Cargando…

Who Should Access Closed-Loop Technology? A Qualitative Study of Clinician Attitudes in England

Background: Clinicians mediate access to closed-loop technology for people with diabetes. Consequently, their attitudes regarding appropriate levels of closed-loop usage will play a key role in future adoption processes. This study aimed to explore clinician attitudes toward future mainstream closed...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Farrington, Conor, Hovorka, Roman, Murphy, Helen R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7196368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31913061
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/dia.2019.0380
Descripción
Sumario:Background: Clinicians mediate access to closed-loop technology for people with diabetes. Consequently, their attitudes regarding appropriate levels of closed-loop usage will play a key role in future adoption processes. This study aimed to explore clinician attitudes toward future mainstream closed-loop usage in England. Materials and Methods: We conducted 36 semistructured interviews with clinicians from a range of professional backgrounds working in outpatient clinics in England. Interview topics included clinicians' views on future pathways for closed-loop use and attitudes toward the predictability of users' technology experiences, a key factor in eligibility decision making. We analyzed transcripts using thematic and framework approaches. Results: Clinicians exhibited a range of opinions regarding future eligibility for closed-loop technology. We identified three key strands of clinician opinion, envisaging (1) tighter access for closed loop (n = 10), citing funding challenges and issues arising from user overconfidence or negative technology attitudes; (2) similar access to closed loop as for current diabetes technologies (n = 15), on the grounds that future funding and access pathways will be similar to current arrangements; and (3) wider access for closed-loop technologies (n = 9), given the potential for significant and widespread benefits arising from closed-loop usage, including downstream cost savings alongside improved glycemic control. Conclusions: Clinicians expressed a range of opinions encompassing continuity with current diabetes technologies, while others envisaged either tighter or more liberal access for closed-loop systems. To optimize technology adoption and equitable uptake, future implementation pathways should consider clinician attitudes toward technology use and access.