ECE2022 Poster Presentations Diabetes, Obesity, Metabolism and Nutrition (202 abstracts)
1Campus Bio-Medico, Metabolic Diseases, Rome, Italy; 2Campus Bio-Medico, Metabolic diseases, Rome, Italy; 3Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy
Background: Technological advances in continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) should aim to improve glucose control and quality of life in patients diagnosed type 1 diabetes (T1D).
Aim: The aim of our study was to compare different CGM and CSII devices on these targets.
Methods: Sixty-nine T1D patients (mean age 39±12; 31 males) were recruited. 36 were on multiple daily insulin injections (MDI), 33 on CSII devices including Medtronic Minimed 640G and 670G, Theras Omnipod, Roche Insight and Movy Tandem. Glucose monitoring was performed with Dexcom-G6, Guardian sensor and Flash Freestyle Libre. The Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ), the Diabetes Specific Quality Of Life Scale (DSQOLS) and The Short Form (36) Health Survey (SF-36) were administered to test quality of life. HbA1c, time in range (TIR), time above the range (TAR) and time below the range (TBR) were investigated as glucose control parameters.
Results: Patients in the CSII group had higher treatment-related satisfaction (84.8% vs 52.8%, P= 0.005), and better disease acceptance (84.8% vs 52.8%, P= 0.012) compared with patients on MDI, despite similar age (MDI mean age 38±12.5, CSII 41±11.6). No differences were observed among devices (P= ns). TIR resulted higher in the CSII group than in the MDI group (P=0.001). The Dexcom G6 group had higher TIR values than the Freestyle (P=0.03) group, but similar to the Medtronic (P=0.12) group.
Conclusions: Technological devices may improve quality of life over MDI treatment. Type of glucose monitoring system may also impact glucose control.