Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic highlighted a pre-existing need for alternatives to traditional in-person diabetes device trainings. Barriers to care, which include the heavy burden of training, pose a threat to optimal adoption and utilization of these devices. We searched the literature for alternative methods of training, evaluated user satisfaction, and compared short-term clinical outcomes with guideline-based glucometric targets and historical training results. METHODS: A scoping review of Embase articles from 2019 to 2021 was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines using key words relevant to diabetes technologies. Original full-text articles investigating training of new users on devices were included. Titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility by 2 independent reviewers, and results were summarized. RESULTS: Of 25 articles retrieved from the database, 11 met the criteria. Alternative training strategies included video conferencing, phone calls, mobile applications, and hybrids with traditional trainings. Overall, there was a high degree of user satisfaction with virtual visits, with a preference for hybrid approaches (6 articles). Although glucometrics varied between articles, short-term glucometrics were satisfactory overall (8 articles), including improved glycated hemoglobin measurements and time in range. Two articles compared time in range over various time points after traditional and remote training. One found equivalency, and the other identified a 5% improvement with remote training. CONCLUSION: Alternative training approaches are a viable option to reduce the barriers to care and to alleviate training burden. Intentional implementation of alternatives should be considered a solution to address current barriers.