Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Dr Stuart Little,
Professor James Shaw
This is the authors' accepted manuscript of an article that has been published in its final definitive form by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., 2019.
For re-use rights please refer to the publisher's terms and conditions.
Background In the HypoCOMPaSS trial, adults with long-standing type 1 diabetes and problematic hypoglycaemia were randomised to compare insulin pump (CSII) vs multiple daily injections (MDI) and real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) vs conventional self-monitoring (SMBG). Our aim was to investigate participants' satisfaction with these technologies at 6-month RCT endpoint and at 2-year follow-up. Methods Participants completed the Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (ITSQ) subscales 'device delivery' and 'hypoglycaemia control'; and Glucose Monitoring Experience Questionnaire (GME-Q), assessing 'convenience', 'effectiveness', 'intrusiveness' and 'total satisfaction'. We assessed change over time and between group differences by insulin and monitoring modalities. Results Participants (N=96) were: 64% women, aged 49±12 years, diabetes duration 29±12 years. At 6 months, participants reported improvements compared to baseline (all p<0.001) in satisfaction with insulin 'delivery device' (r=0.39) and 'hypoglycaemia control' (r=0.52), and trends towards significance in perceived 'effectiveness' (r=0.42) and 'intrusiveness' (r=0.27) of monitoring device (but not 'convenience', p=0.139). All improvements were sustained at 2 years. At 6 months, the only difference between arms was that greater satisfaction with insulin 'delivery device' was reported in the CSII group compared to MDI (p<0.001, r=0.40). No between-group differences were observed at 2 years. Conclusions Overall, significant improvements in participant satisfaction with diabetes technologies were observed over the 6-month RCT, in all domains except 'convenience', maintained at 2 years. While HypoCOMPaSS demonstrated non-inferiority of SMBG versus CGM, and MDI versus CSII in terms of biomedical outcomes, detailed assessments confirm participants' satisfaction with delivery device was greater in those allocated to CSII than MDI.
Author(s): Speight J, Holmes-Truscott E, Little SA, Leelarathna L, Walkinshaw E, Tan HK, Bowes A, Kerr D, Flanagan D, Heller SR, Evans ML, Shaw JAM
Publication type: Article
Publication status: Published
Journal: Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics
Print publication date: 21/10/2019
Online publication date: 23/07/2019
Acceptance date: 23/07/2019
Date deposited: 16/09/2019
ISSN (print): 1520-9156
ISSN (electronic): 1557-8593
Publisher: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
PubMed id: 31335201
Altmetrics provided by Altmetric