Background:The Patient Empowerment through Predictive Personalised Decision Support (PEPPER) system provides personalised bolus advice for people with Type 1 diabetes. The system incorporates an adaptive insulin recommender system (based on case-based reasoning, an artificial intelligence methodology), coupled with a safety system which includes predictive glucose alerts and alarms, predictive low-glucose suspend, personalised carbohydrate recommendations and dynamic bolus insulin constraint. We evaluated the safety and feasibility of the PEPPER system compared to a standard bolus calculator. Methods:This was an open-labelled multicentre randomized controlled cross-over study. Following 4week run-in, participants were randomized to PEPPER/Control or Control/PEPPER in a 1:1 ratio for 12-weeks. Participants then crossed over after a wash-out period. The primary end-point was percentage time in range (TIR, 3.9mmol/L-10.0mmol/L (70-180mg/dL)). Secondary outcomes included glycaemic variability, quality of life, and outcomes on the safety system and insulin recommender.Results: 54 participants on multiple daily injections (MDI) or insulin pump completed the run-in period, making up the intention-to-treat analysis. Median (interquartile range) age was 41.5 (32.3-49.8) years, diabetes duration 21.0 (11.5-26.0) years and HbA1c 61.0 (58.0-66.1) mmol/mol. No significant difference was observed for percentage TIR between the PEPPER and Control groups (62.5 (52.1-67.8) % vs 58.4 (49.6-64.3) % respectively, p=0.27). For quality of life, participants reported higher perceived hypoglycaemia with the PEPPER system despite no objective difference in time spent in hypoglycaemia. Conclusions:The PEPPER system was safe but did not change glycaemic outcomes, compared to control. There is wide scope for integrating PEPPER into routine diabetes management for pump and MDI users. Further studies are required to confirm overall effectiveness.
Background With advances in technology, there is an emerging concern that inequalities exist in provision and diabetes outcomes in areas of greater deprivation. We assess the relationship between socio‐economic status and deprivation with access to diabetes technology and their outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes. Methods Retrospective, observational analysis of adults attending a tertiary centre, comprising three urban hospitals in the UK. Socio‐economic deprivation was assessed by the English Indices of Deprivation 2019. Data analysis was performed using one‐way ANOVAs and chi‐squared tests. Results In total, 1631 adults aged 44 ± 15 years and 758 (47%) women were included, with 391 (24%) using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion, 312 (19%) using real‐time continuous glucose monitoring and 558 (34%) using intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring. The highest use of diabetes technology was in the least deprived quintile compared to the most deprived quintile (67% vs. 45%, respectively; p < 0.001). HbA1c outcomes were available in 400 participants; no association with deprivation was observed (p = 0.872). Participation in structured education was almost twice as high from the most deprived to the least deprived groups (23% vs. 43%; p < 0.001). Adults with white or mixed ethnicity were more likely to use technology compared to black ethnicity (60% vs. 40%; p < 0.001). Conclusions Adults living in the most deprived quintile had less technology use. Irrespective of socio‐economic status or ethnicity, glycaemia was positively affected in all groups. It is imperative that health disparities are further addressed.
Real‐time continuous glucose monitors using subcutaneous needle‐type sensors continue to develop. The limitations of currently available systems, however, include time lag behind changes in blood glucose, the invasive nature of such systems, and in some cases, their accuracy. Non‐invasive techniques have been developed, but, to date, no commercial device has been successful. A key research priority for people with Type 1 diabetes identified by the James Lind Alliance was to identify ways of monitoring blood glucose constantly and accurately using a discrete device, invasive or non‐invasive. Integration of such a sensor is important in the development of a closed‐loop system and the technology must be rapid, selective and acceptable for continuous use by individuals. The present review provides an update on existing continuous glucose‐sensing technologies, and an overview of emergent techniques, including their accuracy and limitations.
(1) Objective: Blood glucose forecasting in type 1 diabetes (T1D) management is a maturing field with numerous algorithms being published and a few of them having reached the commercialisation stage. However, accurate long-term glucose predictions (e.g., >60 min), which are usually needed in applications such as precision insulin dosing (e.g., an artificial pancreas), still remain a challenge. In this paper, we present a novel glucose forecasting algorithm that is well-suited for long-term prediction horizons. The proposed algorithm is currently being used as the core component of a modular safety system for an insulin dose recommender developed within the EU-funded PEPPER (Patient Empowerment through Predictive PERsonalised decision support) project. (2) Methods: The proposed blood glucose forecasting algorithm is based on a compartmental composite model of glucose–insulin dynamics, which uses a deconvolution technique applied to the continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) signal for state estimation. In addition to commonly employed inputs by glucose forecasting methods (i.e., CGM data, insulin, carbohydrates), the proposed algorithm allows the optional input of meal absorption information to enhance prediction accuracy. Clinical data corresponding to 10 adult subjects with T1D were used for evaluation purposes. In addition, in silico data obtained with a modified version of the UVa-Padova simulator was used to further evaluate the impact of accounting for meal absorption information on prediction accuracy. Finally, a comparison with two well-established glucose forecasting algorithms, the autoregressive exogenous (ARX) model and the latent variable-based statistical (LVX) model, was carried out. (3) Results: For prediction horizons beyond 60 min, the performance of the proposed physiological model-based (PM) algorithm is superior to that of the LVX and ARX algorithms. When comparing the performance of PM against the secondly ranked method (ARX) on a 120 min prediction horizon, the percentage improvement on prediction accuracy measured with the root mean square error, A-region of error grid analysis (EGA), and hypoglycaemia prediction calculated by the Matthews correlation coefficient, was 18.8%, 17.9%, and 80.9%, respectively. Although showing a trend towards improvement, the addition of meal absorption information did not provide clinically significant improvements. (4) Conclusion: The proposed glucose forecasting algorithm is potentially well-suited for T1D management applications which require long-term glucose predictions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.