44 research outputs found

    A Web-Based Study of the Relationship of Duration of Insulin Pump Infusion Set Use and Fasting Blood Glucose Level in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes

    Full text link
    Background: To evaluate the impact of infusion set use duration on glycemic control, we conducted an Internet-based study using the T1D Exchange's online patient community, Glu (myGlu.org). Subjects and Methods: For 14 days, 243 electronically consented adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) entered online that day's fasting blood glucose (FBG) level, the prior day's total daily insulin (TDI) dose, and whether the infusion set was changed. Results: Mean duration of infusion set use was 3.0 days. Mean FBG level was higher with each successive day of infusion set use, increasing from 126?mg/dL on Day 1 to 133?mg/dL on Day 3 to 147?mg/dL on Day 5 (P<0.001). TDI dose did not vary with increased duration of infusion set use. Conclusions: Internet-based data collection was used to rapidly conduct the study at low cost. The results indicate that FBG levels increase with each additional day of insulin pump infusion set use.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/140356/1/dia.2014.0336.pd

    Nighttime is the worst time: Parental fear of hypoglycemia in young children with type 1 diabetes

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Fear of hypoglycemia is common in parents of young children with type 1 diabetes (T1D), but little is known about the specific fears that parents most often experience. Hypoglycemia fear has been associated with poorer glycemic control in older children, though not yet studied in a large cohort of very young children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Parents of 549 children <7 years (mean 5.2 ± 1.2 years [19% <3 years]) with a mean diabetes duration of 2.4 ± 1.0 years (range 1-6 years) and mean HbA1c 8.2% ± 1.1% (66 ± 12 mmol/mol) registered in the T1D Exchange completed the worry scale of the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey modified for parents (HFS-P). RESULTS: Mean parental fear of hypoglycemia worry score was 36.1 ± 23.1 (possible range 0-100), with most frequent worries related to the child having a low while asleep and the child not recognizing a low. The mean worry score was not associated with the child's age, glycemic control, or recent severe hypoglycemic event. Parental worries about lows while sleeping were significantly higher in pump users than non-users (61% vs. 45%; P < .001), and tended to be higher in CGM users than non-users (62% vs 51%; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: The greatest worries of parents of young children with T1D were related to hypoglycemia during sleep and other times/circumstances during which it would be difficult to detect hypoglycemia. Using advanced diabetes technologies may be an effort to temper fears about hypoglycemia during sleep, though the directionality of this relationship is undetermined. Additional studies can clarify this association and leverage use of diabetes technologies to improve glycemic control

    State of Type 1 Diabetes Management and Outcomes from the T1D Exchange in 2016–2018

    Get PDF
    Objective: To provide a snapshot of the profile of adults and youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in the United States and assessment of longitudinal changes in T1D management and clinical outcomes in the T1D Exchange registry. Research Design and Methods: Data on diabetes management and outcomes from 22,697 registry participants (age 1–93 years) were collected between 2016 and 2018 and compared with data collected in 2010–2012 for 25,529 registry participants. Results: Mean HbA1c in 2016–2018 increased from 65 mmol/mol at the age of 5 years to 78 mmol/mol between ages 15 and 18, with a decrease to 64 mmol/mol by age 28 and 58–63 mmol/mol beyond age 30. The American Diabetes Association (ADA) HbA1c goal of 10-fold in children <12 years old. HbA1c levels were lower in CGM users than nonusers. Severe hypoglycemia was most frequent in participants ≥50 years old and diabetic ketoacidosis was most common in adolescents and young adults. Racial differences were evident in use of pumps and CGM and HbA1c levels. Conclusions: Data from the T1D Exchange registry demonstrate that only a minority of adults and youth with T1D in the United States achieve ADA goals for HbA1c

    Effect of Metformin Added to Insulin on Glycemic Control Among Overweight/Obese Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial

    Get PDF
    Importance Previous studies assessing the effect of metformin on glycemic control in adolescents with type 1 diabetes have produced inconclusive results. Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of metformin as an adjunct to insulin in treating overweight adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter (26 pediatric endocrinology clinics), double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial involving 140 adolescents aged 12.1 to 19.6 years (mean [SD] 15.3 [1.7] years) with mean type 1 diabetes duration 7.0 (3.3) years, mean body mass index (BMI) 94th (4) percentile, mean total daily insulin 1.1 (0.2) U/kg, and mean HbA1c 8.8% (0.7%). Interventions Randomization to receive metformin (n = 71) (≤2000 mg/d) or placebo (n = 69). Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline to 26 weeks adjusted for baseline HbA1c. Secondary outcomes included change in blinded continuous glucose monitor indices, total daily insulin, BMI, waist circumference, body composition, blood pressure, and lipids. Results Between October 2013 and February 2014, 140 participants were enrolled. Baseline HbA1c was 8.8% in each group. At 13-week follow-up, reduction in HbA1c was greater with metformin (−0.2%) than placebo (0.1%; mean difference, −0.3% [95% CI, −0.6% to 0.0%]; P = .02). However, this differential effect was not sustained at 26-week follow up when mean change in HbA1c from baseline was 0.2% in each group (mean difference, 0% [95% CI, −0.3% to 0.3%]; P = .92). At 26-week follow-up, total daily insulin per kg of body weight was reduced by at least 25% from baseline among 23% (16) of participants in the metformin group vs 1% (1) of participants in the placebo group (mean difference, 21% [95% CI, 11% to 32%]; P = .003), and 24% (17) of participants in the metformin group and 7% (5) of participants in the placebo group had a reduction in BMI z score of 10% or greater from baseline to 26 weeks (mean difference, 17% [95% CI, 5% to 29%]; P = .01). Gastrointestinal adverse events were reported by more participants in the metformin group than in the placebo group (mean difference, 36% [95% CI, 19% to 51%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance Among overweight adolescents with type 1 diabetes, the addition of metformin to insulin did not improve glycemic control after 6 months. Of multiple secondary end points, findings favored metformin only for insulin dose and measures of adiposity; conversely, use of metformin resulted in an increased risk for gastrointestinal adverse events. These results do not support prescribing metformin to overweight adolescents with type 1 diabetes to improve glycemic control

    “I’m essentially his pancreas”: Parent perceptions of diabetes burden and opportunities to reduce burden in the care of children <8 years old with type 1 diabetes

    Get PDF
    Background: Across all age groups, management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) places substantial responsibility and emotional burden upon families. This study explored parent perceptions of the burdens of caring for very young children with T1D. Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with parents (85% mothers) of 79 children with T1D, aged 1 to <8 years old, from four diverse pediatric diabetes clinical centers. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using hybrid thematic analysis to derive central themes. Results: Youth (77% White) had T1D for ≥6 months: age (M ± SD) 5.2 ± 1.5 years, diabetes duration 2.4 ± 1.3 years, and A1c 63 ± 10 mmol/mol (7.9 ± 0.9%); 66% used an insulin pump and 61% used CGM. Three major themes emerged related to diabetes burdens: (a) the emotional burden of diabetes on themselves and their children, (b) the burden of finding, training, and trusting effective secondary caregivers to manage the child's diabetes, and (c) suggestions for how more comprehensive, personalized diabetes education from healthcare providers for parents and secondary caregivers could help reduce parent burden and worry. Conclusions: In families with very young children with T1D, parental perceptions of the burden of managing diabetes are common and could be mitigated by tailored education programs that increase parent knowledge, bolster parents' confidence in themselves, and increase trust in their secondary caregivers to manage diabetes. Reduced parental burden and increased caregiver knowledge may positively impact child's glycemic control, as well as improve parent and child quality of life

    Time spent outside of target glucose range for young children with type 1 diabetes: a continuous glucose monitor study

    Get PDF
    Aim To assess the associations between demographic and clinical characteristics and sensor glucose metrics in young children with type 1 diabetes, using masked, continuous glucose monitoring data from children aged 2 to < 8 years. Research design and methods The analysis included 143 children across 14 sites in the USA, enrolled in a separate clinical trial. Eligibility criteria were: age 2 to <8 years; type 1 diabetes duration ≥3 months; no continuous glucose monitoring use for past 30 days; and HbA1c concentration 53 to <86 mmol/mol (7.0 to <10.0%). All participants wore masked continuous glucose monitors up to 14 days. Results On average, participants spent the majority (13 h) of the day in hyperglycaemia (>10.0 mmol/l) and a median of ~1 h/day in hypoglycaemia (<3.9 mmol/l). Participants with minority race/ethnicity and higher parent education levels spent more time in target range, 3.9–10.0 mmol/l, and less time in hyperglycaemia. More time in hypoglycaemia was associated with minority race/ethnicity and younger age at diagnosis. Continuous glucose monitoring metrics were similar in pump and injection users. Conclusions Given that both hypo- and hyperglycaemia negatively impact neurocognitive development, strategies to increase time in target glucose range for young children are needed
    corecore