AIM: To determine whether people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) initiating glucose sensor monitoring experience greater improvements in HbA1c when provided with education on carbohydrate counting and flexible insulin dosing than those who do not receive nutrition education. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our retrospective observational study included 329 people with T1D initiating glucose sensor monitoring between 2015 and 2021. The participants were divided into two groups: one group attended at least one structured educational session with a registered dietitian (n = 126), while the other group did not receive structured education (n = 203). After 12 months of glucose sensor initiation, we compared glycaemic outcomes and CGM metrics between the two groups. RESULTS: At glucose sensor initiation, both groups with and without education had similar HbA1c levels (7.64% [60.0 mmol/mol] vs. 7.66% [60.2 mmol/mol]). After twelve months, the education group demonstrated greater improvement in glycemic outcomes (HbA1c 7.17% [54.9mmol/mol] vs. 7.37% [57.1 mmol/mol], p < 0.05) and spent significantly more time in the target range than did the group without structured education (68.8% vs. 64.1%, p < 0.05). We observed an inverse correlation between the number of completed educational sessions and HbA1c after 12 months, as well as between the number of educational sessions and the change in HbA1c. CONCLUSIONS: People with T1D who initiated glucose sensor monitoring alongside nutrition education showed greater improvements in HbA1c and increased time spent in the target glucose range compared to individuals who did not receive structured education. TRAIL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT06264271.

• MeSH
• Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 * blood   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Glycated Hemoglobin * analysis   metabolism   MeSH
• Hypoglycemic Agents administration & dosage   MeSH
• Insulin administration & dosage   MeSH
• Blood Glucose * analysis   metabolism   MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Glycemic Control MeSH
• Retrospective Studies MeSH
• Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring * MeSH
• Patient Education as Topic * MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Observational Study MeSH

• MeSH
• Exercise MeSH
• Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 complications   therapy   MeSH
• Hypoglycemia prevention & control   MeSH
• Insulin Infusion Systems * MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Motor Activity MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Review MeSH

Systémy pro automatické podávání inzulinu (AID) představují velký pokrok v léčbě diabetu mellitu 1. typu. Podávání inzulinu automatizují integrací kontinuálního monitorování glukózy, řídicího algoritmu a činností inzulinové pumpy. Přes jejich pokročilost je nutno ve specifických situacích nastavení přizpůsobit, a to buď využitím zvláštních funkcí, nebo i ruční úpravou dávkování. Článek podává přehled o možnostech úprav v dávkování inzulinu pro případy interkurentního onemocnění, pro konzumaci alkoholu a zvýšenou fyzickou aktivitu pro 4 v Česku dostupné certifikované systémy automatického podávání inzulinu.

Automated insulin delivery systems (AID) represent a major advance in the treatment of type 1 diabetes. These systems automate insulin delivery by integrating continuous glucose monitoring, control algorithms and insulin pump actions. Despite their advances, there is a need to adjust the settings in specific situations, either by using special features or even by manually adjusting the dose. The article provides an overview of the possibilities of adjustments in the insulin dosing for intercurrent disease, alcohol consumption and increased physical activity for four certified automatic insulin delivery systems available in the Czech Republic.

• MeSH
• Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 drug therapy   MeSH
• Insulin administration & dosage   therapeutic use   MeSH
• Insulin Infusion Systems * MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Alcohol Drinking MeSH
• Motor Activity MeSH
• Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Review MeSH

AIM: To compare open-source AndroidAPS (AAPS) and commercially available Control-IQ (CIQ) automated insulin delivery (AID) systems in a prospective, open-label, single-arm clinical trial. METHODS: Adults with type 1 diabetes who had been using AAPS by their own decision entered the first 3-month AAPS phase then were switched to CIQ for 3 months. The results of this treatment were compared with those after the 3-month AAPS phase. The primary endpoint was the change in time in range (% TIR; 70-80 mg/dL). RESULTS: Twenty-five people with diabetes (mean age 34.32 ± 11.07 years; HbA1c 6.4% ± 3%) participated in this study. CIQ was comparable with AAPS in achieving TIR (85.72% ± 7.64% vs. 84.24% ± 8.46%; P = .12). Similarly, there were no differences in percentage time above range (> 180 and > 250 mg/dL), mean sensor glucose (130.3 ± 13.9 vs. 128.3 ± 16.9 mg/dL; P = .21) or HbA1c (6.3% ± 2.1% vs. 6.4% ± 3.1%; P = .59). Percentage time below range (< 70 and < 54 mg/dL) was significantly lower using CIQ than AAPS. Even although participants were mostly satisfied with CIQ (63.6% mostly agreed, 9.1% strongly agreed), they did not plan to switch to CIQ. CONCLUSIONS: The CODIAC study is the first prospective study investigating the switch between open-source and commercially available AID systems. CIQ and AAPS were comparable in achieving TIR. However, hypoglycaemia was significantly lower with CIQ.

• MeSH
• Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 * drug therapy   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Glycated Hemoglobin MeSH
• Hypoglycemic Agents therapeutic use   MeSH
• Insulin therapeutic use   MeSH
• Insulin Infusion Systems MeSH
• Insulins * MeSH
• Blood Glucose MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Young Adult MeSH
• Prospective Studies MeSH
• Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring methods   MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Young Adult MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH

• Publication type
• Meeting Abstract MeSH

• Publication type
• Meeting Abstract MeSH

• Publication type
• Meeting Abstract MeSH

• Keywords
• mylife CamAPF FX,
• MeSH
• Electronic Data Processing methods   instrumentation   MeSH
• Biomedical Technology classification   instrumentation   MeSH
• Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 * blood   prevention & control   MeSH
• Insulin Infusion Systems classification   MeSH
• Continuous Glucose Monitoring * methods   instrumentation   MeSH
• Blood Glucose analysis   MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Review MeSH
• Geographicals
• Czech Republic MeSH

Background: The aim was to compare the efficacy of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) and intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) focusing on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) as the primary endpoint. Methods: The CORRIDA LIFE was a 12-month, real-world, nonrandomized study that is part of the CORRIDA clinical trials program. The study compared rtCGM (Dexcom G5 or G6) and isCGM (FreeStyle Libre 14-Day; Abbott) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Only patients on multiple daily insulin injections or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion with no automatic functions were included in this study. Primary outcome was the difference in HbA1c between study groups at 12 months. Results: One hundred ninety-one adults with T1D (mean age 40 ± 13 years, HbA1c 8.1% ± 3.4% [65 ± 14 mmol/mol]) participated in this study; 81 patients initiated rtCGM and 110 initiated isCGM. After 12-months, HbA1c was significantly lower with rtCGM versus isCGM (7.1% ± 3.1% [54.1 ± 10.1 mmol/mol] vs. 7.7% ± 3.3% [61.2 ± 12.2 mmol/mol]), P = 0.0001. The percentage of time in hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL [<3.9 mmol/L]) was lower among rtCGM vs. isCGM participants [4.3% ± 2.8% vs. 6.4% ± 5.3%], P = 0.003). Patients with rtCGM spent less time in clinically significant hypoglycemia (<54 mg/dL [<3.0 mmol/L]) (0.9% ± 1.0% vs. 2.3% ± 2.5%, P < 0.0001) and more time in target range (70-180 mg/dL [3.9-10 mmol/L]) than isCGM users (67.5% ± 14.8% vs. 57.8% ± 17.0%), P = 0.0002. Conclusions: rtCGM was superior to isCGM in HbA1c, hypoglycemia, and other glycemic outcomes. Our findings provide guidance to clinicians when discussing monitoring options with their patients. The study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04759495).

• MeSH
• Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 * drug therapy   MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Glycated Hemoglobin analysis   MeSH
• Hypoglycemia * prevention & control   drug therapy   MeSH
• Hypoglycemic Agents therapeutic use   MeSH
• Insulin therapeutic use   MeSH
• Blood Glucose MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Clinical Trial MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH

• Publication type
• Meeting Abstract MeSH