Barriers and Facilitators to Diabetes Device Adoption for People with Type 1 Diabetes

Overview

Journal Curr Diab Rep

Publisher Current Science

Specialty Endocrinology

Date 2022 May 6

PMID 35522355

Authors

Molly L Tanenbaum

Persis V Commissariat

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose Of Review: Diabetes technology (insulin pumps, continuous glucose monitoring, automated insulin delivery systems) has advanced significantly and provides benefits to the user. This article reviews the current barriers to diabetes device adoption and sustained use, and outlines the known and potential facilitators for increasing and sustaining device adoption.

Recent Findings: Barriers to diabetes device adoption continue to exist at the system-, provider-, and individual-level. Known facilitators to promote sustained adoption include consistent insurance coverage, support for providers and clinics, structured education and support for technology users, and device user access to support as needed (e.g., through online resources). Systemic barriers to diabetes device adoption persist while growing evidence demonstrates the increasing benefits of newest devices and systems. There are ongoing efforts to develop evidence-based structured education programs to support device adoption and sustained use.

Citing Articles

A new approach in insulin pump education improves glycemic outcomes: a randomized controlled trial.

Rytter K, Hougaard A, Skouboe A, Serifovski N, Ranjan A, Norgaard K Acta Diabetol. 2024; 62(1):87-94.

PMID: 39172172 PMC: 11772455. DOI: 10.1007/s00592-024-02340-y.

Continuous glucose monitoring metrics in pregnancy with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Jeeyavudeen M, Crosby M, Pappachan J World J Methodol. 2024; 14(1):90316.

PMID: 38577196 PMC: 10989406. DOI: 10.5662/wjm.v14.i1.90316.

Identification of psychological constructs for a positive psychology intervention to assist with the adjustment to closed loop technology among adolescents living with type 1 diabetes.

Kruger S, Deacon E, van Rensburg E, Segal D Front Psychol. 2023; 14:1273586.

PMID: 37901094 PMC: 10603242. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1273586.

The Effect of Do-It-Yourself Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Glycemic Variables and Participant-Reported Outcomes in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Crossover Trial.

Sehgal S, Elbalshy M, Williman J, Galland B, Crocket H, Hall R J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2023; 19(2):415-425.

PMID: 37671754 PMC: 11873873. DOI: 10.1177/19322968231196562.

Area deprivation and demographic factors associated with diabetes technology use in adults with type 1 diabetes in Germany.

Auzanneau M, Eckert A, Meyhofer S, Heni M, Gillessen A, Schwettmann L Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023; 14:1191138.

PMID: 37600703 PMC: 10433185. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1191138.

References

Borges Jr U, Kubiak T . Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Type 1 Diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2016; 10(3):633-639. PMC: 5038544. DOI: 10.1177/1932296816634736. View

Lawton J, Kimbell B, Rankin D, Ashcroft N, Varghese L, Allen J . Health professionals' views about who would benefit from using a closed-loop system: a qualitative study. Diabet Med. 2020; 37(6):1030-1037. DOI: 10.1111/dme.14252. View

Haskova A, Radovnicka L, Petruzelkova L, Parkin C, Grunberger G, Horova E . Real-time CGM Is Superior to Flash Glucose Monitoring for Glucose Control in Type 1 Diabetes: The CORRIDA Randomized Controlled Trial. Diabetes Care. 2020; 43(11):2744-2750. PMC: 7576432. DOI: 10.2337/dc20-0112. View

Ju Z, Piarulli A, Bielick L, Marschall S, Brouillard E, Steenkamp D . Advanced Diabetes Technology Remains Underutilized in Underserved Populations: Early Hybrid Closed-Loop System Experience at an Academic Safety Net Hospital. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021; 24(2):143-147. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2021.0334. View

Prahalad P, Ebekozien O, Alonso G, Clements M, Corathers S, DeSalvo D . Multi-Clinic Quality Improvement Initiative Increases Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use Among Adolescents and Young Adults With Type 1 Diabetes. Clin Diabetes. 2021; 39(3):264-271. PMC: 8329017. DOI: 10.2337/cd21-0026. View

Everett E, Wisk L . Relationships Between Socioeconomic Status, Insurance Coverage for Diabetes Technology and Adverse Health in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2021; 16(4):825-833. PMC: 9264432. DOI: 10.1177/19322968211050649. View

Indelicato L, Mariano V, Galasso S, Boscari F, Cipponeri E, Negri C . Influence of health locus of control and fear of hypoglycaemia on glycaemic control and treatment satisfaction in people with Type 1 diabetes on insulin pump therapy. Diabet Med. 2017; 34(5):691-697. DOI: 10.1111/dme.13321. View

Agarwal S, Crespo-Ramos G, Long J, Miller V . "I Didn't Really Have a Choice": Qualitative Analysis of Racial-Ethnic Disparities in Diabetes Technology Use Among Young Adults with Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021; 23(9):616-622. PMC: 8501459. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2021.0075. View

Hohendorff J, Gumprecht J, Mysliwiec M, Zozulinska-Ziolkiewicz D, Malecki M . Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data of Polish Patients from Real-Life Conditions: More Scanning and Better Glycemic Control Compared to Worldwide Data. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021; 23(8):577-585. PMC: 8377514. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2021.0034. View

10.

Nordfeldt S, Angarne-Lindberg T, Nordwall M, Ekberg J, Bertero C . As Facts and Chats Go Online, What Is Important for Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes?. PLoS One. 2013; 8(6):e67659. PMC: 3689681. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0067659. View

11.

Tanenbaum M, Iturralde E, Hanes S, Suttiratana S, Ambrosino J, Ly T . Trust in hybrid closed loop among people with diabetes: Perspectives of experienced system users. J Health Psychol. 2017; 25(4):429-438. PMC: 7162558. DOI: 10.1177/1359105317718615. View

12.

Aleppo G, Webb K . Continuous Glucose Monitoring Integration in Clinical Practice: A Stepped Guide to Data Review and Interpretation. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2018; 13(4):664-673. PMC: 6610596. DOI: 10.1177/1932296818813581. View

13.

Iturralde E, Tanenbaum M, Hanes S, Suttiratana S, Ambrosino J, Ly T . Expectations and Attitudes of Individuals With Type 1 Diabetes After Using a Hybrid Closed Loop System. Diabetes Educ. 2017; 43(2):223-232. PMC: 7162535. DOI: 10.1177/0145721717697244. View

14.

Lum J, Bailey R, Barnes-Lomen V, Naranjo D, Hood K, Lal R . A Real-World Prospective Study of the Safety and Effectiveness of the Loop Open Source Automated Insulin Delivery System. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2020; 23(5):367-375. PMC: 8080906. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2020.0535. View

15.

Tanenbaum M, Zaharieva D, Addala A, Ngo J, Prahalad P, Leverenz B . 'I was ready for it at the beginning': Parent experiences with early introduction of continuous glucose monitoring following their child's Type 1 diabetes diagnosis. Diabet Med. 2021; 38(8):e14567. PMC: 8480902. DOI: 10.1111/dme.14567. View

16.

Naranjo D, Suttiratana S, Iturralde E, Barnard K, Weissberg-Benchell J, Laffel L . What End Users and Stakeholders Want From Automated Insulin Delivery Systems. Diabetes Care. 2017; 40(11):1453-1461. PMC: 5864142. DOI: 10.2337/dc17-0400. View

17.

Tumminia A, Crimi S, Sciacca L, Buscema M, Frittitta L, Squatrito S . Efficacy of real-time continuous glucose monitoring on glycaemic control and glucose variability in type 1 diabetic patients treated with either insulin pumps or multiple insulin injection therapy: a randomized controlled crossover trial. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2014; 31(1):61-8. DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.2557. View

18.

Miller V, Xiao R, Slick N, Feudtner C, Willi S . Youth Involvement in the Decision to Start CGM Predicts Subsequent CGM Use. Diabetes Care. 2020; 43(10):2355-2361. PMC: 7510031. DOI: 10.2337/dc20-0348. View

19.

Breton M, Kovatchev B . One Year Real-World Use of the Control-IQ Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop Technology. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021; 23(9):601-608. PMC: 8501470. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2021.0097. View

20.

Farrington C, Hovorka R, Murphy H . Who Should Access Closed-Loop Technology? A Qualitative Study of Clinician Attitudes in England. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2020; 22(5):404-410. PMC: 7196368. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2019.0380. View