> Details

Yuan, Cheng Yi; Kong, Yee W.; Amoore, Tess; Brown, Katrin; Grosman, Benyamin; Jenkins, Alicia; Jones, Hannah; Kurtz, Natalie; Lee, Melissa H.; MacIsaac, Richard; Netzer, Emma; Paldus, Barbora; Robinson, Lesley; Roy, Anirban; Sims, Catriona M.; Trawley, Steven; Vogrin, Sara; O’Neal, David N.

Improved Satisfaction While Maintaining Safety and High Time in Range (TIR) With a Medtronic Investigational Enhanced Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop (e-AHCL) System

Reference
management

Bookmarks

Remove from
bookmarks

Share this on Whatsapp

Close

Bookmarks



You can manage bookmarks using lists, please log in to your user account for this.
  • Media type: E-Article
  • Title: Improved Satisfaction While Maintaining Safety and High Time in Range (TIR) With a Medtronic Investigational Enhanced Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop (e-AHCL) System
  • Contributor: Yuan, Cheng Yi; Kong, Yee W.; Amoore, Tess; Brown, Katrin; Grosman, Benyamin; Jenkins, Alicia; Jones, Hannah; Kurtz, Natalie; Lee, Melissa H.; MacIsaac, Richard; Netzer, Emma; Paldus, Barbora; Robinson, Lesley; Roy, Anirban; Sims, Catriona M.; Trawley, Steven; Vogrin, Sara; O’Neal, David N.
  • imprint: American Diabetes Association, 2024
  • Published in: Diabetes Care
  • Language: English
  • DOI: 10.2337/dc23-2217
  • ISSN: 0149-5992; 1935-5548
  • Keywords: Advanced and Specialized Nursing ; Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism ; Internal Medicine
  • Origination:
  • Footnote:
  • Description: <jats:sec> <jats:title>OBJECTIVE</jats:title> <jats:p>To determine feasibility and compare acceptance of an investigational Medtronic enhanced advanced hybrid closed-loop (e-AHCL) system in adults with type 1 diabetes with earlier iterations.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS</jats:title> <jats:p>This nonrandomized three-stage (12 weeks each) exploratory study compared e-AHCL (Bluetooth-enabled MiniMed 780G insulin pump with automatic data upload [780G] incorporating an updated algorithm; calibration-free all-in-one disposable sensor; 7-day infusion set) preceded by a run-in (non-Bluetooth 780G [670G V4.0 insulin pump] requiring manual data upload; Guardian Sensor 3 [GS3] requiring calibration; 3-day infusion set), stage 1 (780G; GS3; 3-day infusion set), and stage 2 (780G; calibration-free Guardian Sensor 4; 3-day infusion set). Treatment satisfaction was assessed by Diabetes Technology Questionnaire (DTQ)-current (primary outcome) and other validated treatment satisfaction tools with glucose outcomes by continuous glucose monitoring metrics.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>RESULTS</jats:title> <jats:p>Twenty-one of 22 (11 women) participants (baseline HbA1c 6.7%/50 mmol/mol) completed the study. DTQ-current scores favored e-AHCL (123.1 [17.8]) versus run-in (101.6 [24.2]) and versus stage 1 (110.6 [20.8]) (both P &amp;lt; 0.001) but did not differ from stage 2 (119.4 [16.0]; P = 0.271). Diabetes Medication System Rating Questionnaire short-form scores for “Convenience and Efficacy” favored e-AHCL over run-in and all stages. Percent time in range 70–180 mg/dL was greater with e-AHCL versus run-in and stage 2 (+2.9% and +3.6%, respectively; both P &amp;lt; 0.001). Percent times of &amp;lt;70 mg/dL for e-AHCL were significantly lower than run-in, stage 1, and stage 2 (−0.9%, −0.6%, and −0.5%, respectively; all P &amp;lt; 0.01).</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>CONCLUSIONS</jats:title> <jats:p>e-AHCL was feasible. User satisfaction increased compared with earlier Medtronic HCL iterations without compromising glucose control.</jats:p> </jats:sec>