Evaluating fear of hypoglycemia, pediatric parenting stress, and self-efficacy among parents of children with type 1 diabetes and their correlation with glycemic control.

Background: This study was designed to determine the level of fear of hypoglycemia (FoH), pediatric parenting stress and selfefficacy in parents of children with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 61 families of children with T1D who had been diagnosed for at least 6 months recruited from "Gabric Diabetes Education Association" in Tehran. Sixty mothers and 41 fathers of 61 children (26 girls, age: 6.0-12.7 years) were assessed using the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey-Parent (HFS-P), Pediatric Inventory for Parents (PIP) and Self-Efficacy for Diabetes Scale-Parent (SED-P) questionnaires. Pearson correlation analysis was used to compute the correlation between HFS-P, PIP and SEDP scores separately for mother and fathers. Results: Only 8.3% of children had controlled diabetes. Internal reliability of the Persian version of all questionnaires was good. FoH were higher for mothers. Mothers whose children had diabetes for less than two years had significantly lower mean HFS-Behavior subscale (HFS-B) scores than mothers whose children had diabetes for more than two years. There was a positive correlation between fathers' mean HFS-B score and children's total insulin dose per day. Parents' FoH score was positively correlated with increased pediatric parenting stress. Findings also showed considerable emotional distress in 51% of mothers and 29.7% of fathers. Frequency of selfmonitoring blood glucose tests (SMBG) correlated negatively with HbA1c. Conclusion: We concluded that parents with high levels of FoH and stress may benefit from diabetes education. Important implications for education are considering psychological adjustment, recognizing diabetes-related fear and stress in parents, encouraging fathers to become actively involved in the child's diabetes management and emphasizing the importance of SMBG.

Understanding the construct of fear of hypoglycemia in pediatric type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Fear of hypoglycemia (FoH) can be a significant barrier to glycemic control in pediatric type 1 diabetes (T1D). This study aimed to explore underlying constructs of the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey (HFS) for parents (PHFS) and children (CHFS). METHODS: Data were aggregated from five studies of 259 youth with T1D and 250 parents. Exploratory Factor Analysis was used to determine the underlying factors of the CHFS and PHFS. RESULTS: Similar four-factor solutions were found for the CHFS and PHFS. Both subscales consisted of two factors: Behavior Subscale (1) behaviors used to keep blood glucose (BG) high to prevent hypoglycemia (Maintain High BG) and (2) other actions to avoid hypoglycemia (Avoidance); Worry Subscale (1) concerns about helplessness (Helplessness) and (2) negative social consequences associated with hypoglycemia (Social Consequences). CONCLUSIONS: These constructs provide a more comprehensive understanding of pediatric FoH and have implications for interventions aimed at reducing FoH in this population.

Driving safety: concerns and experiences of parents of adolescent drivers with type 1 diabetes.

Driving is a dangerous activity for adolescents, perhaps being even more precarious for adolescents with type 1 diabetes due to the possibility of extreme blood glucose (BG). There is no available data on adolescent driving safety concerns and type 1 diabetes. To begin addressing this issue, we surveyed parents regarding their observations and concerns. Seventy-two parents (87.5% mothers) of adolescent drivers aged 16-19 with type 1 diabetes provided analyzable data. Females comprised 36% of their adolescents, with 74% using pump therapy. In the past year, 13 and 84% of parents reported that their adolescent had experienced severe or moderate disruptive hypoglycemia, respectively. Over half (56%) of the parents reported moderate to extreme worry about how diabetes impacted their adolescent's driving, while only 21% of parents thought their adolescents had similar concerns (p = 0.037). Almost one third (31%) of parents thought their adolescent need not treat low BG until it fell below 70 mg/dL, 13% thought their adolescent could safely drive with BG below 65 mg/dL. And, 31 and 14% of parents, respectively, reported their adolescent had been in a collision or stopped by the police in the past year, which they attributed to both hypo- and hyperglycemia. Adolescents reportedly took steps to prevent hypo- and hyperglycemia while driving, but more aggressively avoided hypoglycemia (p < 0.001). While this data is limited, lacking a non-diabetic control group and randomized sample, it does suggest that driving and adolescent type 1 diabetes deserve further attention and investigation.

Motivational Interviewing Support for a Behavioral Health Internet Intervention for Drivers with Type 1 Diabetes.

While Internet interventions can improve health behaviors, their impact is limited by program adherence. Supporting program adherence through telephone counseling may be useful, but there have been few direct tests of the impact of support. We describe a Telephone Motivational Interviewing (MI) intervention targeting adherence to an Internet intervention for drivers with Type 1 Diabetes, DD.com, and compare completion of intervention benchmarks by those randomized to DD.com plus MI vs. DD.com only. The goal of the pre-intervention MI session was to increase the participant's motivation to complete the Internet intervention and all its assignments, while the goal of the post-treatment MI session was to plan for maintaining changes made during the intervention. Sessions were semi-structured and partially scripted to maximize consistency. MI Fidelity was coded using a standard coding system, the MITI. We examined the effects of MI support vs. no support on number of days from enrollment to program benchmarks. Results show that MI sessions were provided with good fidelity. Users who received MI support completed some program benchmarks such as Core 4 (t176 df= -2.25; p<.03) and 11 of 12 monthly driving diaries significantly sooner, but support did not significantly affect time to intervention completion (t177 df= -1.69; p<. 10) or rates of completion. These data suggest that there is little benefit to therapist guidance for Internet interventions including automated email prompts and other automated minimal supports, but that a booster MI session may enhance collection of follow-up data.

Patient perspectives on personalized glucose advisory systems for type 1 diabetes management.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes technology is rapidly advancing toward fully automated glucose control systems, but little is known about patient perspectives on these systems. This study aimed to gather qualitative and quantitative data on patient attitudes and concerns about using a personalized glucose advisory system (PGASystem) for diabetes management. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Fifty-six adults with type 1 diabetes on insulin pump therapy participated in focus group interviews following use of an insulin pump and continuous glucose monitoring for 4 weeks in a parent study to develop a PGASystem. Focus groups were transcribed and coded for thematic content. RESULTS: All participants endorsed the desire to use a PGASystem, and the majority wanted advice from the system on all aspects of insulin delivery. However, participants indicated that they might be reluctant to follow such advice because of the following concerns: how the advice was generated, relinquishing control to automated technology, and inadequate personalization of the system. Participants believed the system would need to consider numerous factors related to their food, activities, and other personal information to provide optimally individualized advice. The majority also reported difficulties with behavioral event recording on their insulin pumps, and approximately one-third endorsed difficulty with accurate carbohydrate counting. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with type 1 diabetes appear to be enthusiastic about using a PGASystem system for their diabetes management but also have significant concerns affecting their overall willingness to follow such a system's advice. Addressing these concerns will be crucial in the future development of glucose advisory and control technology.

Assessing fear of hypoglycemia in children with Type 1 diabetes and their parents.

This article summarizes the literature on fear of hypoglycemia in pediatric Type 1 diabetes and the assessment of this fear in both children with Type 1 diabetes and their parents. The most common instrument for assessing fear of hypoglycemia in this population is the children's and parent's versions of the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey (HFS), although studies using other assessment measures are also reviewed. Studies using this survey have identified variables contributing to fear of hypoglycemia in children with Type 1 diabetes and their parents, such as history of frequent or traumatic hypoglycemia, as well as trait anxiety. In addition to this summary of the literature, new data are presented supporting the reliability of hypoglycemic fear assessment in younger children and comparing fear of hypoglycemia in children in different age groups (6-18 years old) and their parents. Also reviewed are studies investigating the relationship between fear of hypoglycemia and diabetes control, which have yielded inconsistent results. Given the potential importance of fear of hypoglycemia in pediatric diabetes, there has been limited research in this area.

Psychometric properties of the hypoglycemia fear survey-ii for adults with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To perform the first comprehensive psychometric evaluation of the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey-II (HFS-II), a measure of the behavioral and affective dimensions of fear of hypoglycemia, using modern test-theory methods, including item-response theory (IRT). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Surveys completed in four previous studies by 777 adults with type 1 diabetes were aggregated for analysis, with 289 subjects completing both subscales of the HFS-II and 488 subjects completing only the Worry subscale. The aggregated sample (53.3% female, 44.4% using insulin pumps) had a mean age of 41.9 years, diabetes duration of 23.8 years, HbA(1c) value of 7.7%, and 1.4 severe hypoglycemic episodes in the past year. Data analysis included exploratory factor analysis using polychoric correlations and IRT. Factors were analyzed for fit, trait-level locations, point-measure correlations, and separation values. RESULTS: Internal and test-retest reliability was good, as well as convergent validity, as demonstrated by significant correlations with other measures of psychological distress. Scores were significantly higher in subjects who had experienced severe hypoglycemia in the past year. Factor analyses validated the two subscales of the HFS-II. Item analyses showed that 12 of 15 items on the Behavior subscale, and all of the items on the Worry subscale had good-fit statistics. CONCLUSIONS: The HFS-II is a reliable and valid measure of the fear of hypoglycemia in adults with type 1 diabetes, and factor analyses and IRT support the two separate subscales of the survey.