Virtual Pump Trainings for the t:slim X2 Insulin Pump With Control-IQ Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop Technology: Real World Patient Experience

The COVID-19 pandemic led to a digital evolution in the healthcare industry by necessitating widespread adoption of telehealth and other remote services to enable engagement with patients. Diabetes management is well suited for telehealth utilization if patients employ technology that efficiently generates, captures, and shares data with providers. Traditionally, training for automated insulin delivery devices is provided in-person to allow for a thorough understanding of the device and its use. However, during COVID-related quarantine regulations, most of these trainings needed to be conducted virtually. We performed a retrospective analysis of patient reported outcomes in people with diabetes who completed their training for the t:slim X2 pump with Control-IQ technology between April and September, 2020 and had uploaded 30 days of pump usage data to Tandem’s t:connect® web application. Most participants were adults (90%), female (54%), and had type 1 diabetes (89.9%). Mean age of the sample was 46 years (SD=18.7). Of all 1,686 participants, 1,256 had received virtual pump training while the remaining were trained in-person (n=430). Most participants reported completing their training in 1 to 2 hours (61.5%). After concluding training, participants completed an online questionnaire evaluating their training experience (8 items). Item response options included a 5-point Likert scale with higher values reflecting greater satisfaction and better experience with training. Multivariate analysis of variance indicated a significant effect of training method (virtual vs. in-person) on training-related experience (p=.020). Specifically, participants receiving virtual pump training reported greater overall satisfaction with their training (4.78 vs. 4.65, p=.012) and with the time when their training was conducted (convenient scheduling) (4.74 vs. 4.56, p=.008) compared to their counterparts who underwent in-person training. There were no significant differences between virtually trained and in-person participants on pace of training (4.71 vs. 4.57), trainer’s pump knowledge (4.82 vs. 4.74), trainer’s ability to answer their questions (4.77 vs. 4.70), and participants’ confidence to use the pump after training (4.62 vs. 4.53). In conclusion, all participants irrespective of their training method (virtual or in-person) reported a positive experience with their training for using the t:slim X2 pump with Control-IQ technology. Participants’ high scores on items evaluating their training method also reflects that their expectations of their training session were either met or exceeded. State-of-the-art technologies supporting diabetes management may benefit from patient-centric training methods to enable widespread optimal use. For future studies, it will be interesting to evaluate adherence to therapy by training method and relationship with glycemic outcomes.