I first heard of the REPOSE study (Relative Effectiveness of Pumps Over MDI and Structured Education) in 2016 when I was able to sneak into the Diabetes UK Professional Conference, where Dr Heller published some of the early findings. It has now been formally reviewed and published in full and, as much as I am able to understand it, I find it fascinating reading.
If you are interested, you can read the study here: http://www.bmj.com/content/356/bmj.j1285
The intention of the study was to evaluate whether insulin pumps or multiple daily injections (MDI) gave the better outcomes for people living with type 1 diabetes who have received comparable training and support. Essentially they took over 300 people, spread across multiple centres almost all of whom had HbA1c results over 7.5% and offered them structured education/training in intensive insulin therapy. Of those that undertook the training (267) the study then followed 260 people over 2 years to see what changed. Of the study group, the pump vs MDI split was approx 50:50.
What did it show?
Here are some of the results that caught my eye...
- Supporting people with effective, detailed structured-education/learning/training* in the complexities of managing type 1 diabetes improves outcomes whatever method people use to deliver their insulin (* delete the phrase/s which annoy you the most)
- On average people do a little better on insulin pumps (-0.85% with pump treatment and -0.42% for MDI)
- When results are adjusted for differences which could have skewed the data, the pump 'win' was pretty modest at around an extra -0.25% (-2.7 mmol/mol) reduction in A1c for pump users vs the MDI group - the averages may, of course, hide significant individual variation
- Pump users additionally scored better for 'quality of life' and 'treatment satisfaction'
The small irony is that I had been offered an insulin pump repeatedly for going on 5 years at that time, but had never liked the idea. In fact, looking back, I think if I'd accepted a pump in the years before we started writing this blog, and before I had discovered the #doc - I am really not sure whether it would have done anything much for me. Or whether I would have just have tried it for a bit and then stopped using it out of frustration.
One of my take-aways from the REPOSE trial is that insulin pumps (or any other diabetes technology for that matter) are never going to entirely 'fix' things. This was certainly one of the things that put me off pump therapy for years. If many of my errant results were down to 'user-errors' of judgement, I reasoned, what difference could it make whether that 2u, 3u, 4u dose was delivered by syringe, insulin pen or pump/cannula. It's pretty obvious really - or at least it should be - but a lot of the potential power and effectiveness of insulin pump therapy comes down to the way an individual thinks about their diabetes management. The techniques they use, the strategies they have been given to review and adjust on an ongoing basis. I attended a pump users event when I had only been using Artoo for a few months and was slightly shocked to meet people who had been using insulin pumps for years but had never used (or wanted to use) the combo/dual/square/extended bolus options. It may be that they didn't need to, or that they had never been shown how to. But the lack of curiosity was a genuine surprise.
Not for everyone, and not second best
It is all too easy inside the hothouse of the 'Twitter bubble' to let yourself believe that absolutely everyone is using an insulin pump, full time CGM, Nightscout, and open-source cloud-based Artificial Pancreas algorithm. If you understand even half of that sentence, you will know exactly what I mean. But the simple truth of REPOSE is that insulin pumps are just one option, and they will suit a particular type of person, with a particular set of approaches at a particular time in their lives. That doesn't inherently make them better or worse, and it certainly doesn't make them right for everyone all the time. I loved this post by everyone's second favourite ex-teacher-Libre-wearing-cat-loving-warm-ball-of-GBDOC-loveliness Adrian Long about his continued love of multiple daily injections. People can do brilliantly on MDI, and people can do brilliantly on insulin pumps. What matters most is the support and information/training they have been given. Diabetes is going to be infuriating, uncooperative and apparently willfully disobedient whichever insulin delivery method people use. What I need, in order to face those daily frustrations is a comprehensive set of strategies, and individually tailored personalised goals to make small incremental improvements towards better outcomes. In addition a good deal of understanding and moral/psychological support goes a long way to help.
The shiny gadget effect, sticks and carrots
I do find myself wondering about the possible catalytical nature of a new piece of diabetes technology. For some people, and I think I might be one, having a shiny new diabetes toy (or the promise of one) can re-energise them into a new, more active relationship with their diabetes management. It may also be that people who have never really fancied attending Structured Education, for a whole host of reasons, may decide to take the plunge in order to get access to the technology they are hoping will help.
I'm not altogether sure how I feel about this if I am honest.
I would hope that REPOSE leads to more individualised, supportive care, rather than people being forced to unnecessarily attend officially endorsed education courses purely to box-tick the process (and add delay into the bargain). My own journey towards pump therapy was excellent in that regard. In the pre-pump assessment I was offered the education, but in conversation it was decided that I was already using exactly the techniques and strategies that the course advocated, so that it was entirely up to me whether I thought it would be beneficial or not. I would not want people who might excel at pump therapy to be put off by a hardline education requirement... but at the same time, my own experience tells me that often you don't know what you don't know. And that many people who attend diabetes education expecting very little from it actually leave the course with their relationship with their own diabetes utterly transformed.
My slight worry in all this, is not what this study actually shows, but more how it might potentially be interpreted and skim-read - short version: pumps expensive and not much better. The current guidance over the use of insulin pumps (and when people may additionally benefit from CGM) is pretty clear cut. And yet, some people in some places find themselves having to jump through interminable hoops, or simply get enquiries brushed off for having 'too good an HbA1c'.
Insulin pump therapy really does work well for some people, but it is expensive and the 'working well' does not come automatically. What I hope comes out of all this is a greater level of support and assistance both for pump users and MDI whizzes to aim for those elusive and aspirational treatment targets alongside a decent quality of life and an avoidance of diabetes burnout. With finite NHS resources it is only right that these therapies are used effectively, and clearly a vital component of that is the support, education and encouragement that people receive, not just initially, but on an on-going basis.
Simply blindly chucking technology at T1 is never going to work.
I'd be interested in your thoughts on this trial, and how you think it might impact you in your journey with diabetes. Please do leave a comment below.