Skip to main content

Tweetchat - 12th September 2018

Yesterday evening I hosted the weekly webchat on Twitter taking over @GbdocTChost.  The topic of discussion was "Libre - where we're at".  It was a frantic and fascinating hour of discussion involving members of the #gbdoc.  As host, I had little chance to voice my answers to the questions I raised, so thought it might be good to share some of my thoughts.  Of course they are just opinions and discussing them helps me to modify my thinking and learn.  I had seven questions prepared and miraculously managed to fit them into the time allocated (Tweetdeck scheduling of tweets was very handy!).

Q1. What is your favourite piece of diabetes tech and how did you find out about it?

I love Libre as you might have guessed, but MiaoMiao takes it to another level.  I now understand those that are passionate about the Dexcom.  Having those permanent active reminders, alarms and prompts changed everything about how I manage my condition and my motivation.  Libre made a difference to my HbA1C, perhaps 0.5% at best and after three years of almost constant use, I did start to lose some of my motivation (there are other benefits to Libre apart from HbA1C, which are often over-looked by CCGs).  However, I'm now three months into using MM and am expecting my HbA1C to be in the low 6% area (low 40s mmol/mol).

Q2. Have you used Libre?  If not, what’s stopping you or have you used something different?  What are your views on the system? 

Well...yes!  It's expensive, but not as expensive as Dexcom.  I do think it's worth it - I must do having self-funded since October 2014!  For me, the biggest impact is motivation.  I've never been an 8+ tests a day person, or even a 4+ a day person.  I just don't want that level of intervention and I'm too lazy - I also don't see enough of prerogative to do it.  However, now that the information is available on a scan, and latterly on a browser tab that's always open, then it is easy and has little impact on my day-to-day life.  Libre allows me to 'forget' about my condition until I actually need to interact with it in some way.

Q3.  How have technological advances changed your relationship to diabetes?

Libre was the first piece of technology that I really employed with my diabetes.  Since diagnosis in 2007, I had used the same meter and the same insulins (Novorapid/Levemir).  It has changed my relationship in that much of the mystery has now gone.  It still comes back and tells you who's boss on occasions, but for the most part, variances are predictable and importantly controllable.

Q4.  Have you contacted anyone about access to tech or meds related to your condition?  What did they say and do you feel your questions were answered/taken seriously?

Personally, yes, I asked my doctor about some of the novel insulins and about getting an insulin pump.  He said he couldn't see any point with the insulins and that my HbA1C was too good for a pump - end of conversation.  He wasn't very interested in my Libre traces, but to be fair, as long as all the boxes that he needs to complete are filled, I'm fine with that.

I have also, of course, contacted people in many areas about access to Libre.  Some take the questions seriously, many do not.  Many think that they can fob you off with vague and sometimes evasive answers.  They assume you are being grumpy with them.  This is one outcome, but if they answer questions asked in a logical and clear way with similarly logical and clear answers, then we'll all get along fine.  I want to hold CCGs accountable, but in the end, if they make a decision I don't agree with, but have justified it in a sensible way, then I can't really have an argument.  However, I am yet to find a CCG meet this relatively simple paradigm.

Q5. Who is to 'blame' for the current variance of access to tech across the UK?  What would be your solution for this? 

In my view, there are many different reasons for the variance and 'blame' is perhaps too strong.  As I mentioned in a previous month's blog, a CCG Meds Manager explained that Libre was an unprecedented situation.  I understand - it's rare that patients have access to something for a substantial period prior to prescribing.  It is also unusual for NICE to provide vague guidance.  It is also unusual for a pharma company to be able to market a device to patients that ultimately is available on prescription.

I think structurally the CCGs way of deciding funding doesn't work.  Whether this is a situation peculiar to Libre is unclear.  I suspect it might be.  There should be a central NHS diabetes advisory group.  If they decide that Libre should be funded with a criteria, then that should apply throughout the whole NHS.  Perhaps there should be a central diabetes pot of money?  There is a lack of control across the regions through all aspects of diabetes care.  There is little to no standardisation.

As an example, I wonder - if there was a restricted number of test strip type available on the NHS, could that in turn result in some of the larger brands reducing their price?  There are expensive tests strips and cheaper ones.  Why's that?  Surely they would reduce the price if the NHS made it a competitive tender for supply.  The manufacturer would in turn would get a volume benefit and the NHS would save money.  Why is that so hard?

An question that bugs me is why there's a lack of evidence for the Libre.  Is this a usual situation when a device or medicine gets to market?  How come there isn't more scientific evidence being provided by Abbott.  The clinical data has been scarce and I can understand why CCGs think there's not enough.  This technology has been on the market for four years - plenty of time to fund proper extensive studies.  If these had been conducted, would be in the same situation?  I doubt it - I wonder what Abbott's take on this is?

Q6.  What criteria (if any) do you think should be applied to Libre prescribing? 

It is clear that there needs to be criteria.  An ideal world would be one where prescribing would be based on clinical need.  The problem with that is that it can easily be challenged and in the end many would prescribe to those that shouted loudest.  Criteria can work, but they need to be appropriate and reviewed regularly.  They need to be based on outcomes, not just the cost of supply.  Current criteria, like the RMOC criteria don't take outcomes into account.  The reason is because CCGs can't cope with that either.  If the CCG problem is solved the surely the funding mechanisms could be improved too.


 Q7.  If you wear any tech, has any ‘muggle’ (not a PWD!) asked you about it.  What did you say/do? 

A five year-old French child asked me what was on my arm.  I explained in my GSCE French, but I'm not sure if I'd explained to a five year old English child in English that they'd have understood.  Apart from that, nobody's asked...however I'm quite good at raising the subject and talking at length about the tech I use and what it does.

The tweet chat is hosted by various people who are members of the #gbdoc at 9pm UK time each Wednesday evening.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Big Announcement - Libre Funding

NEWS RELEASE Embargoed 00:01 November 14 NHS TO PROVIDE LIFE CHANGING GLUCOSE MONITORS FOR TYPE 1 DIABETES PATIENTS Tens of thousands of people with Type 1 diabetes across the country will benefit from life changing glucose monitors on the NHS. To coincide with World Diabetes Day, Simon Stevens, Chief Executive of NHS England, is announcing action to end the current variation patients in some parts of the country are facing to access Freestyle Libre. The wearable sensor does away with the need for inconvenient and sometimes painful finger prick blood tests by relaying glucose levels to a smart phone or e-reader. NHS England will ensure the device, which is the size of a £2 coin and sits on the arm, is available on prescription for all patients who qualify for it in line with NHS clinical guidelines. From April 2019, these patients will be able to receive it on prescription from their local GP or diabetes team helping them to better manage their blood sugar levels. It comes as the NHS seeks t…

Libre - March 2018 Update

Since November 2017 and the official listing of Libre on prescription, so much has changed, but has it changed for the better?

I think broadly the answer to that question is No, but not for want of trying.  The situation has become increasingly confusing and disjointed.

Getting it on Prescription Firstly, the prescribing of Libre.  Wales have said yes, most other areas have said perhaps.  This map shows the current status by CCG: Diabetes UK Joint Policy Tracker.  There are improvements, but this demonstrates the postcode lottery.

The data on prescribing rates are published but this data is woefully slow to become in the public domain.  The final UK country to publish data was Scotland, which finally released December data on 13th March!

Here's the data so far:

This shows an increase, but hardly an avalanche!  Wish I could see the January data...Northern Ireland should publish very soon though.

There are CCGs like Manchester that have now approved prescribing, but it's slow an…

August Libre Update - Data, data and more data!

This month's update will be dealt with in two parts, both focusing on data; the first part summarising some data about the prescribing policies across England, the second my usual update on prescriptions fulfilled across the UK.
Libre Prescribing Policies and Implementation in England There didn't seem to be an easy way to compile this.  I used the Diabetes UK Map to link to the policies and then I cross-checked this with a Google search to see whether there was any more information.  I had to do this line by line for each of the 195 CCGs in England - quite a lengthy and tedious process.  However, I am pleased with the information arising from the data.

Firstly, the headline figures - how many CCGs were funding Libre, how many had denied funding and who were still undecided?  There are differences of opinion about these figures as some CCGs have not been clear (Staffordshire CCGs), and some have agreed to fund, but are yet to actually fund due to implementation difficulties (L…