored support plans. People with diabetes and their family members should be offered hypoglycaemia-specific education and training.

To culturally and linguistically adapt the Type 2 Diabetes Stigma Assessment Scale (DSAS-2) into Arabic and assess its psychometric properties.Following forward-backward translation of the DSAS-2, the Content Validity Index (CVI) was assessed. Cognitive debriefing and pilot testing were conducted with adults with T2DM. The Arabic DSAS-2 was included in a multi-center, cross-sectional study (N = 327) Arabic-speaking adults with type 2 diabetes. Psychometric analyses included exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (EFA/CFA), internal consistency reliability, and convergent validity.The Arabic DSAS-2 was considered appropriate, with an excellent CVI (0.98). Unforced EFA revealed a satisfactory three-factor structure, indicating the same subscales as the original instrument ('Treated differently', 'Blame and judgment', 'Self-stigma'). EFA for three factors showed good indicators (KMO=0.924; Bartlett's test of sphericity χ2 = 4063.709, df=171, p lt; 0.001). Internal consistency was satisfactory for both the three-factor structure (α = 0.91, α = 0.88, and α = 0.88, respectively) and the single factor (α = 0.94). CFA results were inconclusive. Although fit indices improved for the single-factor model, compared to the three-factor, they remained inadequate. The total scale demonstrated satisfactory convergent validity with self-esteem.The Arabic DSAS-2 has excellent reliability and acceptable validity, supporting a three-factor structure as well as the use of a total score.

Aims An emerging group of people with type 1 diabetes are not waiting for commercial solutions, choosing to manage their condition with open-source artificial pancreas systems (APS). Our aim was to explore their perspectives on the future of APS. Methods Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted (in Australia, October 2018 to January 2019) with 23 adults with type 1 diabetes currently using open-source APS. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically. Results Participants described five key features of open-source APS they value: compatibility, user-led design, customisability, ability to evolve faster, and community-driven. They attributed the success of the open-source APS movement to benefits they derive from these features: choice, solutions that meet their needs, ownership, staying one step ahead, and real-time support. They expressed hope that future commercial products and healthcare would benefit from their learnings and from collaboration with the open-source APS community. Conclusions Participants believed that there will always be a place for the open-source community. It will continue to build upon and advance commercial products, respond to user needs, offering a higher degree of control and customisation than afforded by commercial products, and generating optimism for the future. Participants desired that future commercial diabetes technologies would be inspired by the open-source community and developed collaboratively with people with diabetes.

ObjectiveTo develop a theory and evidence-based web intervention to reduce psychological barriers towards insulin therapy among adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D).MethodsSalient psychological barriers towards insulin were identified from the literature and classified using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Relevant TDF domains were mapped to evidence-based behaviour change techniques (BCTs), which informed the content for each barrier. Acceptability was explored using cognitive debriefing interviews (n=6 adults with T2D).Results‘Is Insulin Right for Me’ addresses eight barriers, phrased as common questions: Does insulin mean my diabetes is more serious? Do insulin injections cause complications? Is it my fault I need to inject insulin? Will I gain weight? Will injecting hurt? What about hypos? Will injecting insulin be a burden? What will others think of me? BCTs, including persuasive communication and modelling/demonstration, were delivered using appropriate methods (eg, demonstration of the injection process). Participant suggestions for improvement included clear and direct messages, normalising insulin and avoiding confronting images.Conclusions‘Is Insulin Right for Me’ is the first theory and evidence-based, web intervention designed to reduce psychological barriers towards insulin therapy for adults with T2D. Evaluation is needed to determine its impact on negative appraisals and receptiveness towards insulin.

AIMS: This qualitative study aims to explore beliefs, attitudes and experiences of injectable glucagon-like-peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) use and discontinuation, as well as attitudes to further injectable treatment intensification, among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: Nineteen in-depth semi-structured interviews lasting (mean ± standard deviation) 45 ± 18 min were conducted, face-to-face (n = 14) or via telephone (n = 5). Transcripts were analysed using inductive template analyses. Eligible participants were English-speaking adults with T2D who had recently initiated (≤3 years) GLP-1RA treatment. RESULTS: Participants were aged 28-72 years, who predominantly lived in metropolitan areas (n = 15), and had an experience of daily (n = 11) and/or once-weekly (n = 13) GLP-1RA formulations. Six participants had discontinued treatment and seven had trialled two or more formulations. Expectations and experiences of GLP-1RA were related to the perceived: (1) symbolism and stigma of injectable diabetes treatment; (2) ease of injectable administration and device preferences; (3) treatment convenience and social impact; (4) treatment efficacy and benefits, and; (5) negative treatment side effects. Some participants reported increased receptiveness to insulin therapy following their GLP-1RA experience, others emphasised unique concerns about insulin beyond injectable administration. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a novel understanding of expectations and experience of non-insulin injectables among Australian adults with T2D. Our data suggest expectations may be informed by attitudes to insulin therapy, while perceived treatment benefits (e.g. weight-related benefits, administration frequency) may motivate uptake and ongoing use despite concerns. Experience of GLP-1RA injections may impact receptiveness to future insulin use.

IntroductionAchieving glycemic targets and optimizing quality of life (QoL) are important goals of type 1 diabetes care. Hypoglycemia is a common barrier to achieving targets and can be associated with significant distress. However, the impact of hypoglycemia on QoL is not fully understood. The aim of this study was to explore how adults with type 1 diabetes are impacted by hypoglycemia in areas of life that are important to their overall QoL.Research design and methodsParticipants responded to a web-based qualitative survey involving a novel ‘Wheel of Life’ activity. Responses were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.ResultsThe final sample included 219 adults with type 1 diabetes from Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK. They had a mean±SD age of 39±13 years and diabetes duration of 20±14 years. Participants identified eight areas of life important to their overall QoL, including relationships and social life, work and studies, leisure and physical activity, everyday life, sleep, sex life, physical health, and mental health. Participants reported emotional, behavioral, cognitive, and social impacts of hypoglycemia within domains. Across domains, participants described interruptions, limited participation in activities, exhaustion, fear of hypoglycemia, compensatory strategies to prevent hypoglycemia, and reduced spontaneity.ConclusionsThe findings emphasize the profound impact of hypoglycemia on QoL and diabetes self-care behaviors. Diabetes services should be aware of and address the burden of hypoglycemia to provide person-centered care. Clinicians could ask individuals how hypoglycemia affects important areas of their lives to better understand the personal impact and develop tailored management plans.

Women with prior gestational diabetes have nearly 10 times the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Postpartum screening for type 2 diabetes is recommended for early diagnosis and management, yet uptake is low. This work updates a previous systematic review and advances it through the application of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to synthesise personal-level factors impacting type 2 diabetes screening and the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour model (COM-B), to develop messaging recommendations for use in clinical practice and screening promotion interventions.We searched seven academic databases from September 2017 (prior review) to April 2021, reference lists and grey literature. Two reviewers independently screened articles against inclusion criteria (qualitative studies exploring factors impacting postpartum diabetes screening, any language) and extracted data. Using an inductive-deductive model, we coded determinants to the TDF and mapped onto the COM-B model.We identified 38 eligible papers from 34 studies (N = 1291 participants). Most (71%) reported sample sizes of N ≥ 16. The ratio of barriers to enablers was three to one. Eight key TDF domains were identified. Evidence-based recommendations include addressing knowledge, risk perception, fear of diabetes diagnosis, low prioritisation of personal health and fatalism. The risk of bias was low and confidence in findings was moderate to high. A limitation was conceptual overlap between TDF domains, which we addressed via the study procedure.The theoretical categorisation of determinants enables the development of messaging and interventions at the personal level, to promote women's uptake of postpartum type 2 diabetes screening.

Type 1 diabetes is a demanding, complex lifelong condition. Optimal self-care involves repetitive behavioural tasks, undertaken ‘24/7’: administering multiple daily insulin doses, adjusted for food/activity and monitoring glucose levels to avoid hyper- and hypoglycaemia. This requires a comprehensive understanding of diabetes, as well as healthy coping, resilience, problem-solving, and risk reduction skills. It is unsurprising that many experience emotional distress as a consequence of living with type 1 diabetes, which impacts not only on their well-being but also on self-management and outcomes. Clinical guidelines acknowledge that diabetes affects both physical and emotional health. However, the misguided perception persists that the psychosocial care is separate from the diabetes care, and that it requires mental health specialists to assist. A paradigm shift is needed. Diabetes health professionals need to enhance their consultation skills to identify and address psychological needs, if they are to support people to live well with this challenging condition.

Type 2 diabetes is a complex condition requiring attention to blood glucose, blood pressure, cholesterol, and emotional well-being. The overall objective of diabetes self-management is to reduce these risk factors, thereby preventing, delaying, or minimizing risk of long-term complications. Typical strategies include informed dietary choices and physical activity, medication taking and monitoring glucose levels; and, for many, this will also include the challenge of sustaining some weight loss. Substantial advances in medical technologies and treatments in the past 20 years have not been matched with comparable improvements in biomedical outcomes. This chapter highlights five common facets or ‘SHADEs’ of diabetes distress: Scared, Helpless, Alone, Deprived, and Exhausted. As the role of health professionals is not to manage diabetes but rather support people to self-manage their own diabetes, this acronym can be used in clinical practice to identify constructive and creative ways to motivate and sustain effective self-management.

Aim To examine psychosocial and behavioural impacts of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic and lockdown restrictions among adults with type 2 diabetes. Methods Participants enrolled in the PRogrEssion of DIabetic ComplicaTions (PREDICT) cohort study in Melbourne, Australia (n = 489 with a baseline assessment pre‐2020) were invited to complete a phone/online follow‐up assessment in mid‐2020 (i.e., amidst COVID‐19 lockdown restrictions). Repeated assessments that were compared with pre‐COVID‐19 baseline levels included anxiety symptoms (7‐item Generalised Anxiety Disorder scale [GAD‐7]), depressive symptoms (8‐item Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ‐8]), diabetes distress (Problem Areas in Diabetes scale [PAID]), physical activity/sedentary behaviour, alcohol consumption and diabetes self‐management behaviours. Additional once‐off measures at follow‐up included COVID‐19‐specific worry, quality of life (QoL), and healthcare appointment changes (telehealth engagement and appointment cancellations/avoidance). Results Among 470 respondents (96%; aged 66 ± 9 years, 69% men), at least ‘moderate’ worry about COVID‐19 infection was reported by 31%, and 29%–73% reported negative impacts on QoL dimensions (greatest for: leisure activities, feelings about the future, emotional well‐being). Younger participants reported more negative impacts (p

AimsAcceptable and accessible interventions are needed to address ‘psychological insulin resistance’, which is a common barrier to insulin uptake among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Our aim was to test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) study design and acceptability of a theoretically grounded, psycho-educational, web-based resource to reduce negative insulin appraisals among adults with T2D.MethodsA double-blinded, parallel group, two-arm pilot RCT (1:1), comparing intervention with active control (existing online information about insulin). Eligible participants were Australian adults with T2D, taking oral diabetes medications. Exclusion criteria: prior use of injectable medicines; being ‘very willing’ to commence insulin. Primary outcomes: study feasibility (recruitment ease, protocol fulfilment, attrition, data completeness); secondary outcomes: intervention acceptability (intervention engagement, user feedback) and likely efficacy (negative Insulin Treatment Appraisal Scale [ITAS] scores at follow-up). Online surveys completed at baseline and 2 weeks.ResultsDuring 4-week recruitment, 76 people expressed interest: 51 eligible and 35 enrolled (intervention = 17, control = 18; median[interquartile range] age = 62[53, 69] years; 17 women). Protocol fulfilment achieved by 26 (74%) participants (n = 13 per arm), with low participant attrition (n = 6, 17%). Intervention acceptability was high (>80% endorsement, except format preference = 60%). ITAS negative scores differed between-groups at follow-up (M diff = −6.5, 95% confidence interval: −10.7 to −2.4), favouring the intervention.ConclusionsThis novel web-based resource (“Is insulin right for me?”) is acceptable and associated with a likely reduction in negative insulin appraisals, relative to existing resources. This pilot shows the study design is feasible and supports conduct of a fully powered RCT.

OBJECTIVE Impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) and recurrent severe hypoglycemia (RSH) remain problematic for people with type 1 diabetes (T1D), despite major therapeutic advances. We explored beliefs around hypo- and hyperglycemia in adults with T1D with, and without, IAH and RSH. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A cross-sectional U.S. multicenter survey included Attitudes to Awareness of Hypoglycemia (A2A; a 19-item questionnaire concerning beliefs about hypoglycemia), the Gold score (single item: awareness of hypoglycemia), and a question about severe hypoglycemia over the preceding year. The survey was emailed to 6,200 adult participants of the annual T1D Exchange clinic registry data collection. A2A data were subjected to principal component analysis with varimax rotation. RESULTS Among 1,978 respondents (response rate 32%), 61.7% were women, mean ± SD age was 39.6 ± 16.3 years, and T1D duration was 23.1 ± 13.8 years. Thirty-seven percent reported IAH, 16% RSH, and 9% both. A2A items segregated into three factors, differently distributed by hypoglycemia experience. Respondents with IAH or RSH expressed appropriate concern about hypoglycemia, but those with IAH were more likely to prioritize hyperglycemia concerns than those with intact awareness (P = 0.002). Those with RSH showed greater normalization of asymptomatic hypoglycemia than those without (P = 0.019) and trended toward prioritizing hyperglycemia concerns (P = 0.097), driven by those with both IAH and RSH. CONCLUSIONS Adults with T1D with IAH and RSH report specific cognitions about hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia, which may act as barriers to hypoglycemia avoidance and recovery of awareness. These may be modifiable and present a target for enhancing engagement of vulnerable people with strategies to avoid future hypoglycemia.

Aim Hypoglycaemia affects many people with Type 2 diabetes using insulin and other glucose-lowering therapies. This systematic review examined the impact of severe hypoglycaemia (episodes requiring external assistance) on psychological outcomes (e.g. emotional well-being, health status and quality of life) in adults with Type 2 diabetes. Methods MEDLINE Complete, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases were searched for peer-reviewed empirical studies, published in English, reporting the occurrence and severity of hypoglycaemia and its relationship with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in adults with Type 2 diabetes. Data were extracted from published reports and analysed. Results Of 3756 potentially relevant abstracts, 29 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most reported cross-sectional data and sample sizes varied widely (N = 71 to 17 563). Although definitions of mild and severe hypoglycaemia were largely consistent between studies, additional non-standard categorizations (e.g. moderate, very severe) were apparent and recall periods varied. Overall, severe hypoglycaemia was associated with increased fear of hypoglycaemia and decreased emotional well-being, health status and diabetes-specific quality of life. Effect sizes show that the association with fear of hypoglycaemia was stronger than with general health status. Conclusions Notwithstanding the limitations of the empirical studies, these findings indicate that severe hypoglycaemia in adults with Type 2 diabetes (insulin- and non-insulin-treated) is associated with impaired psychological outcomes. Healthcare professionals should address the psychological impact of severe hypoglycaemia during clinical consultations, to support individuals to minimize exposure to, and the psychological consequences of, severe hypoglycaemia.

Aims: We examined: (a) the prevalence of comorbid elevated symptoms of anxiety/depression; (b) its demographic/clinical correlates; (c) associations with self-care behaviors, by diabetes type.Methods: Cross-sectional self-report data of 6590 adults with diabetes (42% type 1; 58% type 2) from the Australian and Dutch Diabetes MILES studies were used. Elevated symptoms of anxiety/depression were defined as GAD-7 >= 10/PHQ-9 >= 10.Results: In both diabetes types, comorbid elevated symptoms of anxiety/depression were present in 9% and symptoms of anxiety alone in 2%; symptoms of depression alone were present in 8% of adults with type 1 diabetes and 11% with type 2 diabetes. Shorter diabetes duration (type 1 only) was the only characteristic that distinguished those with comorbid elevated symptoms of anxiety/depression but not those with symptoms of anxiety/depression alone from the reference group (no/minimal symptoms of anxiety/depression). Those with comorbid elevated symptoms of anxiety/depression had increased odds of sub-optimal diabetes self-care behaviors compared with the reference group, with higher odds than those with symptoms of anxiety or depression alone.Conclusions: Comorbid elevated symptoms of anxiety/depression affected one in ten respondents, who also had increased odds of suboptimal diabetes self-care. Those with shorter type 1 diabetes duration may be at increased risk. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Aims: Prospective memory has been long considered a fundamental cognitive ability for optimal medication taking, but the role of prospective memory errors (termed ‘slips’) in diabetes self-care is unclear. Our aim was to examine associations between prospective memory and medication taking in adults with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods: Some 901 adults with Type 1 diabetes and 927 with Type 2 diabetes completed a cross-sectional survey focused on the psychological and behavioural aspects of living with diabetes. Respondents reported whether they had forgotten to take their diabetes medication over the previous 14 days. Results: Twenty-four per cent (n = 220) of adults with Type 1 diabetes and 23% (n = 211) with Type 2 diabetes reported that they had forgotten their medication at least once over the previous 14 days. This was associated with more prospective memory slips in adults with Type 1 diabetes [odds ratio (OR) 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 1.13; P 1c (Type 1 diabetes). Conclusions: These findings suggest that forgetting medication is relatively common among adults with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes, and provide preliminary evidence for its relationship with self-reported prospective memory slips.

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to investigate medication intake, perceived barriers and their correlates in adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, 3,383 Dutch adults with diabetes (42% type 1; 58% type 2) completed the 12-item ‘Adherence Starts with Knowledge’ questionnaire (ASK-12; total score range: 12-60) and reported socio-demographics, clinical and psychological characteristics and health behaviors. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used.ResultsAdults with type 1 diabetes had a slightly lower mean ASK-12 score (i.e. more optimal medication intake and fewer perceived barriers) than adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. After adjustment for covariates, correlates with suboptimal intake and barriers were fewer severe hypoglycemic events and more depressive symptoms and diabetes-specific distress. In type 2 diabetes, correlates were longer diabetes duration, more depressive symptoms and diabetes-specific distress.ConclusionsAdults with type 1 diabetes showed slightly more optimal medication intake and fewer perceived barriers than adults with non-insulin treated type 2 diabetes. Correlates differed only slightly between diabetes types. The strong association with depressive symptoms and diabetes-specific distress in both diabetes types warrants attention, as improving these outcomes in some people with diabetes might indirectly improve medication intake.

IntroductionType 2 diabetes is a global health priority. People with diabetes are more likely to experience mental health problems relative to people without diabetes. Diabetes guidelines recommend assessment of depression and diabetes distress during diabetes care. This systematic review will examine the effect of routinely assessing and addressing depression and diabetes distress using patient-reported outcome measures in improving outcomes among adults with type 2 diabetes.Methods and analysisMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Complete, PsycInfo, The Cochrane Library and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched using a prespecified strategy using a prespecified Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, Setting and study design strategy. The date range of the search of all databases will be from inception to 3 August 2020. Randomised controlled trials, interrupted time-series studies, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, case–control studies and analytical cross-sectional studies published in peer-reviewed journals in the English language will be included. Two review authors will independently screen abstracts and full texts with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer, if required, using Covidence software. Two reviewers will undertake risk of bias assessment using checklists appropriate to study design. Data will be extracted using prespecified template. A narrative synthesis will be conducted, with a meta-analysis, if appropriate.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this review of published studies. Presentation of results will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020200246.

Diabetes distress is a common negative emotional response to the ongoing burden of living with diabetes. Elevated diabetes distress is associated with impaired diabetes self-management and quality of life yet rarely identified and addressed in clinical practice. Health professionals report numerous barriers to the provision of care for diabetes distress, including lack of skills and confidence, but few diabetes distress training opportunities exist. The purpose of this paper is to describe how we utilized Intervention Mapping to plan the development, implementation, and evaluation of a novel diabetes distress e-learning program for diabetes educators, to meet a well-documented need and significant gap in diabetes care. A multidisciplinary team (combining expertise in research, health and clinical psychology, diabetes education, nursing, tertiary education, and website architecture) developed a diabetes distress e-learning program. We followed a six-step process (logic model of the problem, program outcomes and objectives, program design, program production, program implementation plan, and evaluation plan) known as Intervention Mapping. The program is underpinned by educational and psychological theory, including Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives and social cognitive theory. We developed a short (estimated 4 h) e-learning program for diabetes educators, which draws on the content of the Diabetes and Emotional Health handbook and toolkit. It integrates a 7As model, which provides a stepwise approach to identifying and addressing diabetes distress. Our diabetes distress e-learning program has been developed systematically, guided by an Intervention Mapping approach. In the next phase of the project, we will trial the e-learning.

IntroductionThe successful treatment of type 1 diabetes (T1D) requires those affected to employ insulin therapy to maintain their blood glucose levels as close to normal to avoid complications in the long-term. The Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating (DAFNE) intervention is a group education course designed to help adults with T1D develop and sustain the complex self-management skills needed to adjust insulin in everyday life. It leads to improved glucose levels in the short term (manifest by falls in glycated haemoglobin, HbA1c), reduced rates of hypoglycaemia and sustained improvements in quality of life but overall glucose levels remain well above national targets. The DAFNEplus intervention is a development of DAFNE designed to incorporate behavioural change techniques, technology and longer-term structured support from healthcare professionals (HCPs).Methods and analysisA pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial in adults with T1D, delivered in diabetes centres in National Health Service secondary care hospitals in the UK. Centres will be randomised on a 1:1 basis to standard DAFNE or DAFNEplus. Primary clinical outcome is the change in HbA1c and the primary endpoint is HbA1c at 12 months, in those entering the trial with HbA1c >7.5% (58 mmol/mol), and HbA1c at 6 months is the secondary endpoint. Sample size is 662 participants (approximately 47 per centre); 92% power to detect a 0.5% difference in the primary outcome of HbA1c between treatment groups. The trial also measures rates of hypoglycaemia, psychological outcomes, an economic evaluation and process evaluation.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was granted by South West-Exeter Research Ethics Committee (REC ref: 18/SW/0100) on 14 May 2018. The results of the trial will be published in a National Institute for Health Research monograph and relevant high-impact journals.Trial registration numberISRCTN42908016.

Item does not contain fulltext AIM: To summarize and critically appraise the recent qualitative evidence regarding the impact of hypoglycaemia on the quality of life of family members of adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Four databases were searched systematically (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Library), and results were screened for eligibility. Article quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research. Data were extracted, coded and analysed using thematic analysis. The systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Enhancing transparency in reporting of qualitative research (ENTREQ) guidelines. RESULTS: Eight qualitative studies were included in the final review. The majority of participants were partners or spouses of adults with type 1 diabetes. Thematic synthesis resulted in six analytical themes: 'Hypoglycaemia alters everyday life, reducing freedoms and increasing disruptions', 'Hypoglycaemia has an adverse impact on sleep', 'Hypoglycaemia negatively changes the relationship with the person with diabetes', 'Hypoglycaemia negatively impacts emotional well-being', 'The detection, prevention, and treatment of hypoglycaemia consumes time and energy' and 'Family members have unmet needs for informational and emotional support regarding hypoglycaemia'. Across the six analytical themes, family members described how hypoglycaemia has a severe negative impact on different aspects of their lives, including daily living, personal relationships and emotional well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Family members experience the impact of hypoglycaemia as a major recurrent challenge in their lives. The unmet needs of family members need further attention in research and clinical practice.

© Breanne E Kunstler, John Furler, Elizabeth Holmes-Truscott, Hamish McLachlan, Douglas Boyle, Sean Lo, Jane Speight, David O'Neal, Ralph Audehm, Gary Kilov, Jo-Anne Manski-Nankervis. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (http://formative.jmir.org), 02.09.2020. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Formative Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://formative.jmir.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included. Background: Managing type 2 diabetes (T2D) requires progressive lifestyle changes and, sometimes, pharmacological treatment intensification. General practitioners (GPs) are integral to this process but can find pharmacological treatment intensification challenging because of the complexity of continually emerging treatment options. Objective: This study aimed to use a co-design method to develop and pretest a clinical decision support (CDS) tool prototype (GlycASSIST) embedded within an electronic medical record, which uses evidence-based guidelines to provide GPs and people with T2D with recommendations for setting glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) targets and intensifying treatment together in real time in consultations. Methods: The literature on T2D-related CDS tools informed the initial GlycASSIST design. A two-part co-design method was then used. Initial feedback was sought via interviews and focus groups with clinicians (4 GPs, 5 endocrinologists, and 3 diabetes educators) and 6 people with T2D. Following refinements, 8 GPs participated in mock consultations in which they had access to GlycASSIST. Six people with T2D viewed a similar mock consultation. Participants provided feedback on the functionality of GlycASSIST and its role in supporting shared decision making (SDM) and treatment intensification. Results: Clinicians and people with T2D believed that GlycASSIST could support SDM (although this was not always observed in the mock consultations) and individualized treatment intensification. They recommended that GlycASSIST includes less information while maintaining relevance and credibility and using graphs and colors to enhance visual appeal. Maintaining clinical autonomy was important to GPs, as they wanted the capacity to override GlycASSIST's recommendations when appropriate. Clinicians requested easier screen navigation and greater prescribing guidance and capabilities. Conclusions: GlycASSIST was perceived to achieve its purpose of facilitating treatment intensification and was acceptable to people with T2D and GPs. The GlycASSIST prototype is being refined based on these findings to prepare for quantitative evaluation.

Contains fulltext : 235355.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) Hypoglycaemia is a common barrier to optimal glycaemic management and often feared among adults with type 1 diabetes. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize current evidence regarding the impact of hypoglycaemia on quality of life (QoL) and related outcomes. Electronic searches of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were conducted. Peer-reviewed empirical studies investigating the relationship between hypoglycaemia and QoL were eligible for inclusion. Thirty studies met the inclusion criteria. Extracted data was summarized in a narrative synthesis according to Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis guidelines. None of the studies examined the impact of hypoglycaemia on general QoL. There was no association between hypoglycaemia and diabetes-specific QoL in four of the 30 studies. Severe hypoglycaemia was associated with greater fear of hypoglycaemia and diabetes distress, and lower general emotional well-being, but not with depression, anxiety, or health status. Self-treated hypoglycaemia was associated with greater fear of hypoglycaemia. With the exception of fear of hypoglycaemia, this review shows mixed associations between hypoglycaemia and psychological outcomes. Further research is needed to investigate the impact of hypoglycaemia on other domains of QoL.

ObjectivesThis study examined the effect of using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) routinely to assess and address depressive symptoms and diabetes distress among adults with type 2 diabetes.DesignA systematic review of published peer-reviewed studies.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, CINAHL Complete, PsycINFO, The Cochrane Library and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched.Eligibility criteriaStudies including adults with type 2 diabetes, published in English, from the inception of the databases to 24 February 2022 inclusive; and where the intervention included completion of a PROM of depressive symptoms and/or diabetes distress, with feedback of the responses to a healthcare professional.Data extraction and synthesisUsing Covidence software, screening and risk of bias assessment were conducted by two reviewers independently with any disagreements resolved by a third reviewer.ResultsThe search identified 4512 citations, of which 163 full-text citations were assessed for eligibility, and nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Five studies involved assessment of depressive symptoms only, two studies assessed diabetes distress only, and two studies assessed both. All studies had an associated cointervention. When depressive symptoms were assessed (n=7), a statistically significant between-group difference in depressive symptoms was observed in five studies; with a clinically significant (>0.5%) between-group difference in HbA1c in two studies. When diabetes distress was assessed (n=4), one study demonstrated statistically significant difference in depressive symptoms and diabetes distress; with a clinically significant between-group difference in HbA1c observed in two studies.ConclusionStudies are sparse in which PROMs are used to assess and address depressive symptoms or diabetes distress during routine clinical care of adults with type 2 diabetes. Further research is warranted to understand how to integrate PROMs into clinical care efficiently and determine appropriate interventions to manage identified problem areas.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020200246.

BACKGROUND Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems have been shown to be safe and effective in reducing hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia but are not universally available, accessible, or affordable. Therefore, user-driven open-source AID systems are becoming increasingly popular. OBJECTIVE This study aims to investigate the motivations for which people with diabetes (types 1, 2, and other) or their caregivers decide to build and use a personalized open-source AID. METHODS A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted to assess personal motivations and associated self-reported clinical outcomes. RESULTS Of 897 participants from 35 countries, 80.5% (722) were adults with diabetes and 19.5% (175) were caregivers of children with diabetes. Primary motivations to commence open-source AID included improving glycemic outcomes (476/509 adults, 93.5%, and 95/100 caregivers, 95%), reducing acute (443/508 adults, 87.2%, and 96/100 caregivers, 96%) and long-term (421/505 adults, 83.3%, and 91/100 caregivers, 91%) complication risk, interacting less frequently with diabetes technology (413/509 adults, 81.1%; 86/100 caregivers, 86%), improving their or child’s sleep quality (364/508 adults, 71.6%, and 80/100 caregivers, 80%), increasing their or child’s life expectancy (381/507 adults, 75.1%, and 84/100 caregivers, 84%), lack of commercially available AID systems (359/507 adults, 70.8%, and 79/99 caregivers, 80%), and unachieved therapy goals with available therapy options (348/509 adults, 68.4%, and 69/100 caregivers, 69%). Improving their own sleep quality was an almost universal motivator for caregivers (94/100, 94%). Significant improvements, independent of age and gender, were observed in self-reported glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), 7.14% (SD 1.13%; 54.5 mmol/mol, SD 12.4) to 6.24% (SD 0.64%; 44.7 mmol/mol, SD 7.0; PP CONCLUSIONS These results highlight the unmet needs of people with diabetes, provide new insights into the evolving phenomenon of open-source AID technology, and indicate improved clinical outcomes. This study may inform health care professionals and policy makers about the opportunities provided by open-source AID systems. CLINICALTRIAL INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR2-10.2196/15368

OBJECTIVE To investigate glycemic and psychosocial outcomes with hybrid closed-loop (HCL) versus user-determined insulin dosing with multiple daily injections (MDI) or insulin pump (i.e., standard therapy for most adults with type 1 diabetes). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Adults with type 1 diabetes using MDI or insulin pump without continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) were randomized to 26 weeks of HCL (Medtronic 670G) or continuation of current therapy. The primary outcome was masked CGM time in range (TIR; 70–180 mg/dL) during the final 3 weeks. RESULTS Participants were randomized to HCL (n = 61) or control (n = 59). Baseline mean (SD) age was 44.2 (11.7) years, HbA1c was 7.4% (0.9%) (57 [10] mmol/mol), 53% were women, and 51% used MDI. HCL TIR increased from (baseline) 55% (13%) to (26 weeks) 70% (10%) with the control group unchanged: (baseline) 55% (12%) and (26 weeks) 55% (13%) (difference 15% [95% CI 11, 19]; P < 0.0001). For HCL, HbA1c was lower (median [95% CI] difference −0.4% [−0.6, −0.2]; −4 mmol/mol [−7, −2]; P < 0.0001) and diabetes-specific positive well-being was higher (difference 1.2 [95% CI 0.4, 1.9]; P < 0.0048) without a deterioration in diabetes distress, perceived sleep quality, or cognition. Seventeen (9 device-related) versus 13 serious adverse events occurred in the HCL and control groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS In adults with type 1 diabetes, 26 weeks of HCL improved TIR, HbA1c, and their sense of satisfaction from managing their diabetes compared with those continuing with user-determined insulin dosing and self-monitoring of blood glucose. For most people living with type 1 diabetes globally, this trial demonstrates that HCL is feasible, acceptable, and advantageous.

Type 2 diabetes in young adults (nominally, 18-30 years of age) is a more aggressive condition than that seen in older age, with a greater risk of major morbidity and early mortality. This first Australian consensus statement on the management of type 2 diabetes in young adults considers areas where existing type 2 diabetes guidance, directed mainly towards older adults, may not be appropriate or relevant for the young adult population. Where applicable, recommendations are harmonised with current national guidance for type 2 diabetes in children and adolescents (aged 18 years). The full statement is available at https://www.diabetessociety.com.au, https://www.adea.com.au and https://www.apeg.org.au.Advice is provided on important aspects of care including screening, diabetes type, psychological care, lifestyle, glycaemic targets, pharmacological agents, cardiovascular disease risk management, comorbidity assessment, contraception and pregnancy planning, and patient-centred education. Special considerations for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians are highlighted separately.Management recommendations for young adults, which differ from those for adults, include: ▪screening for diabetes in young adults with overweight or obesity and additional risk factors, including in utero exposure to type 2 diabetes or gestational diabetes mellitus; ▪more stringent glucose targets (glycated haemoglobin ≤ 6.5% [≤ 48 mmol/mol]); ▪in the context of obesity or higher cardio-renal risk, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors are preferred second line agents; ▪β-cell decline is more rapid, so frequent review, early treatment intensification and avoidance of therapeutic inertia are indicated; ▪a blood pressure target of 130/80 mmHg, as the adult target of ≤ 140/90 mmHg is too high; ▪absolute cardiovascular disease risk calculators are not likely to be accurate in this age group; early statin use should therefore be considered; and ▪a multidisciplinary model of care including an endocrinologist and a certified diabetes educator.

The psychological burden experienced by people with diabetes prior to islet transplantation is recognized but has not been studied comprehensively, especially in relation to glycemia. Therefore, we conducted a rigorous pre-operative psychosocial profile of UK islet transplant recipients, and compared groups with higher/lower HbA1 c to test the null hypothesis that pre-transplant hypoglycemia awareness and psychosocial burden would not be related to baseline HbA1 c in this high-risk cohort. Pre-transplant, recipients (n = 44) completed validated hypoglycemia awareness questionnaires and generic/diabetes-specific measures of psychological traits and states. Scores were compared in groups, dichotomized by HbA1 c (≤8% versus >8%). Participants were aged (mean±SD) 53 ± 10 years; 64% were women; with HbA1 c 8.3 ± 1.7%. Median rate of severe hypoglycemia over the preceding 12 months was 13 events/person-year and 90% had impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (Gold/Clarke score ≥4). Participants had elevated fear of hypoglycemia (HFS-II Worry), impaired diabetes-specific quality of life (DQoL) and low generic health status (SF-36; EQ-5D). One quarter reported scores indicating likely anxiety/depression (HAD). Dispositional optimism (LOT-R) and generalized self-efficacy (GSE) were within published ‘norms.’ Despite negative perceptions of diabetes (including low personal control), participants were confident that islet transplantation would help (BIPQ). Hypoglycemia awareness and psychosocial profile were comparable in lower (n = 24) and higher (n = 20) HbA1 c groups. Islet transplant candidates report sub-optimal generic psychological states (anxiety/depressive symptoms), health status and diabetes-specific psychological states (fear of hypoglycemia, diabetes-specific quality of life). While their generic psychological traits (optimism, self-efficacy) are comparable with the general population, they are highly optimistic about forthcoming transplant. HbA1 c is not a proxy measure of psychosocial burden, which requires the use of validated questionnaires to systematically identify those who may benefit most from psychological assessment and support.

Introduction The incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus has increased in children and adolescents due largely to the obesity epidemic, particularly in high risk ethnic groups. β-Cell function declines faster and diabetes complications develop earlier in paediatric type 2 diabetes compared with adult-onset type 2 diabetes. There are no consensus guidelines in Australasia for assessment and management of type 2 diabetes in paediatric populations and health professionals have had to refer to adult guidelines. Recent international paediatric guidelines did not address adaptations to care for patients from Indigenous backgrounds. Main recommendations This guideline provides advice on paediatric type 2 diabetes in relation to screening, diagnosis, diabetes education, monitoring including targets, multicomponent healthy lifestyle, pharmacotherapy, assessment and management of complications and comorbidities, and transition. There is also a dedicated section on considerations of care for children and adolescents from Indigenous background in Australia and New Zealand. Changes in management as a result of the guidelines Published international guidelines currently exist, but the challenges and specifics to care for children and adolescents with type 2 diabetes which should apply to Australasia have not been addressed to date. These include: recommendations regarding care of children and adolescents from Indigenous backgrounds in Australia and New Zealand including screening and management; tighter diabetes targets (glycated haemoglobin, ≤ 48 mmol/mol [≤ 6.5%]) for all children and adolescents; considering the use of newer medications approved for adults with type 2 diabetes under the guidance of a paediatric endocrinologist; and the need to transition adolescents with type 2 diabetes to a diabetes multidisciplinary care team including an adult endocrinologist for their ongoing care.

AIMS: Optimal diabetes management requires daily selfmanagement. While little time is spent with health professionals, they can have a substantial impact on how a person manages and feels about living with diabetes. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore what people with diabetes wish their health professionals understood about living with diabetes.METHODS: Thematic analysis was conducted of responses to a single open-ended question, 'What do you wish your health professional understood about living with diabetes?', which was part of the Diabetes MILES-2 survey, assessing the psychological and behavioural aspects of living with type 1 or type 2 diabetes in Australian adults.RESULTS: In total, 1316 responses (56% response rate) were collected, with 1190 responses included for analysis (54% from respondents with type 1 diabetes, 46% from those with type 2 diabetes). Seven major themes emerged; respondents wished their health professional understood: 1) the potential barriers to diabetes management; 2) that it is 'easier said than done'; 3) the social/emotional impact; 4) that they want, need and deserve more; 5) that judgements, assumptions and negative perspective are not helpful; 6) more about diabetes; and 7) that the respondent is the expert in his/her diabetes. Other comments suggested satisfactory experiences with health professionals, highlighting that some respondents had no wish for their health professional to understand more.CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that, although some adults with diabetes are satisfied with their health professionals' understanding of living with diabetes, many report unmet needs and perceive a lack of person-centred care from their health professionals.

Background: Few long-term RCTs compare Hybrid Closed Loop (HCL) insulin delivery to manual (non-HCL) insulin dosing in type 1 diabetes (T1D). Objective: To examine glycemic and psychosocial outcomes in adults with T1D using HCL vs. manual insulin dosing with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) for 6 months. Methods: Adults using multiple daily injections or pumps with SMBG were randomized 1:1 after insulin dose optimization to 26 weeks of HCL (Medtronic 670G) or continuation of current therapy. The primary outcome was time in target range (70-180mg/dL) with masked CGM during the final 3 weeks. Secondary outcomes included other CGM metrics, HbA1c, treatment satisfaction (DTSQs) and diabetes distress (PAID). Intention to treat analysis was performed with ANCOVA or rank sum test. Results: HCL and control groups were well balanced at baseline (Table). At 26 weeks, mean (95% CI) CGM time in range with HCL was greater by 14.8% (11.1, 18.5), with reduced high and low glucose time, and lower HbA1c. There were no between-group differences in treatment satisfaction or diabetes distress (Table). Conclusions: HCL provided a significant and sustained glycemic benefit compared with standard therapy. Results will inform potential users and health professionals and a cost-benefit analysis may facilitate HCL access. Disclosure S.A. McAuley: Advisory Panel; Self; Medtronic. Research Support; Self; Medtronic, Roche Diabetes Care. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Lilly Diabetes, Roche Diabetes Care. M.H. Lee: Research Support; Self; Medtronic. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca, Medtronic. B. Paldus: Research Support; Self; JDRF. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Australian Diabetes Society, Medtronic. S. Vogrin: None. M.B. Abraham: Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Lilly Diabetes. L. Bach: None. M. Burt: None. N. Cohen: Advisory Panel; Self; Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lilly Diabetes. Research Support; Self; Ypsomed AG. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. P.G. Colman: None. E.A. Davis: None. C. Hendrieckx: None. M. de Bock: None. J. Holmes-Walker: None. J. Kaye: Advisory Panel; Self; Abbott. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk Inc. K. Kumareswaran: None. R. MacIsaac: None. R.W. McCallum: None. C.M. Sims: Stock/Shareholder; Self; Medtronic. J. Speight: Research Support; Self; Abbott, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, Sanofi-Aventis. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; American Diabetes Association, Australian Diabetes Society, Roche Diabetes Care. S. Stranks: Advisory Panel; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Lilly Diabetes, Sanofi-Aventis. S. Trawley: None. V. Sundararajan: None. G. Ward: None. A.C. Keech: Advisory Panel; Self; Amgen, Kowa Research Institute, Inc. Consultant; Self; Sanofi-Aventis. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Abbott, Amgen. A. Jenkins: Advisory Panel; Self; Abbott, Medtronic. Research Support; Self; Abbott, GlySens Incorporated, Medtronic, Sanofi-Aventis. T. Jones: Other Relationship; Self; Medtronic. D.N. ONeal: None.

BACKGROUND Delivering self-management support to people with type 2 diabetes mellitus is essential to reduce the health system burden and to empower people with the skills, knowledge, and confidence needed to take an active role in managing their own health. OBJECTIVE This study aims to evaluate the adoption, use, and effectiveness of the My Diabetes Coach (MDC) program, an app-based interactive embodied conversational agent, Laura, designed to support diabetes self-management in the home setting over 12 months. METHODS This randomized controlled trial evaluated both the implementation and effectiveness of the MDC program. Adults with type 2 diabetes in Australia were recruited and randomized to the intervention arm (MDC) or the control arm (usual care). Program use was tracked over 12 months. Coprimary outcomes included changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Data were assessed at baseline and at 6 and 12 months, and analyzed using linear mixed-effects regression models. RESULTS A total of 187 adults with type 2 diabetes (mean 57 years, SD 10 years; 41.7% women) were recruited and randomly allocated to the intervention (n=93) and control (n=94) arms. MDC program users (92/93 participants) completed 1942 chats with Laura, averaging 243 min (SD 212) per person over 12 months. Compared with baseline, the mean estimated HbA1c decreased in both arms at 12 months (intervention: 0.33% and control: 0.20%), but the net differences between the two arms in change of HbA1c (−0.04%, 95% CI −0.45 to 0.36; P=.83) was not statistically significant. At 12 months, HRQoL utility scores improved in the intervention arm, compared with the control arm (between-arm difference: 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.07; P=.04). CONCLUSIONS The MDC program was successfully adopted and used by individuals with type 2 diabetes and significantly improved the users’ HRQoL. These findings suggest the potential for wider implementation of technology-enabled conversation-based programs for supporting diabetes self-management. Future studies should focus on strategies to maintain program usage and HbA1c improvement. CLINICALTRIAL Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN) 12614001229662; https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12614001229662

Over the past 25 years, there has been significant acknowledgement of the importance of assessing the impact of diabetes on quality of life. Yet, despite the development of several diabetes-specific quality-of-life measures, the challenges we faced in 1995 remain. There is little consensus on the definition of quality of life because of the complexity and subjectivity of the concept. General quality of life comprises several domains of life, and these are highly individualized. Assessing the impact of diabetes on these life domains adds to the complexity. While comprehensive diabetes-specific quality-of-life measures typically increase respondent burden, brief questionnaires may not capture all relevant/important domains. Today, the lack of resolution of these challenges may explain why the impact of diabetes on quality of life is not systematically assessed in research or clinical care. Few researchers report detailed rationales for assessment, there is often a mismatch between the concept of interest and the measure selected, and data are misinterpreted as assessing the impact of diabetes on quality of life when, in reality, related but distinct constructs have been assessed, such as diabetes distress, treatment satisfaction or health status. While significant efforts are being made to increase routine monitoring of psychological well-being and understand the lived experience, no guidelines currently recommend routine clinical assessment of diabetes-specific quality of life, and there is no consensus on which questionnaire(s) to use. The gaps identified in this review need urgent attention, starting with recognition that assessment of diabetes-specific quality of life is as important as biomedical markers, if we are to improve the lives of people with diabetes.

BACKGROUND Managing type 2 diabetes (T2D) requires progressive lifestyle changes and, sometimes, pharmacological treatment intensification. General practitioners (GPs) are integral to this process but can find pharmacological treatment intensification challenging because of the complexity of continually emerging treatment options. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to use a co-design method to develop and pretest a clinical decision support (CDS) tool prototype (GlycASSIST) embedded within an electronic medical record, which uses evidence-based guidelines to provide GPs and people with T2D with recommendations for setting glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) targets and intensifying treatment together in real time in consultations. METHODS The literature on T2D-related CDS tools informed the initial GlycASSIST design. A two-part co-design method was then used. Initial feedback was sought via interviews and focus groups with clinicians (4 GPs, 5 endocrinologists, and 3 diabetes educators) and 6 people with T2D. Following refinements, 8 GPs participated in mock consultations in which they had access to GlycASSIST. Six people with T2D viewed a similar mock consultation. Participants provided feedback on the functionality of GlycASSIST and its role in supporting shared decision making (SDM) and treatment intensification. RESULTS Clinicians and people with T2D believed that GlycASSIST could support SDM (although this was not always observed in the mock consultations) and individualized treatment intensification. They recommended that GlycASSIST includes less information while maintaining relevance and credibility and using graphs and colors to enhance visual appeal. Maintaining clinical autonomy was important to GPs, as they wanted the capacity to override GlycASSIST’s recommendations when appropriate. Clinicians requested easier screen navigation and greater prescribing guidance and capabilities. CONCLUSIONS GlycASSIST was perceived to achieve its purpose of facilitating treatment intensification and was acceptable to people with T2D and GPs. The GlycASSIST prototype is being refined based on these findings to prepare for quantitative evaluation.

Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems have been shown to be safe and effective in reducing hyper- and hypoglycaemia, but are not universally available, accessible, and affordable. Therefore, user-driven open-source AID systems are becoming increasingly popular. Methods: This study investigated motivations why people with diabetes or their caregivers decide to build and use a personalised open-source AID. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted to assess personal motivations and associated self-reported clinical outcomes. Findings: Of 897 participants from 35 countries, 80·4% were adults with diabetes and 19·6% were caregivers of children with diabetes. Primary motivations to commence open-source AID included: improving glycaemic outcomes (94% of adults, 95% of caregivers), reducing acute (87%/96%) and long-term (83%/91%) complication risk, interacting less frequently with diabetes technology (81%/76%), improving their/child’s sleep quality (72%/80%), increasing their/child’s life expectancy (72%/85%), lack of commercially available AID systems (71%/70%), and unachieved therapy goals with available therapy options (68%/69%). Improving their own sleep quality was an almost universal motivator for caregivers (94%). Significant improvements, independent of age and gender, were observed in self-reported HbA1C, 7·14±1·13% (54·5±12·4 mmol/mol) to 6·24±0·64% (44·7±7·0 mmol/mol; p

IntroductionHypoglycaemia is a frequent adverse event and major barrier for achieving optimal blood glucose levels in people with type 1 or type 2 diabetes using insulin. The Hypo-RESOLVE (Hypoglycaemia—Redefining SOLutions for better liVEs) consortium aims to further our understanding of the day-to-day impact of hypoglycaemia. The Hypo-METRICS (Hypoglycaemia—MEasurement, ThResholds and ImpaCtS) application (app) is a novel app for smartphones. This app is developed as part of the Hypo-RESOLVE project, using ecological momentary assessment methods that will minimise recall bias and allow for robust investigation of the day-to-day impact of hypoglycaemia. In this paper, the development and planned psychometric analyses of the app are described.Methods and analysisThe three phases of development of the Hypo-METRICS app are: (1) establish a working group—comprising diabetologists, psychologists and people with diabetes—to define the problem and identify relevant areas of daily functioning; (2) develop app items, with user-testing, and implement into the app platform; and (3) plan a large-scale, multicountry study including interviews with users and psychometric validation. The app includes 7 modules (29 unique items) assessing: self-report of hypoglycaemic episodes (during the day and night, respectively), sleep quality, well-being/cognitive function, social interactions, fear of hypoglycaemia/hyperglycaemia and work/productivity. The app is designed for use within three fixed time intervals per day (morning, afternoon and evening). The first version was released mid-2020 for use (in conjunction with continuous glucose monitoring and activity tracking) in the Hypo-METRICS study; an international observational longitudinal study. As part of this study, semistructured user-experience interviews and psychometric analyses will be conducted.Ethics and disseminationUse of the novel Hypo-METRICS app in a multicountry clinical study has received ethical approval in each of the five countries involved (Oxford B Research Ethics Committee, CMO Region Arnhem-Nijmegen, Ethikkommission der Medizinischen Universität Graz, Videnskabsetisk Komite for Region Hovedstaden and the Comite Die Protection Des Personnes SUD Mediterranne IV). The results from the study will be published in peer review journals and presented at national and international conferences.Trial registration numberNCT04304963.

OBJECTIVEThe HypoCOMPaSS study was designed to test the hypothesis that successful avoidance of biochemical hypoglycemia without compromising overall glycemic control would restore sufficient hypoglycemia awareness to prevent recurrent severe hypoglycemia in the majority of participants with established type 1 diabetes. Before starting the study, we planned to investigate associations between baseline characteristics and recurrent severe hypoglycemia over 2 years’ follow-up.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSA total of 96 adults with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycemia participated in a 24-week 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial comparing insulin delivery and glucose monitoring modalities, with the goal of rigorous biochemical hypoglycemia avoidance. The analysis included 71 participants who had experienced severe hypoglycemia in the 12-month prestudy with confirmed absence (complete responder) or presence (incomplete responder) of severe hypoglycemia over 24 months’ follow-up.RESULTSThere were 43 (61%) complete responders and 28 (39%) incomplete responders experiencing mean ± SD 1.5 ± 1.0 severe hypoglycemia events/person-year. At 24 months, incomplete responders spent no more time with glucose ≤3 mmol/L (1.4 ± 2.1% vs. 3.0 ± 4.8% for complete responders; P = 0.26), with lower total daily insulin dose (0.45 vs. 0.58 units/24 h; P = 0.01) and greater impairment of hypoglycemia awareness (Clarke score: 3.8 ± 2.2 vs. 2.0 ± 1.9; P = 0.01). Baseline severe hypoglycemia rate (16.9 ± 16.3 vs. 6.4 ± 10.8 events/person-year; P = 0.002) and fear of hypoglycemia were higher in incomplete responders. Peripheral neuropathy was more prevalent in incomplete responders (11 [39%] vs. 2 [4.7%]; P < 0.001) with a trend toward increased autonomic neuropathy.CONCLUSIONSRecurrent severe hypoglycemia was associated with higher preintervention severe hypoglycemia rate, fear of hypoglycemia, and concomitant neuropathy.

OBJECTIVE To examine the association of diabetes stigma with psychological, behavioral, and HbA1c outcomes and to investigate moderation effects of self-esteem, self-efficacy, and/or social support. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS The national Second Diabetes MILES – Australia (MILES-2) survey included adults with type 1 diabetes (n = 959, 41% of whom were male, with mean ± SD age 44 ± 15 years), insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (n = 487, 60% male, age 61 ± 9 years), and non–insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (n = 642, 55% male, age 61 ± 10 years). (Un)adjusted linear regression analyses tested the association between diabetes stigma (Diabetes Stigma Assessment Scale [DSAS]) and psychological outcomes (depressive symptoms [eight-item version of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8)], anxiety symptoms [Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) questionnaire], and diabetes-specific distress [20-item Problem Areas In Diabetes (PAID) scale]), behavioral outcomes (healthy diet and physical activity [Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities (SDSCA)]), and self-reported HbA1c. Interaction effects tested whether associations varied by self-esteem (Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale [RSES]), self-efficacy (Confidence in Diabetes Self-Care [CIDS] scale), or diabetes-specific social support (Diabetes Support Scale [DSS]). RESULTS Significant positive associations were observed between DSAS and PHQ-8, GAD-7, and PAID across diabetes type/treatment groups (all P < 0.001), whereby each SD increase in DSAS scores was associated with approximately one-half SD deterioration in emotional well-being. Associations between DSAS and SDSCA and HbA1c were nonmeaningful. Self-esteem moderated psychological outcomes among participants with type 1 and non–insulin-treated type 2 diabetes and diabetes distress among those with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. Interaction effects were partially observed for social support but not for self-efficacy. CONCLUSIONS This study provides evidence of the association between diabetes stigma and depressive/anxiety symptoms and diabetes distress and for the moderating effects of self-esteem and social support among adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Further research is needed to examine associations with objectively measured behavioral and clinical outcomes.

Almost 100 years since the discovery of insulin, hypoglycaemia remains a barrier for people with type 1 diabetes to achieve and maintain blood glucose at levels which prevent long-term diabetes-related complications. Although hypoglycaemia is primarily attributable to the limitations of current treatment and defective hormonal counter-regulation in type 1 diabetes, the central role of psycho-behavioural factors in preventing, recognizing and treating hypoglycaemia has been acknowledged since the early 1980s. Over the past 25 years, as documented in the present review, there has been a substantial increase in psycho-behavioural research focused on understanding the experience and impact of hypoglycaemia. The significant contributions have been in understanding the impact of hypoglycaemia on a person's emotional well-being and aspects of life (e.g. sleep, driving, work/social life), identifying modifiable psychological and behavioural risk factors, as well as in developing psycho-behavioural interventions to prevent and better manage (severe) hypoglycaemia. The impact of hypoglycaemia on family members has also been confirmed. Structured diabetes education programmes and psycho-behavioural interventions with a focus on hypoglycaemia have both been shown to be effective in addressing problematic hypoglycaemia. However, the findings have also revealed the complexity of the problem and the need for a personalized approach, taking into account the individual's knowledge of, and emotional/behavioural reactions to hypoglycaemia. Evidence is emerging that people with persistent and recurrent severe hypoglycaemia, characterized by deeply entrenched cognitions and lack of concern around hypoglycaemia, can benefit from tailored cognitive behavioural therapy.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the recommended assessment and management of women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), based on the best available evidence, clinical expertise and consumer preference?SUMMARY ANSWER: International evidence-based guidelines, including 166 recommendations and practice points, addressed prioritized questions to promote consistent, evidence-based care and improve the experience and health outcomes of women with PCOS.WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Previous guidelines either lacked rigorous evidence-based processes, did not engage consumer and international multidisciplinary perspectives, or were outdated. Diagnosis of PCOS remains controversial, and assessment and management are inconsistent. The needs of women with PCOS are not being adequately met and evidence practice gaps persist.STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: International evidence-based guideline development engaged professional societies and consumer organizations with multidisciplinary experts and women with PCOS directly involved at all stages. Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II-compliant processes were followed, with extensive evidence synthesis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was applied across evidence quality, feasibility, acceptability, cost, implementation and ultimately recommendation strength.PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Governance included a six continent international advisory and a project board, five guideline development groups, and consumer and translation committees. Extensive health professional and consumer engagement informed guideline scope and priorities. Engaged international society-nominated panels included pediatrics, endocrinology, gynecology, primary care, reproductive endocrinology, obstetrics, psychiatry, psychology, dietetics, exercise physiology, public health and other experts, alongside consumers, project management, evidence synthesis and translation experts. In total, 37 societies and organizations covering 71 countries engaged in the process. Twenty face-to-face meetings over 15 months addressed 60 prioritized clinical questions involving 40 systematic and 20 narrative reviews. Evidence-based recommendations were developed and approved via consensus voting within the five guideline panels, modified based on international feedback and peer review, with final recommendations approved across all panels.MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The evidence in the assessment and management of PCOS is generally of low to moderate quality. The guideline provides 31 evidence based recommendations, 59 clinical consensus recommendations and 76 clinical practice points all related to assessment and management of PCOS. Key changes in this guideline include: (i) considerable refinement of individual diagnostic criteria with a focus on improving accuracy of diagnosis; (ii) reducing unnecessary testing; (iii) increasing focus on education, lifestyle modification, emotional wellbeing and quality of life; and (iv) emphasizing evidence based medical therapy and cheaper and safer fertility management.LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Overall evidence is generally low to moderate quality, requiring significantly greater research in this neglected, yet common condition, especially around refining specific diagnostic features in PCOS. Regional health system variation is acknowledged and a process for guideline and translation resource adaptation is provided.WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The international guideline for the assessment and management of PCOS provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice based on the best available evidence, expert multidisciplinary input and consumer preferences. Research recommendations have been generated and a comprehensive multifaceted dissemination and translation program supports the guideline with an integrated evaluation program.STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The guideline was primarily funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) supported by a partnership with ESHRE and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Guideline development group members did not receive payment. Travel expenses were covered by the sponsoring organizations. Disclosures of conflicts of interest were declared at the outset and updated throughout the guideline process, aligned with NHMRC guideline processes. Full details of conflicts declared across the guideline development groups are available at https://www.monash.edu/medicine/sphpm/mchri/pcos/guideline in the Register of disclosures of interest. Of named authors, Dr Costello has declared shares in Virtus Health and past sponsorship from Merck Serono for conference presentations. Prof. Laven declared grants from Ferring, Euroscreen and personal fees from Ferring, Euroscreen, Danone and Titus Healthcare. Prof. Norman has declared a minor shareholder interest in an IVF unit. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. The guideline was peer reviewed by special interest groups across our partner and collaborating societies and consumer organizations, was independently assessed against AGREE-II criteria, and underwent methodological review. This guideline was approved by all members of the guideline development groups and was submitted for final approval by the NHMRC.