Ruth S Weinstock, Dan Raghinaru, Robin L Gal, Richard M Bergenstal, Amy Bradshaw, Terra Cushman, Craig Kollman, Davida Kruger, Mary L Johnson, Teresa McArthur, Beth A Olson, Sean M Oser, Tamara K Oser, Roy W Beck, Korey Hood, Grazia Aleppo
{"title":"老年人受益于连续血糖监测仪使用的虚拟支持,但需要更长时间的访问。","authors":"Ruth S Weinstock, Dan Raghinaru, Robin L Gal, Richard M Bergenstal, Amy Bradshaw, Terra Cushman, Craig Kollman, Davida Kruger, Mary L Johnson, Teresa McArthur, Beth A Olson, Sean M Oser, Tamara K Oser, Roy W Beck, Korey Hood, Grazia Aleppo","doi":"10.1177/19322968241294250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Older adults may be less comfortable with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology or require additional education to support use. The Virtual Diabetes Specialty Clinic study provided the opportunity to understand glycemic outcomes and support needed for older versus younger adults living with diabetes and using CGM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prospective, virtual study of adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D, N = 160) or type 2 diabetes (T2D, N = 74) using basal-bolus insulin injections or insulin pump therapy. Remote CGM diabetes education (3 scheduled visits over 1 month) was provided by Certified Diabetes Care and Education Specialists with additional visits as needed. CGM-measured glycemic metrics, HbA1c and visit duration were evaluated by age (<40, 40-64 and ≥65 years).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median CGM use was ≥95% in all age groups. From baseline to 6 months, time 70 to 180 mg/dL improved from 45% ± 22 to 57% ± 16%; 50 ± 25 to 65 ± 18%; and 60 ± 28 to 69% ± 18% in the <40, 40-64, and ≥65-year groups, respectively (<40 vs 40-64 years <i>P</i> = 0.006). Corresponding values for HbA1c were 8.0% ± 1.6 to 7.3% ± 1.0%; 7.9 ± 1.6 to 7.0 ± 1.0%; and 7.4 ± 1.4 to 7.1% ± 0.9% (all <i>P</i> > 0.05). Visit duration was 41 min longer for ages ≥65 versus <40 years (<i>P</i> = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Adults with diabetes experience glycemic benefit after remote CGM use training, but training time for those >65 years is longer compared with younger adults. Addressing individual training-related needs, including needs that may vary by age, should be considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":15475,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Older Adults Benefit From Virtual Support for Continuous Glucose Monitor Use But Require Longer Visits.\",\"authors\":\"Ruth S Weinstock, Dan Raghinaru, Robin L Gal, Richard M Bergenstal, Amy Bradshaw, Terra Cushman, Craig Kollman, Davida Kruger, Mary L Johnson, Teresa McArthur, Beth A Olson, Sean M Oser, Tamara K Oser, Roy W Beck, Korey Hood, Grazia Aleppo\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19322968241294250\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Older adults may be less comfortable with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology or require additional education to support use. The Virtual Diabetes Specialty Clinic study provided the opportunity to understand glycemic outcomes and support needed for older versus younger adults living with diabetes and using CGM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prospective, virtual study of adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D, N = 160) or type 2 diabetes (T2D, N = 74) using basal-bolus insulin injections or insulin pump therapy. Remote CGM diabetes education (3 scheduled visits over 1 month) was provided by Certified Diabetes Care and Education Specialists with additional visits as needed. CGM-measured glycemic metrics, HbA1c and visit duration were evaluated by age (<40, 40-64 and ≥65 years).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median CGM use was ≥95% in all age groups. From baseline to 6 months, time 70 to 180 mg/dL improved from 45% ± 22 to 57% ± 16%; 50 ± 25 to 65 ± 18%; and 60 ± 28 to 69% ± 18% in the <40, 40-64, and ≥65-year groups, respectively (<40 vs 40-64 years <i>P</i> = 0.006). Corresponding values for HbA1c were 8.0% ± 1.6 to 7.3% ± 1.0%; 7.9 ± 1.6 to 7.0 ± 1.0%; and 7.4 ± 1.4 to 7.1% ± 0.9% (all <i>P</i> > 0.05). Visit duration was 41 min longer for ages ≥65 versus <40 years (<i>P</i> = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Adults with diabetes experience glycemic benefit after remote CGM use training, but training time for those >65 years is longer compared with younger adults. Addressing individual training-related needs, including needs that may vary by age, should be considered.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15475,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19322968241294250\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19322968241294250","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
Older Adults Benefit From Virtual Support for Continuous Glucose Monitor Use But Require Longer Visits.
Background: Older adults may be less comfortable with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology or require additional education to support use. The Virtual Diabetes Specialty Clinic study provided the opportunity to understand glycemic outcomes and support needed for older versus younger adults living with diabetes and using CGM.
Methods: Prospective, virtual study of adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D, N = 160) or type 2 diabetes (T2D, N = 74) using basal-bolus insulin injections or insulin pump therapy. Remote CGM diabetes education (3 scheduled visits over 1 month) was provided by Certified Diabetes Care and Education Specialists with additional visits as needed. CGM-measured glycemic metrics, HbA1c and visit duration were evaluated by age (<40, 40-64 and ≥65 years).
Results: Median CGM use was ≥95% in all age groups. From baseline to 6 months, time 70 to 180 mg/dL improved from 45% ± 22 to 57% ± 16%; 50 ± 25 to 65 ± 18%; and 60 ± 28 to 69% ± 18% in the <40, 40-64, and ≥65-year groups, respectively (<40 vs 40-64 years P = 0.006). Corresponding values for HbA1c were 8.0% ± 1.6 to 7.3% ± 1.0%; 7.9 ± 1.6 to 7.0 ± 1.0%; and 7.4 ± 1.4 to 7.1% ± 0.9% (all P > 0.05). Visit duration was 41 min longer for ages ≥65 versus <40 years (P = 0.001).
Conclusions: Adults with diabetes experience glycemic benefit after remote CGM use training, but training time for those >65 years is longer compared with younger adults. Addressing individual training-related needs, including needs that may vary by age, should be considered.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology (JDST) is a bi-monthly, peer-reviewed scientific journal published by the Diabetes Technology Society. JDST covers scientific and clinical aspects of diabetes technology including glucose monitoring, insulin and metabolic peptide delivery, the artificial pancreas, digital health, precision medicine, social media, cybersecurity, software for modeling, physiologic monitoring, technology for managing obesity, and diagnostic tests of glycation. The journal also covers the development and use of mobile applications and wireless communication, as well as bioengineered tools such as MEMS, new biomaterials, and nanotechnology to develop new sensors. Articles in JDST cover both basic research and clinical applications of technologies being developed to help people with diabetes.