Associations of Executive Function With Diabetes Management and Glycemic Control in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes.

Aims: The aims of this study were to assess domains of executive function in relation to diabetes management and glycemic control in adolescents with type 1 diabetes and to compare adolescent self-report and parent proxy-report of adolescent executive function. Methods: Adolescents with type 1 diabetes (N = 169, 46% female, age 15.9 ± 1.3 years) and their parents completed self-report and parent proxy-report versions of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF). Results: Self-report and parent proxy-report BRIEF T scores were moderately to strongly correlated; parent proxy scores were significantly higher than self-report scores. Executive function problems (Global Executive Composite T score ≥60) occurred in 9% of adolescents by self-report and 26% by parent proxy-report. For almost all Metacognition Index scales, elevated (T score ≥60) parent proxy scores were associated with lower adherence, lower adolescent diabetes self-efficacy, and more parent involvement in diabetes management. Elevated scores on several Metacognition Index scales were associated with less pump use (Plan/Organize by self-report, Initiate by parent proxy-report, and Monitor by parent proxy-report) and higher A1C (Plan/Organize by self-report and parent proxy-report and Organization of Materials by parent proxy-report). The only significant associations for the Behavioral Regulation Index scales occurred for adherence (by parent proxy-report) and diabetes self-efficacy (by self-report and parent-report). Conclusion: Adolescents with type 1 diabetes who have problems with metacognition may need additional support for diabetes self-management.

Association of executive function problems and disordered eating behaviours in teens with type 1 diabetes.

AIM: To explore cross-sectional associations between executive function problems and disordered eating behaviours in teens with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Executive function was assessed by the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF), self-report and parent proxy-report versions. Scores ≥60 (on Global Executive Composite, Behavioral Regulation Index, Metacognition Index or clinical scales) indicated problems with executive function. Disordered eating behaviour was assessed by the Diabetes Eating Problem Survey Revised (DEPS-R) and categorized as follows: <10 low, 10-19 moderate and ≥20 high. RESULTS: In the 169 teens (46% girls, median age 16.0 years [range 13.7-18.7], median diabetes duration 8.9 years [range 1.4-16.6]), 29% had moderate and 12% had high level of disordered eating behaviours. Executive function problems were present in 9% by self report and 26% by parent proxy-report. Among teens with moderate/high level of disordered eating behaviours, 19% had executive function problems by self report (vs. 2% of teens with low level of disordered eating behaviours, p < 0.001) and 33% had executive function problems by parent proxy-report (vs. 20% of teens with low level of disordered eating behaviours, p = 0.056). A greater level of disordered eating behaviours was associated with executive function problems by teen self report on the General Executive Composite (p < 0.001), Behavioral Regulation Index (p < 0.001), emotional control clinical scale (p < 0.001), shift clinical scale (p < 0.001) and by parent proxy-report on the task initiation clinical scale (p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Assessing executive function and screening for disordered eating behaviours in teens with type 1 diabetes could help identify a subset of teens at high risk for adverse outcomes and need for intervention.