Citations

Importance In patients with severe aortic valve stenosis at intermediate surgical risk, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with a self-expanding supra-annular valve was noninferior to surgery for all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 2 years. Comparisons of longer-term clinical and hemodynamic outcomes in these patients are limited. Objective To report prespecified secondary 5-year outcomes from the Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis in Intermediate Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement (SURTAVI) randomized clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants SURTAVI is a prospective randomized, unblinded clinical trial. Randomization was stratified by investigational site and need for revascularization determined by the local heart teams. Patients with severe aortic valve stenosis deemed to be at intermediate risk of 30-day surgical mortality were enrolled at 87 centers from June 19, 2012, to June 30, 2016, in Europe and North America. Analysis took place between August and October 2021. Intervention Patients were randomized to TAVR with a self-expanding, supra-annular transcatheter or a surgical bioprosthesis. Main Outcomes and Measures The prespecified secondary end points of death or disabling stroke and other adverse events and hemodynamic findings at 5 years. An independent clinical event committee adjudicated all serious adverse events and an independent echocardiographic core laboratory evaluated all echocardiograms at 5 years. Results A total of 1660 individuals underwent an attempted TAVR (n = 864) or surgical (n = 796) procedure. The mean (SD) age was 79.8 (6.2) years, 724 (43.6%) were female, and the mean (SD) Society of Thoracic Surgery Predicted Risk of Mortality score was 4.5% (1.6%). At 5 years, the rates of death or disabling stroke were similar (TAVR, 31.3% vs surgery, 30.8%; hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.85-1.22]; P = .85). Transprosthetic gradients remained lower (mean [SD], 8.6 [5.5] mm Hg vs 11.2 [6.0] mm Hg; P < .001) and aortic valve areas were higher (mean [SD], 2.2 [0.7] cm 2 vs 1.8 [0.6] cm 2 ; P < .001) with TAVR vs surgery. More patients had moderate/severe paravalvular leak with TAVR than surgery (11 [3.0%] vs 2 [0.7%]; risk difference, 2.37% [95% CI, 0.17%- 4.85%]; P = .05). New pacemaker implantation rates were higher for TAVR than surgery at 5 years (289 [39.1%] vs 94 [15.1%]; hazard ratio, 3.30 [95% CI, 2.61-4.17]; log-rank P < .001), as were valve reintervention rates (27 [3.5%] vs 11 [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 2.21 [95% CI, 1.10-4.45]; log-rank P = .02), although between 2 and 5 years only 6 patients who underwent TAVR and 7 who underwent surgery required a reintervention. Conclusions and Relevance Among intermediate-risk patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, major clinical outcomes at 5 years were similar for TAVR and surgery. TAVR was associated with superior hemodynamic valve performance but also with more paravalvular leak and valve reinterventions.

Abstract Objective It is difficult to assess self-management behaviors (SMBs) and incorporate them into a personalized self-care plan. We aimed to develop and apply SMB phenotyping algorithms from data collected by diabetes devices and a mobile health (mHealth) application to create patient-specific SMBs reports to guide individualized interventions. Follow-up interventions aimed to understand patient's reasoning behind discovered SMB choices. Methods This study deals with adults on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion using a continuous glucose monitor (CGM) who self-tracked SMBs with an mHealth application for 1 month. Patient-generated data were quantified and an SMB report was designed and populated for each participant. A diabetes educator used the report to conduct personalized, data-driven educational interventions. Thematic analysis of the intervention was conducted. Results Twenty-two participants recorded 118 alcohol, 251 exercise, 2,661 meal events, and 1,900 photos. A patient-specific SMB report was created from this data and used to conduct the educational intervention. High variability of SMB was observed between patients. There was variability in the percentage of alcohol events accompanied by a blood glucose check, median 79% (38–100% range), and frequency of changing the bolus waveform, median 11 (7–95 range). Interventions confirmed variability of SMBs. Main emerging themes from thematic analysis were: challenges and barriers, motivators, current SMB techniques, and future plans to improve glycemic control. Conclusion The ability to quantify SMBs and understand patients' rationale may help improve diabetes self-care and related outcomes. This study describes our first steps in piloting a patient-specific diabetes educational intervention, as opposed to the current “one size fits all” approach.

Background: The objective of this study was to assess disposal patterns for “sharps” among a cohort of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) receiving insulin therapy. Method: A convenience sample of inpatients and outpatients was surveyed about how they disposed of sharps, how often they reused lancets and needles, and what education they had received about proper disposal. Safe disposal was defined as discarding sharps into a formal sharps or sealable container; otherwise, disposal was categorized as unsafe. Results: Of 150 respondents, 56% were men and 75% were white. The mean (SD) age was 56 (15) years; duration of DM, 20 (13) years; and hemoglobin A 1c , 8.1% (2.0%). Half the respondents reused a lancet two or more times, and 21% reused an insulin needle two or more times. Thirty-eight percent of respondents discarded lancets unsafely, and 33% discarded insulin needles unsafely, typically by throwing these items into household trash. Most respondents (75%) discarded insulin pens, vials, cartridges, insulin pump supplies, and continuous glucose monitor sensors into household trash. Most (64%) indicated that they had not received education on safe sharps-disposal practices, and 84% had never visited their municipal website for information on medical waste disposal. Conclusion: Approximately one-third of patients unsafely disposed of sharps. Unsafe disposal could cause millions of sharps to appear in the municipal solid waste stream, thereby posing a substantial public health hazard. Point-of-care patient education is important, but a broader public health campaign may be required.

Background: We propose a methodology to analyze complex real-life glucose data in insulin pump users. Methods: Patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) on insulin pumps were recruited from an academic endocrinology practice. Glucose data, insulin bolus (IB) amounts, and self-reported alcohol consumption and exercise events were collected for 30 days. Rules were developed to retrospectively compare IB recommendations from the insulin pump bolus calculator (IPBC) against recommendations from a proposed decision aid (PDA) and for assessing the PDA’s recommendation for exercise and alcohol. Results: Data from 15 participants were analyzed. When considering instances where glucose was below target, the PDA recommended a smaller dose in 14%, but a larger dose in 13% and an equivalent IB in 73%. For glucose levels at target, the PDA suggested an equivalent IB in 58% compared to the subject’s IPBC, but higher doses in 20% and lower in 22%. In events where postprandial glucose was higher than target, the PDA suggested higher doses in 25%, lower doses in 13%, and equivalent doses in 62%. In 64% of all alcohol events the PDA would have provided appropriate advice. In 75% of exercise events, the PDA appropriately advised an IB, a carbohydrate snack, or neither. Conclusions: This study provides a methodology to systematically analyze real-life data generated by insulin pumps and allowed a preliminary analysis of the performance of the PDA for insulin dosing. Further testing of the methodological approach in a broader diabetes population and prospective testing of the PDA are needed.

Background: There is a lack of systematic ways to analyze how diabetes patients use their insulin pumps to self-manage blood glucose to compensate for alcohol ingestion and exercise. The objective was to analyze “real-life” insulin dosing decisions occurring in conjunction with alcohol intake and exercise among patients using insulin pumps. Methods: We recruited adult type 1 diabetes (T1D) patients on insulin pump therapy. Participants were asked to maintain their daily routines, including those related to exercising and consuming alcohol, and keep a 30-day journal on exercise performed and alcohol consumed. Thirty days of insulin pump data were downloaded. Participants’ actual insulin dosing behaviors were compared against their self-reported behaviors in the setting of exercise and alcohol. Results: Nineteen T1D patients were recruited and over 4000 interactions with the insulin pump were analyzed. The analysis exposed variability in how subjects perceived the effects of exercise/alcohol on their blood glucose, inconsistencies between self-reported and observed behaviors, and higher rates of blood glucose control behaviors for exercise versus alcohol. Conclusion: Compensation techniques and perceptions on how exercise and alcohol affect their blood glucose levels vary between patients. Improved individualized educational techniques that take into consideration a patient’s unique life style are needed to help patients effectively apply alcohol and exercise compensation techniques.

Background: Successful diabetes management requires behavioral changes. Little is known about self-management behaviors (SMB) in adults on insulin pump (IP) therapy. Objective: Analyze and characterize observed common diabetes SMB in adult participants with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using IPs and to correlate behaviors with glycemic outcomes based on participant’s individual glucose targets. Materials and Methods: One month of IP data from adults with T1D were downloaded. Computer programs were written to automatically quantify the observed frequency of expected behaviors such as: insulin bolusing, checking blood glucose (BG), and recording carbohydrate intake, and other interactions with the IP. Results: Nineteen participants were recruited and 4,249 IP interactions were analyzed to ascertain behaviors. Intersubject variability of adherence to minimally expected behaviors was observed: daily documentation of carbohydrates and BG checks in 76.6 (31.7)% and 60.0 (32.5)%, respectively, and bolusing without consulting the IPBC in 13.0 (16.9)% of delivered boluses, while daily insulin bolus delivery was consistent 96.8 (5.7)%. Higher frequency of adherence to daily behaviors correlated with a higher number of glucose readings at target. Conclusion: Results indicate variability in SMB and do not always match recommendations. Case-scenarios based on observed real-life SMB could be incorporated into interviews/surveys to elucidate ways to improve SMB.

Background: We aim to provide data on a diabetes technology simulation course (DTSC) that instructs internal medicine residents in the use of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) devices. Methods: The DTSC was implemented during calendar year 2012 and conducted in the institution's simulation center. It consisted of a set of prerequisites, a practicum, and completion of a web-based inpatient CSII-ordering simulation. DTSC participants included only those residents in the outpatient endocrinology rotation. Questionnaires were used to determine whether course objectives were met and to assess the satisfaction of residents with the course. Questionnaires were also administered before and after the endocrine rotation to gauge improvement in familiarity with CSII and CGMS technologies. Results: During the first year, 12 of 12 residents in the outpatient endocrinology rotation completed the DTSC. Residents reported that the course objectives were fully met. The mean satisfaction score with the course ranged from 4.0 to 4.9 (maximum, 5), with most variables rated above 4.5. Self-reported familiarity with the operation of CSII and CGMS devices increased significantly in the postrotation survey compared with that on the prerotation survey (both p < .01). Conclusions: In this pilot program, simulation-based education increased the perceived familiarity of residents with CSII and CGMS technologies. In light of these preliminary findings, the course will continue to be offered, with further data accrual. Future work will involve piloting the DTSC approach among other types of providers, such as residents in other specialties or inpatient nursing staff.

Objective: The objective of the analysis was to review the effectiveness of a care process model (CPM) developed to guide management of patients on insulin pump therapy undergoing elective surgical procedures. Methods: Electronic medical records were reviewed to assess the impact of the CPM on documentation of insulin pump status, glucose monitoring, and safety during the perioperative phase of care. Post-CPM care was compared with management provided before CPM implementation. Results: We reviewed 45 cases on insulin pump therapy in the pre-CPM cohort and 106 in the post-CPM cohort. Demographic characteristics, categories of surgery, and perioperative times were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Recommended hemoglobin A1c monitoring occurred in 73% of cases in the pre-CPM cohort but improved to 94% in the post-CPM group ( P < .01). There was a higher frequency of documentation of the insulin pump during the preoperative, intraoperative, and postanesthesia care unit segments of care in the post- vs pre-CPM periods (all P < .01). The number of cases with intraoperative glucose monitoring increased (57% pre-CPM vs 81% post-CPM; P < .01). Glycemic control was comparable between the 2 CPM periods. Hypoglycemia was rare, with only 3 episodes in the pre-CPM group and 4 in the post-CPM. No adverse events associated with perioperative insulin pump use were observed. Conclusions: This analysis adds to previous data on use of insulin pump therapy during the perioperative period. Some processes require additional attention, but data continue to indicate that a standardized approach to care can lead to a successful and safe transition of insulin pump therapy throughout the perioperative period.