A Mobile App for the Self-Management of Type 1 Diabetes Among Adolescents: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Shivani Goyal, Caitlin A Nunn, Michael Rotondi, Amy B Couperthwaite, Sally Reiser, Angelo Simone, Debra K Katzman, Joseph A Cafazzo, Mark R Palmert, Shivani Goyal, Caitlin A Nunn, Michael Rotondi, Amy B Couperthwaite, Sally Reiser, Angelo Simone, Debra K Katzman, Joseph A Cafazzo, Mark R Palmert

Abstract

Background: While optimal blood glucose control is known to reduce the long-term complications associated with type 1 diabetes mellitus, adolescents often struggle to achieve their blood glucose targets. However, their strong propensity toward technology presents a unique opportunity for the delivery of novel self-management interventions. To support type 1 diabetes self-management in this population, we developed the diabetes self-management app bant, which included wireless blood glucose reading transfer, out-of-range blood glucose trend alerts, coaching around out-of-range trend causes and fixes, and a point-based incentive system.

Objective: The primary objective was to evaluate bant 's effect on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) through a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Secondary measures (eg, self-monitoring of blood glucose [SMBG]) were also collected to assess bant 's impact on the self-management behaviors of adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

Methods: We enrolled 92 adolescents into a 12-month RCT, with 46 receiving usual care and 46 receiving usual care plus bant. Clinical outcome data were collected at quarterly research visits via validated tools, electronic chart review, glucometer downloads, and semistructured interviews. App satisfaction was assessed at 6 and 12 months, and at trial end, users ranked bant components based on perceived usefulness. Mobile analytics captured frequency of blood glucose uploads, which were used to categorize participants into high, moderate, low, or very low engagement levels.

Results: Linear mixed models showed no changes in primary and secondary clinical outcomes. However, exploratory regression analysis demonstrated a statistically significant association between increased SMBG and improved HbA1c in the intervention group. For a subgroup of bant users taking SMBG ≥5 daily, there was a significant improvement in HbA1c of 0.58% (P=.02), while the parallel subgroup in the control arm experienced no significant change in HbA1c (decrease of 0.06%, P=.84). Although app usage did diminish over the trial, on average, 35% (16/46 participants) were classified as moderately or highly engaged (uploaded SMBG ≥3 days a week) over the 12 months.

Conclusion: Although primary analysis of clinical outcomes did not demonstrate differences between the bant and control groups, exploratory analysis suggested that bant may positively impact the use of SMBG data and glycemic control among youth. The next generation of bant will aim to remove barriers to use, such as deploying the app directly to personal devices instead of secondary research phones, and to explore the utility of integrating bant into routine clinical care to facilitate more frequent feedback. Future evaluations of mHealth apps should consider more robust research tools (eg, ResearchKit) and alternative RCT study designs to enable more rapid and iterative evaluations, better suited to the nature of rapidly evolving consumer technology.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01899274; https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT01899274 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6qWrqF1yw).

Keywords: adolescent; behavior change; blood glucose; cell phones; diabetes mellitus; gamification; mobile applications; mobile phone; self-care; self-management.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: The Hospital for Sick Children and University Health Network jointly own intellectual property rights to the bant app. Under the respective agreements with their organizations, Joseph A Cafazzo, Mark R Palmert, Debra K Katzman, and Shivani Goyal are entitled to personally benefit from any commercial use of the intellectual property.

©Shivani Goyal, Caitlin A Nunn, Michael Rotondi, Amy B Couperthwaite, Sally Reiser, Angelo Simone, Debra K Katzman, Joseph A Cafazzo, Mark R Palmert. Originally published in JMIR Mhealth and Uhealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 19.06.2017.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The intervention includes an iPhone 4S loaded with bant, as well as a Bluetooth adapter attached to the OneTouch UltraMini blood glucose meter. Circles represent individual readings at different times of the day, with the bedtime reading having been selected to display further information; the blue region represents a particular participant’s target blood glucose range. The different colors of the circles represent the different reading contexts (eg, breakfast readings are blue).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Participant enrollment.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Mean hemoglobin A1c values for the intervention and control groups from baseline to 12 months.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Regression analysis for self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) and hemoglobin A1c.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Longitudinal mean hemoglobin A1c for intervention and control participants with 12-month self-monitoring of blood glucose of 5 or more per day.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Overall satisfaction with bant at the 6- and 12-month time points.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Number of times (measured as days per month) users uploaded blood glucose data to bant across the study duration.

References

    1. Shulman RM, Daneman D. Type 1 diabetes mellitus in childhood. Medicine. 2010 Dec;38(12):679–685. doi: 10.1016/j.mpmed.2010.09.001.
    1. Patterson CC, Gyürüs E, Rosenbauer J, Cinek O, Neu A, Schober E, Parslow RC, Joner G, Svensson J, Castell C, Bingley PJ, Schoenle E, Jarosz-Chobot P, Urbonaité B, Rothe U, Krzisnik C, Ionescu-Tirgoviste C, Weets I, Kocova M, Stipancic G, Samardzic M, de Beaufort C, Green A, Dahlquist GG, Soltész G. Trends in childhood type 1 diabetes incidence in Europe during 1989-2008: evidence of non-uniformity over time in rates of increase. Diabetologia. 2012 Aug;55(8):2142–7. doi: 10.1007/s00125-012-2571-8.
    1. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993 Sep 30;329(14):977–86. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199309303291401.
    1. Nathan DM, Cleary PA, Backlund JC, Genuth SM, Lachin JM, Orchard TJ, Raskin P, Zinman B, Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) Study Research Group Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2005 Dec 22;353(25):2643–53. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa052187.
    1. White NH, Cleary PA, Dahms W, Goldstein D, Malone J, Tamborlane WV, Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT)/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) Research Group Beneficial effects of intensive therapy of diabetes during adolescence: outcomes after the conclusion of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) J Pediatr. 2001 Dec;139(6):804–12.
    1. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT)/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) Study Research Group Mortality in type 1 diabetes in the DCCT/EDIC versus the general population. Diabetes Care. 2016 Aug;39(8):1378–83. doi: 10.2337/dc15-2399.
    1. Holl RW, Swift PG, Mortensen HB, Lynggaard H, Hougaard P, Aanstoot H, Chiarelli F, Daneman D, Danne T, Dorchy H, Garandeau P, Greene S, Hoey HM, Kaprio EA, Kocova M, Martul P, Matsuura N, Robertson KJ, Schoenle EJ, Sovik O, Tsou R, Vanelli M, Aman J. Insulin injection regimens and metabolic control in an international survey of adolescents with type 1 diabetes over 3 years: results from the Hvidore study group. Eur J Pediatr. 2003 Jan;162(1):22–9. doi: 10.1007/s00431-002-1037-2.
    1. Miller KM, Foster NC, Beck RW, Bergenstal RM, DuBose SN, DiMeglio LA, Maahs DM, Tamborlane WV, T1D Exchange Clinic Network Current state of type 1 diabetes treatment in the U.S.: updated data from the T1D Exchange clinic registry. Diabetes Care. 2015 Jun;38(6):971–8. doi: 10.2337/dc15-0078.
    1. de Beaufort CE, Swift PG, Skinner CT, Aanstoot HJ, Aman J, Cameron F, Martul P, Chiarelli F, Daneman D, Danne T, Dorchy H, Hoey H, Kaprio EA, Kaufman F, Kocova M, Mortensen HB, Njølstad PR, Phillip M, Robertson KJ, Schoenle EJ, Urakami T, Vanelli M, Hvidoere Study Group on Childhood Diabetes 2005 Continuing stability of center differences in pediatric diabetes care: do advances in diabetes treatment improve outcome? The Hvidoere Study Group on Childhood Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2007 Sep;30(9):2245–50. doi: 10.2337/dc07-0475.
    1. Wood JR, Miller KM, Maahs DM, Beck RW, DiMeglio LA, Libman IM, Quinn M, Tamborlane WV, Woerner SE, T1D Exchange Clinic Network Most youth with type 1 diabetes in the T1D Exchange Clinic Registry do not meet American Diabetes Association or International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes clinical guidelines. Diabetes Care. 2013 Jul;36(7):2035–7. doi: 10.2337/dc12-1959.
    1. Farmer A, Gibson OJ, Tarassenko L, Neil A. A systematic review of telemedicine interventions to support blood glucose self-monitoring in diabetes. Diabet Med. 2005 Oct;22(10):1372–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2005.01627.x.
    1. Cameron FJ, de Beaufort C, Aanstoot HJ, Hoey H, Lange K, Castano L, Mortensen HB, Hvidoere International Study Group Lessons from the Hvidoere International Study Group on childhood diabetes: be dogmatic about outcome and flexible in approach. Pediatr Diabetes. 2013 Nov;14(7):473–80. doi: 10.1111/pedi.12036.
    1. Miller KM, Beck RW, Bergenstal RM, Goland RS, Haller MJ, McGill JB, Rodriguez H, Simmons JH, Hirsch IB, T1D Exchange Clinic Network Evidence of a strong association between frequency of self-monitoring of blood glucose and hemoglobin A1c levels in T1D exchange clinic registry participants. Diabetes Care. 2013 Jul;36(7):2009–14. doi: 10.2337/dc12-1770.
    1. Skinner H, Biscope S, Poland B, Goldberg E. How adolescents use technology for health information: implications for health professionals from focus group studies. J Med Internet Res. 2003 Dec 18;5(4):e32. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5.4.e32.
    1. Norman CD, Maley O, Li X, Skinner HA. Using the internet to assist smoking prevention and cessation in schools: a randomized, controlled trial. Health Psychol. 2008 Nov;27(6):799–810. doi: 10.1037/a0013105.
    1. Lenhart A. Teens, social media & technology overview 2015. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center; 2015. Apr 9, [2017-01-04]. .
    1. Lenhart A, Ling R, Campbell S, Purcell K. Teens and mobile phones. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2010. Apr 20, [2017-01-04]. .
    1. Martínez-Pérez B, de la Torre-Díez I, López-Coronado M. Mobile health applications for the most prevalent conditions by the World Health Organization: review and analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(6):e120. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2600.
    1. Glooko . Remote patient monitoring for diabetes. Mountain View, CA: Glooko, Inc; 2016. [2017-01-04]. .
    1. One Drop. Blue Bell, PA: Informed Data Systems Inc; 2016. [2017-01-04]. .
    1. mySugr. Vienna, Austria: mySugr; [2017-01-04]. .
    1. WellDoc . WellDoc’s disruptive innovation in healthcare and mHealth uses mobile technology to transform the treatment of chronic disease. Columbia, MD: WellDoc, Inc; 2017. [2017-01-04].
    1. Pham Q, Wiljer D, Cafazzo JA. Beyond the randomized controlled trial: a review of alternatives in mHealth clinical trial methods. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2016 Sep 09;4(3):e107. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.5720.
    1. Eng DS, Lee JM. The promise and peril of mobile health applications for diabetes and endocrinology. Pediatr Diabetes. 2013 Jun;14(4):231–8. doi: 10.1111/pedi.12034.
    1. Kirwan M, Vandelanotte C, Fenning A, Duncan MJ. Diabetes self-management smartphone application for adults with type 1 diabetes: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(11):e235. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2588.
    1. Quinn CC, Shardell MD, Terrin ML, Barr EA, Ballew SH, Gruber-Baldini AL. Cluster-randomized trial of a mobile phone personalized behavioral intervention for blood glucose control. Diabetes Care. 2011 Sep;34(9):1934–42. doi: 10.2337/dc11-0366.
    1. Holmen H, Torbjørnsen A, Wahl AK, Jenum AK, Småstuen MC, Arsand E, Ribu L. A mobile health intervention for self-management and lifestyle change for persons with type 2 diabetes, part 2: one-year results from the Norwegian randomized controlled trial RENEWING HEALTH. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2014;2(4):e57. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.3882.
    1. Chomutare T, Fernandez-Luque L, Arsand E, Hartvigsen G. Features of mobile diabetes applications: review of the literature and analysis of current applications compared against evidence-based guidelines. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(3):e65. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1874.
    1. Arnhold M, Quade M, Kirch W. Mobile applications for diabetics: a systematic review and expert-based usability evaluation considering the special requirements of diabetes patients age 50 years or older. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(4):e104. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2968.
    1. El-Gayar O, Timsina P, Nawar N, Eid W. Mobile applications for diabetes self-management: status and potential. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013;7(1):247–62.
    1. Canadian Diabetes Association Clinical Practice Guidelines Expert Committee Canadian Diabetes Association 2008 clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and management of diabetes in Canada. Can J Diabetes. 2008;32(Suppl 1):S1–S201.
    1. Cafazzo JA, Casselman M, Hamming N, Katzman DK, Palmert MR. Design of an mHealth app for the self-management of adolescent type 1 diabetes: a pilot study. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(3):e70. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2058.
    1. Eysenbach G, CONSORT-EHEALTH Group CONSORT-EHEALTH: improving and standardizing evaluation reports of Web-based and mobile health interventions. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(4):e126. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1923.
    1. Dornhorst A, Lüddeke H, Sreenan S, Koenen C, Hansen JB, Tsur A, Landstedt-Hallin L. Safety and efficacy of insulin detemir in clinical practice: 14-week follow-up data from type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients in the PREDICTIVE European cohort. Int J Clin Pract. 2007 Mar;61(3):523–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2007.01316.x.
    1. Friis AM, Johnson MH, Cutfield RG, Consedine NS. Kindness matters: a randomized controlled trial of a mindful self-compassion intervention improves depression, distress, and HbA1c among patients with diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2016 Nov;39(11):1963–1971. doi: 10.2337/dc16-0416.
    1. Lenters-Westra E, Schindhelm RK, Bilo HJ, Groenier KH, Slingerland RJ. Differences in interpretation of haemoglobin A1c values among diabetes care professionals. Neth J Med. 2014 Nov;72(9):462–6.
    1. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group Hypoglycemia in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Diabetes. 1997 Feb;46(2):271–86.
    1. Ingersoll GM, Marrero DG. A modified quality-of-life measure for youths: psychometric properties. Diabetes Educ. 1991;17(2):114–8.
    1. Skinner TC, Hoey H, McGee HM, Skovlund SE, Hvidøre Study Group on Childhood Diabetes A short form of the Diabetes Quality of Life for Youth questionnaire: exploratory and confirmatory analysis in a sample of 2,077 young people with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia. 2006 Apr;49(4):621–8. doi: 10.1007/s00125-005-0124-0.
    1. Anderson BJ, Auslander WF, Jung KC, Miller JP, Santiago JV. Assessing family sharing of diabetes responsibilities. J Pediatr Psychol. 1990 Aug;15(4):477–92.
    1. La Greca AM, Swales T, Klemp S, Madigan S. Self care behaviors among adolescents with diabetes. Ninth Annual Sessions of the Society of Behavioural Medicine; April 27-30, 1988; Boston, MA, USA. 1988. p. A42.
    1. Greco P, La Greca AM, Ireland A, Wick P, Freeman C, Agramonte R. Assessing adherence in IDDM: a comparison of two methods. Diabetes. 1990;40(Suppl 1):A165.
    1. Lewin AB, LaGreca AM, Geffken GR, Williams LB, Duke DC, Storch EA, Silverstein JH. Validity and reliability of an adolescent and parent rating scale of type 1 diabetes adherence behaviors: the Self-Care Inventory (SCI) J Pediatr Psychol. 2009 Oct;34(9):999–1007. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jsp032.
    1. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Transtheoretical therapy: toward a more integrative model of change. Psychother Theory Res Pract. 1982;19(3):276–288. doi: 10.1037/h0088437.
    1. Prochaska JO, Velicer WF. The transtheoretical model of health behavior change. Am J Health Promot. 1997;12(1):38–48.
    1. Bing D, He X. Linear mixed models in clinical trials using PROC MIXED. PharmaSUG2010; May 23-26, 2010; Orlando, FL, USA. 2010. p. SP07.
    1. Arnau J, Bendayan R, Blanca MJ, Bono R. The effect of skewness and kurtosis on the robustness of linear mixed models. Behav Res Methods. 2013 Sep;45(3):873–9. doi: 10.3758/s13428-012-0306-x.
    1. Long term mobile game success: beyond awareness and adoption. New York, NY: The Nielsen Company; 2016. Oct 18, [2017-01-11]. .
    1. Bot BM, Suver C, Neto EC, Kellen M, Klein A, Bare C, Doerr M, Pratap A, Wilbanks J, Dorsey ER, Friend SH, Trister AD. The mPower study, Parkinson disease mobile data collected using ResearchKit. Sci Data. 2016 Mar 03;3:160011. doi: 10.1038/sdata.2016.11. doi: 10.1038/sdata.2016.11.
    1. Deacon AJ, Edirippulige S. Using mobile technology to motivate adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review of recent literature. J Telemed Telecare. 2015 Dec;21(8):431–8. doi: 10.1177/1357633X15605223.
    1. Collins LM, Murphy SA, Strecher V. The multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) and the sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART): new methods for more potent eHealth interventions. Am J Prev Med. 2007 May;32(5 Suppl):S112–8. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2007.01.022.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅