Stereoselective synthesis of bioactive natural spiroacetals aculeatins A and B.

B. Das,M. Krishnaiah,C. Sudhakar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bmcl.2010.01.162

IF: 2.94

2010-04-01

Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Treatment Intensification With Insulin Pumps and Other Technologies in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Results of a Physician Survey in the United States

George Grunberger,David Sze,Anastasia Ermakova,Ray Sieradzan,Teresa Oliveria,Eden M. Miller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2337/cd19-0008

2020-01-01

Clinical Diabetes

Abstract:An online survey was conducted to assess the perspectives and use of diabetes technologies by a sample of U.S. primary care physicians (PCPs) and endocrinologists to optimize intensive insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes. Overall, endocrinologists reported using diabetes technologies more frequently than PCPs for patients with type 2 diabetes requiring basal-bolus insulin therapy. PCPs and endocrinologists who were highly focused on diabetes management with insulin therapy reported using insulin delivery devices (insulin pumps and wearable tube-free patches) when patients are not achieving their A1C target while taking basal plus three or more prandial injections of insulin daily.
Removing Barriers, Bridging the Gap, and the Changing Role of the Health Care Professional with Automated Insulin Delivery Systems

Kathryn Lingen,David Maahs,Natalie Bellini,Diana Isaacs

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2023.0440

2024-02-21

Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics

Abstract:As all people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and some with type 2 diabetes (T2D) require insulin, there is a need to develop management methods that not only achieve glycemic targets but also reduce the burden of living with diabetes. After insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors, the next step in the evolution of diabetes technology is automated insulin delivery (AID) systems, which have transformed intensive insulin management over the past decade, as these systems address the shortcomings of previous management options. However, AID use remains fairly limited, and access represents a major barrier to use for many people with diabetes, despite these systems being standard of care. Therefore, the future of AID will necessitate addressing barriers related to social determinants of health, finances, and an expansion of the number and type of health care professionals (HCPs) prescribing AID systems. These crucial steps will be essential to ensure that everyone with intensively managed diabetes can use AID systems. The impact of implementing these changes will create a shift in the future of diabetes care that will result in achievement of more targeted glycemia and psychosocial outcomes for all people with diabetes and an expansion of the role of all HCPs in AID-related diabetes care. Even more importantly, by addressing social determinants of health and clinical inertia related to AID, the field can address disparities in outcomes across countries, race, gender, socioeconomic status, and insurance status. Furthermore, the increased use of AID system will provide more time during appointments for a shift in the discussion away from fine tuning insulin dosing and toward a focus on more topics related to behavior and conversations about general health. This will include psychosocial outcomes, and quality of life. In addition, these changes can hopefully allow for time to discuss more general issues, such as cardiovascular health, obesity prevention, diabetes-related complications, and other health-related concerns.

endocrinology & metabolism
Continuous glucose monitoring among nurse practitioners in primary care: Characteristics associated with prescribing and resources needed to support use

Tristen L. Hall,L. Miriam Dickinson,Meredith K. Warman,Tamara K. Oser,Sean M. Oser

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/jxx.0000000000001060

2024-07-24

Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners

Abstract:ABSTRACT Background: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) can improve health for people with diabetes but is limited in primary care (PC). Nurse Practitioners (NPs) in PC can improve diabetes management through CGM, but NPs' interest in CGM and support needed are unclear. Purpose: We describe behaviors and attitudes related to CGM for diabetes management among NPs in PC. Methodology: This cross-sectional web-based survey of NPs practicing in PC settings used descriptive statistics to describe CGM experience and identify resources to support prescribing. We used multivariable regression to explore characteristics predicting prescribing and confidence using CGM for diabetes. Results: Nurse practitioners in hospital-owned settings were twice as likely to have prescribed CGM (odds ratio [OR] = 2.320, 95% CI [1.097, 4.903]; p = .002) than private practice; those in academic medical centers were less likely (OR = 0.098, 95% CI [0.012, 0.799]; p = .002). Past prescribing was associated with favorability toward future prescribing (coef. = 0.7284, SE = 0.1255, p < .001) and confidence using CGM to manage diabetes (type 1: coef. = 3.57, SE = 0.51, p < .001; type 2: coef. = 3.49, SE = 0.51, p < .001). Resources to prescribe CGM included consultation with an endocrinologist (62%), educational website (61%), and endocrinological e-consultations (59%). Conclusions: Nurse practitioners are open to prescribing CGM and can improve diabetes management and health outcomes for PC patients. Implications: Research should explore mechanisms behind associations with CGM experience and attitudes. Efforts to advance CGM should include educational websites and endocrinology consultations for NPs in PC.

nursing,health care sciences & services
Self‐reported insulin pump prescribing practices in pediatric type 1 diabetes

Meghan E. Fredette,Mark R. Zonfrillo,Sangshin Park,Jose Bernardo Quintos,Philip A. Gruppuso,Lisa Swartz Topor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/pedi.13213

2021-04-21

Pediatric Diabetes

Abstract:<section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Introduction</h3><p>Disadvantaged and minority youth with type 1 diabetes are less likely to be on insulin pump therapy compared to the majority population. Little is known about how pediatric endocrinology providers determine eligibility for insulin pump. We aimed to identify provider factors influencing the decision to initiate insulin pump therapy.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Methods</h3><p>We conducted a survey of Pediatric Endocrine Society members who prescribe insulin pump therapy to pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes. The survey collected information about prescriber characteristics, use and adherence to guidelines, eligibility criteria, and objective and subjective factors that influence insulin pump prescription.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Results</h3><p>The survey was completed by 192 individuals who met eligibility criteria (14.1% response rate). The majority of respondents were attending providers, and were white, non‐Hispanic females. A minority of providers (22%) reported following written insulin pump guidelines, and many (70%) reported using personal guidelines to guide patient selection. Most providers had no objective eligibility criteria, aside from standard glucose monitoring. Providers identified patient lifestyle and increased risk of hypoglycemia, as well as patient and family factors such as motivation, realistic expectations of insulin pump use, ability to demonstrate carbohydrate counting, patient request, and ability to communicate as important in the decision to initiate insulin pump.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Conclusion</h3><p>Pediatric endocrinology providers place significant importance on subjective factors and utilize few objective criteria in determining eligibility for insulin pump. In the setting of the known disparities in insulin pump use, providers should utilize objective, consistent criteria to determine which patients are safe to initiate insulin pump.</p><p>This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.</p></section>

pediatrics,endocrinology & metabolism
Clinical perspective on innovative insulin delivery technologies in diabetes management

Güvenç Koçkaya,Tadej Battelino,Goran Petrovski,Johan Jendle,Beatrix Sármán,Nancy Elbarbary,Damla Gökşen,Mohammed Alharbi,Birol Tibet,Amir Mustapha Sharaf,Selin Ökçün,Filiz Öztürk,Mustafa Kurnaz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2024.1308319

2024-10-01

Abstract:Introduction: The primary objective of this study is to report the results of an online questionnaire and the in-person discussion sessions of physicians specializing in diabetes care in which their opinions about current diabetes management was obtained. Methods: The Diabetes Innovation Summit 2023 drew attendance from a diverse group of specialized physicians from multiple countries. A comprehensive literature review was conducted to examine the technologies and medical needs associated with diabetes management. Using the results of the review, a questionnaire was developed by three experts from the steering committee to solicit feedback from specialized physicians. The online survey was made accessible between 10th December 2022 and 10th January 2023. Following the online survey, six structured in-person discussion sessions were conducted with specialized physicians from the Middle East, Central-Eastern Europe, and North Africa regions. Results: The study revealed that about 59% of survey requests were answered, with many participants being pediatric endocrinologists from North Africa. Around 60% of diabetes patients followed Multiple Daily Injections (MDI) according to specialized physicians. Among MDI users, 62% employed Blood Glucose Monitors (BGM), 31% used intermittent-scanning Continuous Glucose Monitors (isCGM), and 23% used CGM. In North Africa, nearly 90% of patients used MDI due to financial constraints. While physicians focused on both Time in Range (TIR) and HbA1c for MDI-treated patients, satisfaction with TIR achieved was expressed by 31%, while 74·1% believed Real-Time CGM (rtCGM) was effective. Concerns arose about potentially misleading HbA1c results and the relatively low patient achievement of target TIR despite CGM usage. The Smart MDI System was seen favorably compared to other applications. The system's affordability was a significant barrier, particularly in the Middle East and Africa. Conclusion: The present study highlights that physicians are generally supportive of utilizing new technology. The questionnaires and the open discussion revealed the expectation that the Smart MDI technology provides better control, primarily by identifying missed boluses, while expressing concerns on the use of the technology by teenagers and children, who might forget the device and be reluctant to use in public, and by the older population, who might be challenged by the technology.
Continuous glucose monitoring for primary care patients with diabetes: Barriers, facilitators, & resources to support access

Meredith Warman,Melissa Fillippi,Brian Manning,Tamara Oser,Donald Nease,Tristen Hall,Sean Oser,Jennifer Carroll

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.20.s1.2689

2022-04-01

Abstract:Context: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes is associated with improved patient health outcomes including reduced glycated hemoglobin (A1c) and hypoglycemia and is part of ADA Standards of Medical Care. CGM prescription often takes place in endocrinology practices. With limited access to endocrinologists, many patients could benefit from receiving CGM through primary care. Objective: The overall study aims to understand primary care clinicians' CGM prescribing experience and likelihood to prescribe, and identify resources needed to support prescribing CGM. This qualitative phase examines barriers and facilitators to prescribing, and resources to support prescribing. Study Design: Qualitative phase of an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study following a cross-sectional online survey. Respondents were invited to participate in phone/virtual interviews to understand CGM prescribing attitudes and behaviors. Participants were stratified based on factors related to distance to an endocrinologist and prescribing behavior. Rapid qualitative analysis was used to understand relationships and trends, and identify resources to support CGM prescription in primary care. Setting: Two primary care research networks. Population studied: Primary care physicians and advanced practice providers in the U.S. Outcome Measures: Resources needed, barriers, and facilitators to prescribing CGM. Results: 55 interviews were conducted. The following themes emerged in the analysis: Insurance and cost-related barriers were most commonly cited, as well as distance to endocrinology when > 40 miles away. Facilitators included training and experience with CGM and staff to support patient education and insurance navigation. Resources (e.g., webinars, online guides, conferences) to increase knowledge about CGM use and clinical outcomes and guidance with insurance processes/coverage could support CGM prescription in primary care. Conclusions: Increased understanding among primary care clinicians of the use and benefits of CGM can help with confidence in prescribing. CGM management in primary care could benefit patients with diabetes, especially those with access barriers to endocrinologists. Addressing cost and insurance barriers at a policy level can make CGM more attainable to underserved populations and reduce disparities in diabetes control.
136-LB: Health Care Professional (HCP) Perspectives on Support Tools for Diabetes Devices

LAUREL H. MESSER,TIMOTHY B. VIGERS,HALIS K. AKTURK,GREGORY P. FORLENZA,KELSEY B. HUSS,ANGELA J. KARAMI,EMILY MALECHA,SEAN OSER,SARIT POLSKY,LAURA PYLE,VIRAL SHAH,R. PAUL WADWA,TAMARA OSER

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2337/db22-136-lb

IF: 7.7

2022-06-01

Diabetes

Abstract:Purpose: To understand the relative importance of support tools for HCPs to increase engagement with diabetes devices Methods: Primary care, pediatric and adult endocrinology HCPs completed an online survey assessing their comfort with continuous glucose monitors, connected insulin pens, insulin pumps, hybrid closed-loop systems, and their perceived needs for support tools. Hypothetical tools were described and Visual Analog Scales (VAS) (0 to 100) were used to "indicate how useful each tool would be in clinical practice." Results: 113 primary care HCPs (mean 16.3±10.1 yrs in practice) , 84 adult endocrinology HCPs (10.7±9.2 yrs in practice) , and 34 pediatric endocrinology HCPs (13.6±12.2 yrs in practice) completed the survey. A tool that assists in determining patients' insurance coverage for devices was ranked with the highest median score for all HCP types (VAS score: 90, 99, 95/100 respectively) , followed by an Online Data Platform to access device information (85, 88, 91.5/100) [Figure]. HCPs additionally indicated the importance of device data integration into an electronic health record (EHR) (83, 87.5, 82/100) , support tool accessibility from the EHR (79.5, 71, 75/100) , and device information communication to patients via EHR (78, 73.5, 75/100) . Conclusion: HCPs from 3 disciplines highlighted the need for clinical tools to work with diabetes devices in clinical practice, with particular interest in insurance aid and data platform. Disclosure L. H. Messer: Consultant; Capillary Biomedical, Inc., Dexcom, Inc., Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc., Research Support; Beta Bionics, Inc., Dexcom, Inc., Insulet Corporation, Medtronic. L. Pyle: None. V. Shah: Advisory Panel; Medscape, Sanofi, Consultant; Dexcom, Inc., Research Support; Dexcom, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Insulet Corporation, Novo Nordisk. R. Wadwa: Advisory Panel; Dompé, Consultant; Beta Bionics, Inc., Other Relationship; Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc., Research Support; Dexcom, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. T. Oser: Advisory Panel; Cecelia Health, Dexcom, Inc. T. B. Vigers: None. H. K. Akturk: Research Support; Dexcom, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, REMD Biotherapeutics. G. P. Forlenza: Advisory Panel; Lilly, Medtronic, Consultant; Dexcom, Inc., Insulet Corporation, Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc., Research Support; Dexcom, Inc., Insulet Corporation, Medtronic, Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. K. B. Huss: None. A. J. Karami: None. E. Malecha: None. S. Oser: Advisory Panel; Cecelia Health, Children with Diabetes, Inc., Dexcom, Inc., Consultant; American Diabetes Association, Association of Diabetes Care & Education Specialists, Jaeb Center for Health Research, Research Support; American Academy of Family Physicians, Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust. S. Polsky: Advisory Panel; Medtronic, Other Relationship; diaTribe, Research Support; Dexcom, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust, Medtronic, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Sanofi-Aventis U. S. Funding The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust (G-2206-05306)

endocrinology & metabolism
564-P: Insights into How Health Technologies Can Support Patient-Centered Diabetes Self-Management—A Mixed-Methods Approach

TIMOTHY M. BOBER,JODI S. KRALL,SOPHIA GARVIN,MARGARET ZUPA,CHRISTINA WHITE,BHAVINI SOTAA,CARISSA LOW,ANN-MARIE ROSLAND

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2337/db24-564-p

IF: 7.7

2024-06-14

Diabetes

Abstract:Background & Objective: New technologies like mobile applications (apps), activity trackers, and continuous glucose monitors (CGM) are available to support people with diabetes (PWD), but it is not clear how these tools are currently used together for diabetes self-management (DSM). This mixed methods study assessed how PWD use technology to relate diabetes self-care behaviors to DSM goals. Methods: Sixty-one adults aged 18-75 with type I or II diabetes (DM) who used ≥1 diabetes medication were surveyed about health app and monitor use (glucose, food, exercise/activity, weight, sleep, and stress trackers) as well as digital and general health literacy. 18 survey respondents completed semi-structured interviews examining how technologies were and could be used in daily DSM. Results: Survey respondents were 34% African American and 38% female, 48% were >45 years old. Regarding DM type and treatment, 72% had Type II diabetes, 59% used insulin, and 56% had used CGMs. Participants had high levels of digital and general health literacy. For tech use, 87% of respondents used ≥1 health app; 59% had used an activity tracker; and 47% had used apps to track ≥3 separate health behaviors. While glucose-tracking apps were more common among CGM (92%) and insulin users (100%), survey respondents used other health apps at similar rates regardless of CGM (57% vs. 60%) or insulin status (61% vs. 60%). Interviewees described using glucose-tracking apps to personalize dietary choices, but less often reported using data from other health apps or monitors for DSM goals. For data to be helpful for DSM, interviewees desired data that was passively collected, easily integrated across monitors, easily visualized, and tailorable to personal health goals. Conclusion: PWD reported using apps to monitor multiple behaviors that impact DSM. Findings suggest that there are untapped opportunities to integrate diabetes apps with trackable lifestyle data to support patient-centered DSM. Disclosure T.M. Bober: None. J.S. Krall: Research Support; Becton, Dickinson and Company, Sanofi. S. Garvin: None. M. Zupa: None. C. White: None. B. Sotaa: None. C. Low: None. A. Rosland: None. Funding The Pittsburgh Foundation (MR2022-128717)

endocrinology & metabolism
Roll-over shapes of the able-bodied knee-ankle-foot system during gait initiation, steady-state walking, and gait termination.

S. C. Miff,A. Hansen,D. Childress,S. Gard,M. Meier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GAITPOST.2007.04.011

IF: 2.746

2008-02-01

Gait & Posture

Abstract:
Computational Analyses of Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA, C22:6, n-3) with Alzheimer’s Disease-Causing Amyloid Peptide A β 1-42 Reassures Its Therapeutic Utility

M. Hashimoto,S. Hossain,K. Matsuzaki,Abdullah Al Mamun,H. Arai,O. Shido

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/AAD.2016.52006

2016-06-07

Abstract:The accumulation of amyloid β peptide1-42 (Aβ1-42) masses in the brains of Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) patients is associated with neuronal loss and memory deficits. We have previously reported that oral administration of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA, C22:6, n-3) significantly decreases Aβ burden in the brains of AD model rats and that direct in vitro incubation of DHA with Aβ1-42 curbs the progression of amyloid fibrillation. In the present in silico study, we investigated whether DHA computationally binds with amyloid peptides. The NMR solution structures of Aβ1-42 were downloaded from the Protein Data Bank (PDB IDs: 1Z0Q and 2BEG). The binding of DHA to Aβ peptides was assessed by molecular docking using both a flexible and rigid docking system. Thioflavin T (ThT) was used as positive control. The chemical structures of ThT and DHA were modeled and converted to the PDB format using PRODRUG. Drug-like properties of DHA were evaluated by ADME (Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion). DHA was found to successfully dock with Aβ1-42. Computational analyses of the binding of DHA to Aβ1-42, as evaluated by docking studies, further corroborated the inhibitory effect of DHA on in vitro Aβ1-42 fibrillogenesis and might explain the in vivo reduction of amyloid burden observed in the brains of DHA-administered AD model rats demonstrated in our previous study. These computational data suggest the potential utility of DHA as a preventive medication in Aβ-induced neurodegenerative diseases, including AD.
A Team-Based Training for Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Diabetes Care: Mixed Methods Pilot Implementation Study in Primary Care Practices

Melissa K Filippi,Angela M Lanigan,Sean M Oser,Jillian Alai,Alicia Brooks-Greisen,Tamara K Oser

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/45189

2023-04-25

JMIR Formative Research

Abstract:Background: The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) develops and maintains continuing medical education that is relevant to modern primary care practices. One continuing medical education modality is AAFP TIPS, which are comprised of resources designed for family medicine physicians and their care teams that aid in quick and accessible practice improvement strategies, with actionable steps. Evaluating physicians' use of and satisfaction with this modality's content and implementation strategies has not been prioritized previously. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) plays an increasing role in the treatment of diabetes; uptake occurs more rapidly in endocrinology settings than in primary care settings. To help address such differences in CGM uptake and diabetes care, AAFP TIPS on Continuous Glucose Monitoring (AAFP TIPS CGM) was developed, using published evidence and input from content experts (family medicine faculty; AAFP staff; and an advisory group comprised of other primary care physicians, patients, a pharmacist, and a primary care practice facilitator). A pilot implementation project was conducted in 3 primary care practices. Objective: To evaluate AAFP TIPS CGM in primary care practices, the research team assessed use of and satisfaction with the content and assessed barriers to and facilitators for strategy and workflow implementation. Methods: In total, 3 primary care practices participated in a mixed methods pilot implementation of AAFP TIPS CGM between June and October 2021. Practice champions at each site completed AAFP TIPS CGM and baseline practice surveys to evaluate practice characteristics and CGM prescribing. They conducted team trainings (via webinars or in person), with the goals of implementing CGM into practice and establishing or improving CGM workflows. Practice champions and team training participants completed posttraining surveys to evaluate the training, AAFP TIPS materials, and likelihood of implementing CGM. Interviews were conducted with 6 physicians, including practice champions, 2 months after team training. Satisfaction surveys were also distributed to those who completed the AAFP TIPS CGM course via the internet during the study period. Results: Of the 3 practices, 2 conducted team trainings. The team training evaluation survey showed that practice staff understood their role in implementing CGM in practice (19/20, 95%), and most (11/20, 55%) did not have questions after the training. Insurance coverage for CGM was a remaining knowledge gap and potential barrier to implementing CGM in practice. Physicians and interdisciplinary care team members who took the AAFP TIPS CGM course via the internet, as well as those who attended in-person team training, expressed a high degree of satisfaction with the education, content, and applicability of the course. Conclusions: This pilot implementation of AAFP TIPS CGM offers pertinent and timely information for primary care practices that desire to initiate or expand CGM use to best meet the needs of their patients with diabetes.
Healthcare professionals' perceptions and management of obesity & knowledge of glucagon, GLP-1, GIP receptor agonists, and dual agonists

W Timothy Garvey,Cathy D Mahle,Trevor Bell,Robert F Kushner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/osp4.756

2024-05-04

Abstract:Background: Anti-obesity medications (AOMs) have historically had limited weight-loss efficacy. However, newer glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA)-based therapies seem to be more effective, including dual agonists of GLP-1R and the glucagon receptor (GCGR) or glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide receptor. Objective: To explore healthcare professionals' (HCPs) experience in obesity treatment and their understanding of agonists of GCGR, glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) RA, and GLP-1 RA. Methods: This cross-sectional online survey of HCPs prescribing AOMs was conducted in the United States in 2023 with a questionnaire designed to evaluate prescribing behavior and understanding of GCGR, GIP RA, and GLP-1 RA. Results: The 785 respondents (251 primary-care physicians [PCPs], 263 endocrinologists, and 271 advanced practice providers [APPs]) reported 55% of their patients had obesity (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2 or ≥27 with weight-related complications) and recommended AOMs to 49% overall, significantly more endocrinologists (57% of patients, p < 0.0005) than PCPs (43%) or APPs (46%). The greatest barriers to treatment were medication cost/lack of insurance (mean 4.2 on 1-5 scale [no barrier-extreme barrier]), low patient engagement/adherence (3.3), and inadequate time/staff (3.1). Metformin was the type 2 diabetes (T2D) medication most commonly prescribed to treat obesity in T2D patients (92.5% of respondents). Most HCPs (65%) were very/extremely familiar with GLP-1 RA, but only 30% with GIP RA and 16% with GCGR. Most HCPs expected dual GCGR/GLP-1 RA to benefit many obesity-related conditions; however, only a minority of HCPs perceived that they would benefit non-cardiometabolic complications of obesity. Conclusions: Among HCPs prescribing AOMs, gaps exist in the management of people living with obesity as <50% are prescribed AOMs. Barriers to treatment indicate a need to improve access to AOMs. HCPs were less familiar with GCGR or GIP RA than GLP-1 RA but expect dual GCGR/GLP-1 RA may offer additional benefits, potentially addressing treatment barriers and access. Thus, there is a need for greater education among HCPs regarding the mechanism of action and therapeutic effects of GCGR agonists, and dual GCGR/GLP-1 RA, so that the full range of obesity-related complications can be effectively treated.
131-LB: Diabetes and Disparities in Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Community Health Care Settings

AMISHA WALLIA,SHIVANI AGARWAL,ANDREW L. OWEN,EMILY L. LAM,KA'DERRICKA DAVIS,STACY BAILEY,SEAN E. DELACEY,ALLISON PACK,JUAN ESPINOZA,DANA BRIGHT,ALICE EGGLESTON,MATTHEW J. O'BRIEN

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2337/db23-131-lb

IF: 7.7

2023-06-20

Diabetes

Abstract:Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) serve vulnerable DM patients in primary care in underserved settings. The state of DM (glycemic control, complications) may differ and utilization of technologies (e.g. continuous glucose monitoring [CGM]) may be essential. But the current state of DM and CGM is poorly characterized. Using EHR data from a national FQHC network (2015-2021) we examined baseline demographic characteristics, CGM prescriptions, and their association. We included 47,579 with DM: n=1630 with T1D [3%], n= 45,949 T2D [97%], 38% Hispanic, 34% Black (Table 1). Notably, T1D pts [mean age 43 SD 16], had poor glycemic control (HbA1c 9.4 SD 2.4) with elevated DM complications severity index scores [mean DSCI 2.3 SD 4.7]. Overall CGM prescriptions were extremely low; 9% in T1D and only 1% in T2D. Among T1D, those who were Hispanic [OR 0.39, (CI 0.23, 0.66), p < 0.001] or Black [OR 0.52, (CI 0.33, 0.81), p = 0.003] were less likely to have CGM prescribed than White adults, after adjustment. Among T2D, those who were Hispanic [OR 0.42, CI 0.33, 0.55, p < 0.001] or Black [OR 0.68, CI 0.54, 0.85, p = 0.001] were similarly less likely to have CGM. Non-private insurance was also a significant factor. DM severity (poor control, complications) is notable in FQHCs, yet CGM is exceptionally low. These findings underscore the major translation gap in standard of care for FQHCs and the critical need to understand inequities. Disclosure A. Wallia: Research Support; UnitedHealth Group, Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly and Company. D. Bright: None. A. Eggleston: None. M. J. O'brien: None. S. Agarwal: Advisory Panel; Medtronic, Consultant; Beta Bionics, Inc., Research Support; Abbott Diabetes, Dexcom, Inc. A. L. Owen: None. E. L. Lam: None. K. Davis: None. S. Bailey: Advisory Panel; Gilead Sciences, Inc., Consultant; Lundbeck, Pfizer Inc., Research Support; Eli Lilly and Company, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Gilead Sciences, Inc., Lundbeck, Pfizer Inc. S. E. Delacey: None. A. Pack: Consultant; Gilead Sciences, Inc., Research Support; Merck & Co., Inc., Pfizer Inc., Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, RRF Foundation for Aging, Lundbeck, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead Sciences, Inc. J. Espinoza: Consultant; Sanofi, Research Support; NIH - National Institutes of Health, FDA, Speaker's Bureau; Glooko, Inc. Funding Centers for Diabetes Translation Research (5P30DK020541, 472P30DK092949-11A); National Pilot and Feasibility Grant for Diabetes Research Centers; Center for Diabetes Translation Research

endocrinology & metabolism
Systematic review of disparities in continuous glucose monitoring and insulin pump utilization in the United States: Key themes and evidentiary gaps

Pranav M Patel,Divya Thomas,Zhixi Liu,Sarah Aldrich-Renner,Marilee Clemons,Bimal V Patel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/dom.15774

Abstract:Aim: This study aims to provide a comprehensive overview of real-world evidence pertaining to disparities in the utilization of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs)/insulin pumps to highlight potential evidentiary gaps and discern emerging themes from the literature. Materials and methods: A systematic review of published manuscripts and abstracts was conducted from: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Nursing and Allied Health, Web of Science and CINHAL. Attributes related to patients, outcomes, interventions (CGMs/pumps/both) and study type were captured. In addition, factors associated with disparities in device utilization were examined. Results: Thirty-six studies were included in the final analysis; the studies predominantly focused on people living with type 1 diabetes. Only two studies included individuals with type 2 diabetes. Almost two-thirds of the studies reported outcomes associated with disparities (e.g. glycated haemoglobin, diabetic ketoacidosis, resource utilization). Most studies highlighted disparities across race, ethnicity and insurance type. Evidentiary gaps were identified, particularly in the evidence for people with type 2 diabetes, the continuation of CGM/pump use and limited studies addressing disparities among Native Americans/American Indians. Conclusion: This study reveals critical disparities in diabetes technology use across race, ethnicity and insurance type, particularly among people with type 1 diabetes. Evidentiary gaps assessing disparities in diabetes technology use persist, particularly concerning people with type 2 diabetes, Native American/American Indian and LGBTQ+ populations, and in outcomes related to continuation of use. Social and digital determinants of health, such as income, transportation, residential location and technological literacy, are crucial to achieving equitable access. Future research should focus on the patient journey to identify opportunities for equitable access to diabetes technology as its use grows.
1079-P: Implementation of Diabetes E-consult Service Eliminates Barriers to Specialty Expertise

JOANNA MITRI,NANCY CIBOTTI GRANOF,SUSAN HERZLINGER BOTEIN,SANJEEV N. MEHTA

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2337/db23-1079-p

IF: 7.7

2023-06-20

Diabetes

Abstract:Background: Electronic physician consultations (e-consults) with endocrinologists represent a safe and effective alternative to many referrals for diabetes care. E-consults represent an important, but underutilized, modality to address the shortage of endocrinologists. Aim: To implement a scalable diabetes e-consult service for a large network of primary care practices in the United States. Methods: Primary care providers (PCPs) from 40 practices used a designated email to consult endocrinologists based at a diabetes center. Endocrinologists also had remote access to the electronic health records used by consulting PCPs. E-consults provided individualized recommendations for management, evaluation, targeted education or referral to the diabetes center in addition to targeted education. Provider experience surveys were completed online by PCPs and specialists after each consult. Results: Between Feb-Sep 2022, 55 e-consults were completed; 86% within 2 business days. The service was positively reviewed by PCPs; 96% reported the e-consult was helpful, 86% reporting more confidence in diabetes care; and 64% reported the e-consult saved them time. A majority of e-consults (PCP, 79%; endocrinologist, 77%) required <10 mins to complete. Specialists made no recommendations for a patient referral to the diabetes center. Conclusions: A diabetes e-consult service can be rapidly implemented with minimal administrative support. It has the potential to bring greater diabetes expertise to primary care practices and save the PCPs time while avoiding unnecessary referrals to endocrinology practices. Future analyses will address the clinical impact of the e-consult service. Disclosure J.Mitri: Other Relationship; Novo Nordisk, Research Support; Kowa Company, Ltd. N.Cibotti granof: None. S.Herzlinger botein: None. S.N.Mehta: None.

endocrinology & metabolism
Disparities in Insulin Pump Therapy Persist in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes Despite Rising Overall Pump Use Rates

M. Rebecca O'Connor,Kristen Carlin,Tumaini Coker,Brenda Zierler,Catherine Pihoker

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2018.10.005

2019-01-01

Journal of Pediatric Nursing

Abstract:PURPOSE: This study sought to determine if disparities in insulin pump therapy among youth with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) persist despite recent increases in overall pump use rates.DESIGN AND METHODS: All patients aged 6 months-17 years, diagnosed with T1DM, and completed 4+ outpatient diabetes visits at an academically-affiliated pediatric health care center from 2011 to 2016 were identified (n = 2131). Data were collected from existing electronic medical records and a multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify factors associated with insulin pump therapy.RESULTS: Findings revealed one novel factor (patients/families whose primary language is Spanish [OR 0.47, p = 0.038] or other non-English languages [OR 0.47, p = 0.028]) and confirmed several previously known factors associated with lower insulin pump use: patients who were older (10-14 years OR 0.38, p < 0.0001; 15+ years OR 0.15, p < 0.0001), male (OR 0.80, p = 0.021), non-Hispanic black (OR 0.59, p = 0.009), American Indian/Alaska Native (OR 0.19, p = 0.023), had either government (OR 0.42, p < 0.0001) or no insurance (OR 0.52, p = 0.004) and poor glycemic control (at least one HbA1c ≥ 8.5%; OR 0.54, p < 0.0001).CONCLUSION: Significant disparities in insulin pump use in youth with T1DM persist despite known benefits associated with pump therapy and underlying causes remain unclear.PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Health care providers should explore barriers to insulin pump therapy, including limited English language proficiency.
Experimental models of benzene carcinogenesis.

P. Craig

Abstract:
Insulin dose optimization using an automated artificial intelligence-based decision support system in youths with type 1 diabetes

Revital Nimri,Tadej Battelino,Lori M. Laffel,Robert H. Slover,Desmond Schatz,Stuart A. Weinzimer,Klemen Dovc,Thomas Danne,Moshe Phillip,Shlomit Shalitin,Rachel Bello,Michal Nevo-Shenker,Naama Fisch-Shvalb,Galit Shiovitch-Mantzuri,Orit Choresh,Irit Drutz,Yehiel Nava,Alona Hemo,Orna Hermon,Rachel Nave,Natasa Bratina,Darja Smigoe-Schweiger,Brigita Mali,Ana Gianini,Urska Sever,Barbara Murn Berkopec,Michelle Katz,Elvira Isganaitis,Sanjeev Mehta,Heidi Quinn,Nisha Naik,Zijing Guo,Lisa Volkening,Gregory Forlenza,R. Paul Wadwa,G. Todd Alonso,Laurel Messer,Lindsey Towers,Katie Thivener,Cari Berget,Samantha Lange,Emily Jost,Maria Rossick-Solis,Michael Haller,Paul Hiers,Laura Jacobsen,Madison Smith,Anastasia O’Neill,Jennifer Hosford,Alexis Perry,Eda Cengiz,Jennifer Sherr,Kathryn Gibbons,Lori Carria,Melinda Zgorski,Torben Biester,Olga Kordonouri,Thekla von dem Berge,Sarah Biester,Kerstin Remus,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-1045-7

IF: 82.9

2020-09-01

Nature Medicine

Abstract:Despite the increasing adoption of insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitoring devices, most people with type 1 diabetes do not achieve their glycemic goals<sup><a href="/articles/s41591-020-1045-7#ref-CR1">1</a></sup>. This could be related to a lack of expertise or inadequate time for clinicians to analyze complex sensor-augmented pump data. We tested whether frequent insulin dose adjustments guided by an automated artificial intelligence-based decision support system (AI-DSS) is as effective and safe as those guided by physicians in controlling glucose levels. ADVICE4U was a six-month, multicenter, multinational, parallel, randomized controlled, non-inferiority trial in 108 participants with type 1 diabetes, aged 10–21 years and using insulin pump therapy (ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT03003806). Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive remote insulin dose adjustment every three weeks guided by either an AI-DSS, (AI-DSS arm, <i>n</i> = 54) or by physicians (physician arm, <i>n</i> = 54). The results for the primary efficacy measure—the percentage of time spent within the target glucose range (70–180 mg dl<sup>−1</sup> (3.9–10.0 mmol l<sup>−1</sup>))—in the AI-DSS arm were statistically non-inferior to those in the physician arm (50.2 ± 11.1% versus 51.6 ± 11.3%, respectively, <i>P</i> < 1 × 10<sup>−7</sup>). The percentage of readings below 54 mg dl<sup>−1</sup> (<3.0 mmol l<sup>−1</sup>) within the AI-DSS arm was statistically non-inferior to that in the physician arm (1.3 ± 1.4% versus 1.0 ± 0.9%, respectively, <i>P</i> < 0.0001). Three severe adverse events related to diabetes (two severe hypoglycemia, one diabetic ketoacidosis) were reported in the physician arm and none in the AI-DSS arm. In conclusion, use of an automated decision support tool for optimizing insulin pump settings was non-inferior to intensive insulin titration provided by physicians from specialized academic diabetes centers.

biochemistry & molecular biology,cell biology,medicine, research & experimental
Opportunities to overcome underutilization of enhanced insulin delivery technologies in people with type 2 diabetes: a narrative review

Davida F Kruger,Diana Isaacs,Lucille Hughes,Eden Miller,Timothy S Bailey,Davida F. Kruger,Timothy S. Bailey

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00325481.2024.2331417

2024-03-23

Postgraduate Medicine

Abstract:Use of innovative technologies such as continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and insulin delivery systems have been shown to be safe and effective in helping patients with diabetes achieve significantly improved glycemic outcomes compared to their previous therapies. However, these technologies are underutilized in many primary care practices. This narrative review discusses some of the clinical and economic benefits of tubeless insulin delivery devices and discusses how this technology can overcome the main obstacles inherent to use of conventional insulin delivery devices.

medicine, general & internal
Diabetes patients' experiences with the implementation of insulin therapy and their perceptions of computer-assisted self-management systems for insulin therapy

Airin Cr Simon,Wouter T Gude,Frits Holleman,Joost Bl Hoekstra,Niels Peek

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3198

2014-10-23

Abstract:Background: Computer-assisted decision support is an emerging modality to assist patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in insulin self-titration (ie, self-adjusting insulin dose according to daily blood glucose levels). Computer-assisted insulin self-titration systems mainly focus on helping patients overcome barriers related to the cognitive components of insulin titration. Yet other (eg, psychological or physical) barriers could still impede effective use of such systems. Objective: Our primary aim was to identify experiences with and barriers to self-monitoring of blood glucose, insulin injection, and insulin titration among patients with T2DM. Our research team developed a computer-assisted insulin self-titration system, called PANDIT. The secondary aim of this study was to evaluate patients' perceptions of computer-assisted insulin self-titration. We included patients who used PANDIT in a 4-week pilot study as well as patients who had never used such a system. Methods: In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted individually with patients on insulin therapy who were randomly recruited from a university hospital and surrounding general practices in the Netherlands. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed qualitatively. To classify the textual remarks, we created a codebook during the analysis, in a bottom-up and iterative fashion. To support examination of the final coded data, we used three theories from the field of health psychology and the integrated model of user satisfaction and technology acceptance by Wixom and Todd. Results: When starting insulin therapy, some patients feared a lifelong commitment to insulin therapy and disease progression. Also, many barriers arose when implementing insulin therapy (eg, some patients were embarrassed to inject insulin in public). Furthermore, patients had difficulties increasing the insulin dose because they fear hypoglycemia, they associate higher insulin doses with disease progression, and some were ignorant of treatment targets. Patients who never used a computer-assisted insulin self-titration system felt they had enough knowledge to know when their insulin should be adjusted, but still believed that the system advice would be useful to confirm their reasoning. Furthermore, the time and effort saved with automated insulin advice was considered an advantage. Patients who had used PANDIT found the system useful if their glycemic regulation improved. Nevertheless, for some patients, the absence of personal contact with their caregiver was a drawback. While guidelines state that adjustment of basal insulin dose based on fasting plasma glucose values is sufficient, both patients who had and those who had not used PANDIT felt that such a system should take more patient data into consideration, such as lifestyle and diet factors. Conclusions: Patients encounter multiple obstacles when implementing insulin therapy. Computer-assisted insulin self-titration can increase patient awareness of treatment targets and increase their confidence in self-adjusting the insulin dose. Nevertheless, some barriers may still exist when using computer-assisted titration systems and these systems could also introduce new barriers.

Stereoselective synthesis of bioactive natural spiroacetals aculeatins A and B.

Treatment Intensification With Insulin Pumps and Other Technologies in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Results of a Physician Survey in the United States

Removing Barriers, Bridging the Gap, and the Changing Role of the Health Care Professional with Automated Insulin Delivery Systems

Continuous glucose monitoring among nurse practitioners in primary care: Characteristics associated with prescribing and resources needed to support use

Self‐reported insulin pump prescribing practices in pediatric type 1 diabetes

Clinical perspective on innovative insulin delivery technologies in diabetes management

Continuous glucose monitoring for primary care patients with diabetes: Barriers, facilitators, & resources to support access

136-LB: Health Care Professional (HCP) Perspectives on Support Tools for Diabetes Devices

564-P: Insights into How Health Technologies Can Support Patient-Centered Diabetes Self-Management—A Mixed-Methods Approach

Roll-over shapes of the able-bodied knee-ankle-foot system during gait initiation, steady-state walking, and gait termination.

Computational Analyses of Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA, C22:6, n-3) with Alzheimer’s Disease-Causing Amyloid Peptide A β 1-42 Reassures Its Therapeutic Utility

A Team-Based Training for Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Diabetes Care: Mixed Methods Pilot Implementation Study in Primary Care Practices

Healthcare professionals' perceptions and management of obesity & knowledge of glucagon, GLP-1, GIP receptor agonists, and dual agonists

131-LB: Diabetes and Disparities in Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Community Health Care Settings

Systematic review of disparities in continuous glucose monitoring and insulin pump utilization in the United States: Key themes and evidentiary gaps

1079-P: Implementation of Diabetes E-consult Service Eliminates Barriers to Specialty Expertise

Disparities in Insulin Pump Therapy Persist in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes Despite Rising Overall Pump Use Rates

Experimental models of benzene carcinogenesis.

Insulin dose optimization using an automated artificial intelligence-based decision support system in youths with type 1 diabetes

Opportunities to overcome underutilization of enhanced insulin delivery technologies in people with type 2 diabetes: a narrative review

Diabetes patients' experiences with the implementation of insulin therapy and their perceptions of computer-assisted self-management systems for insulin therapy