Patient-reported outcomes following islet cell or pancreas transplantation (alone or after kidney) in type 1 diabetes: a systematic review

Aims For selected individuals with complex Type 1 diabetes, pancreatic islet transplantation (IT) offers the potential of excellent glycaemic controlwithout significant hypoglycaemia, balanced by the need for ongoing systemic immunosuppression. Increasingly, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are considered alongside biomedical outcomes as a measure of transplant success. PROs in IT have not previously been compared directlywith the closest alternate treatment option, pancreas transplant alone (PTA) or pancreas after kidney (PAK).

Methods We used a Population, Intervention, Comparisons, Outcomes (PICO) strategy to search Scopus and screened 314 references for inclusion.

Results Twelve studies [including PRO assessment of PAK, PTA, islet-after kidney (IAK) and islet transplant alone (ITA); n = 7–205] used a total of nine specified and two unspecified PRO measures. Results were mixed but identified some benefits which remained apparent up to 36 months post-transplant, including improvements in fear of hypoglycaemia, as well as some aspects of diabetes-specific quality of life (QoL) and general health status. Negative outcomes included short-term pain associated with the procedure, immunosuppressant side effects and depressed mood associated with loss of graft function.

Conclusions The mixed resultsmay be attributable to limited sample sizes. Also, some PROmeasures may lack sensitivity to detect actual changes, as they exclude issues and domains of life likely to be important forQoL post-transplantation and when patients may no longer perceive themselves to have diabetes. Thus, the full impact of islet ⁄ pancreas transplantation (alone or after kidney) on QoL is unknown. Furthermore, no studies have assessed patient satisfaction, which may highlight further advantages and disadvantages of transplantation.

Pilot Study of clinician attitudes to insulin pump therapy: international differences and the need for a greater understanding of the patient perspective

OBJECTIVES: To identify and survey health care professionals (HCPs) attitudes to insulin pump therapy (CSII).

METHODS: Eight specialists were interviewed to explore the attitudes and beliefs about CSII. Responses were analysed thematically and used to inform the design of a new 22-item questionnaire: the Attitudes to Pump Therapy (APT) Survey. The APT was pilottested among 95 HCPs (54% male; 75.5% diabetologists/DSNs, 13.8% general practitioners) at the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) conference, 2006. Results were analysed using non-parametric statistics with bonferroni correction.

RESULTS: Analyses of interview data identified 9 themes: biomedical, perceived control of care/diabetes, technology, quality of life, financial resources, training, education & support, suitability, and evidence-base. Items were designed to reflect these themes with responses scored on a 5-point Likert scale (strongly agree—strongly disagree). No statistically significant differences
were found by gender, HCP speciality, country (and continent) of origin or proportion of patients using CSII. Most notable differences were found in relation to gross domestic product (GDP) and the potential for pump therapy to achieve tight blood glucose control (lower GDP = more agreement: p = 0.001), and result in diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) (lower GDP = less agreement: p < 0.005). Ranked mean scores showed a split between biomedical/clinical items (N = 11) and items concerned with patient experience (N = 11). Attitudes about biomedical/clinical issues were generally clear (i.e. for 7/11 items, the mean score was “agree”) but less decisive about patient experience (i.e. for 8/11 items, the mean score was “neither agree nor disagree”).

CONCLUSION: Few subgroup differences existed, but those that did may be explained by lack of access to treatment (directly corresponding to GDP). Clinicians’ were generally clear in their attitudes regarding biomedical aspects but less so regarding patient experience. Research focusing on patient-reported outcomes is likely to offer clinicians a greater understanding of the patients’ perspective of insulin pump therapy.

The impact of hypoglycaemia on quality of life and related patient-reported outcomes in Type 2 diabetes : a narrative review

As a common side effect of insulin treatment for diabetes, hypoglycaemia is a constant threat and can have far-reaching and potentially devastating consequences, including immediate physical injury as well as more pervasive cognitive, behavioural and emotional effects. Moreover, as a significant limiting factor in achieving optimal glycaemic control, exposure to hypoglycaemia can influence diabetes self-management.

Although hypoglycaemia is known to occur in Type 2 diabetes, its morbidity and impact on the individual are not well recognized. The aim of the current review is to examine published evidence to achieve a synthesis of the scope and significance of the potential detriment caused by hypoglycaemia to individuals with Type 2 diabetes. The implications of these observations for treatment and research have also been considered.

A narrative review was performed of empirical papers published in English since 1966, reporting the effect of hypoglycaemia on quality of life and related outcomes (including generic and diabetes specificquality of life, emotional well-being and health utilities) in Type 2 diabetes.

Research demonstrates the potential impact of hypoglycaemia on the lives of people with Type 2 diabetes, from an association with depressive symptoms and heightened anxiety, to impairment of the ability to drive, work and function in ways that are important for quality of life. Few studies consider hypoglycaemia as an explanatory variable in combination with quality of life or related primary endpoints. As a consequence, there is a pressing need for high-quality research into the overall impact of hypoglycaemia on the lives of people with Type 2 diabetes.