Real‐world lived experience of older adults with type 1 diabetes after an automated insulin delivery trial

• Published in: Diabetic medicine Vol. 41; no. 4; pp. e15264 - n/a
• Main Authors: Kubilay, Erin, Trawley, Steven, Ward, Glenn M., Fourlanos, Spiros, Colman, Peter G., McAuley, Sybil A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.04.2024
• Subjects: Adults; automated insulin delivery; Automation; Blood glucose; Clinical trials; closed‐loop therapy; cost; Diabetes; Diabetes mellitus (insulin dependent); Glucose monitoring; Insulin; lived experience; older adults; Older people; retirement; type 1 diabetes; Usability; type 1 diabetes; cost; automated insulin delivery; lived experience; older adults; retirement; closed-loop therapy
• ISSN: 0742-3071; 1464-5491; 1464-5491
• DOI: 10.1111/dme.15264

Aims First‐generation closed‐loop automated insulin delivery improves glycaemia and psychosocial outcomes among older adults with type 1 diabetes in clinical trials. However, no study has previously assessed real‐world lived experience of older adults using closed‐loop therapy outside a trial environment. Methods Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with older adults who were pre‐existing insulin pump users and previously completed the OldeR Adult Closed‐Loop (ORACL) randomised trial. Interviews focused on perceptions of diabetes technology use, and factors influencing decisions regarding continuation. Results Twenty‐eight participants, mean age 70 years (SD 5), were interviewed at median 650 days (IQR 608–694) after their final ORACL trial visit. At interview, 23 participants (82%) were still using a commercial closed‐loop system (requiring manual input for prandial insulin bolus doses). Themes discussed in interviews relating to closed‐loop system use included sustained psychosocial benefits, cost and retirement considerations and usability frustrations relating to sensor accuracy and system alarms. Of the five participants who had discontinued, reasons included cost, continuous glucose monitoring‐associated difficulties and usability frustrations. Cost was the largest consideration regarding continued use; most participants considered the increased ease of diabetes management to be worth the associated costs, though cost was prohibitive for some. Conclusions Almost 2 years after completing a closed‐loop clinical trial, closed‐loop automated insulin delivery remains the preferred type 1 diabetes therapy for the majority of older adult participants. Chronological age is not a barrier to real‐world successful use of diabetes technology. Identifying age‐related barriers, and solutions, to diabetes technology use among older adults is warranted.