Type of publication:
Conference abstract
Author(s):
*Basavaraju N.; *Jones A.; *Cane C.; *Moulik P.
Citation:
Diabetes Technology and Therapeutics. Conference: Advanced Techologies and Treatments for Diabetes Conference, ATTD 2024. Virtual. 26(Supplement 2) (pp A327), 2024. Date of Publication: 01 Feb 2024.
Abstract:
Background and Aims: Hybrid closed loop(HCL) continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion(CSII) and continuous glucose monitoring(CGM) have made significant improvements in management of T1D. We studied benefits of Hybrid closed loop(HCL) over non-closed loop(NCL) CSII in a cohort of adults with T1D. Method(s): We analysed a live database of patients managed in a single centre on CSII. Clinical parameters assessed included %Time in range(TIR), %hypoglycaemia(%hypo) and HbA1c. QOL was assessed with Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire( DTSQ), Hypoglycaemia Fear Survey(HFS), Type 1 Diabetes Distress score(T1DDS). Data was analysed using the SPSS software. Result(s): Data on 281 patients were included, mean age was 44 years(range 19-81), 57% females. 218 were on HCL (Medtronic 780G with Guardian G4 sensor or Tandem T-Slim with Dexcom G6 sensor) and 63 (Omnipod DASH with Dexcom G6 or Freestyle Libre 2). For HCL vs NCL systems, clinical parameters improved with mean HbA1c (52 vs 57mmol/mol, p < 0.005), TIR (71% vs 62%, p < 0.005) and %hypo (1.64% vs 2.64%, p = 0.08). QOL improvement favoured HCL, but were non-significant with mean DTSQ (36.3 vs 35.5, p = 0.21), HFS (33.6vs34.9, p = 0.71) and T1DDS (47.2 vs 49.3, p = 0.40). There was no significant difference in clinical or QOL parameters between Medtronic 780G and Tandem T-Slim HCL systems. Conclusion(s): HCL systems studied had clear benefits in terms of clinical outcome parameters compared to NCL, but this was not reflected in improved patient perceptions on QOL. All patients on NCL being on CGM may be a possible explanation, with the reassurance of CGM making the biggest impact on patients perceived QOL.
