The emotional well-being of parents with children at genetic risk for type 1 diabetes before and during participation in the POInT-study.

INTRODUCTION: This study examined the emotional impact that parents experience when confronted with an increased genetic risk of type 1 diabetes (T1D) in their child. Population-based screening of neonates for genetic risk of chronic disease carries the risk of increased emotional burden for parents. METHODS: Information was collected using a well-being questionnaire for parents of infants identified as having an increased risk for T1D in a multinational research study. Parents were asked to complete this questionnaire after they were told their child had an increased risk for T1D (Freder1k-study) and at several time points during an intervention study (POInT-study), where oral insulin was administered daily. RESULTS: Data were collected from 2595 parents of 1371 children across five countries. Panic-related anxiety symptoms were reported by only 4.9% after hearing about their child having an increased risk. Symptoms of depression were limited to 19.4% of the parents at the result-communication visit and declined over time during the intervention study. When thinking about their child's risk for developing T1D (disease-specific anxiety), 47.2% worried, felt nervous and tense. Mothers and parents with a first-degree relative (FDR) with T1D reported more symptoms of depression and disease-specific anxiety (p < 0.001) than fathers and parents without a FDR. CONCLUSION: Overall, symptoms of depression and panic-related anxiety are comparable with the German population. When asked about their child's risk for T1D during the intervention study, some parents reported disease-specific anxiety, which should be kept in mind when considering population-based screening. As certain subgroups are more prone, it will be important to continue psychological screening and, when necessary, to provide support by an experienced, multidisciplinary team.

General population screening for childhood type 1 diabetes: is it time for a UK strategy?

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a chronic autoimmune disease of childhood affecting 1:500 children aged under 15 years, with around 25% presenting with life-threatening diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). While first-degree relatives have the highest risk of T1D, more than 85% of children who develop T1D do not have a family history. Despite public health awareness campaigns, DKA rates have not fallen over the last decade. T1D has a long prodrome, and it is now possible to identify children who go on to develop T1D with a high degree of certainty. The reasons for identifying children presymptomatically include prevention of DKA and related morbidities and mortality, reducing the need for hospitalisation, time to provide emotional support and education to ensure a smooth transition to insulin treatment, and opportunities for new treatments to prevent or delay progression. Research studies of population-based screening strategies include using islet autoantibodies alone or in combination with genetic risk factors, both of which can be measured from a capillary sample. If found during screening, the presence of two or more islet autoantibodies has a high positive predictive value for future T1D in childhood (under 18 years), offering an opportunity for DKA prevention. However, a single time-point test will not identify all children who go on to develop T1D, and so combining with genetic risk factors for T1D may be an alternative approach. Here we discuss the pros and cons of T1D screening in the UK, the different strategies available, the knowledge gaps and why a T1D screening strategy is needed.

Data Sharing While Using a Closed-Loop System: Qualitative Study of Adolescents' and Parents' Experiences and Views.

Objective: To understand and explore data sharing practices among adolescents and their parents using a closed-loop system. Methods: Eighteen adolescents (aged 11-18 years) and 19 parents were interviewed after adolescents had ∼6 months experience of using a closed-loop system, which permitted them to share glucose and insulin data with parents/caregivers. Data were analyzed thematically. Results: There was considerable variability in how parent-child dyads perceived, valued, and undertook data sharing. Parents of early adolescents (11-13 years) reported making extensive use of "real time" data to remotely manage their child's diabetes and early adolescents described needing and wanting this input. Parents of middle adolescents (14-16 years) described making greater use of retrospective data. To avoid conflict and encourage and support their son/daughter's autonomy, these individuals reported practicing watchful waiting and only intervening after concerns about a pattern of problematic behavior or their child's safety arose. Middle adolescents indicated that data sharing had been done primarily for the benefit of their parents, although they also noted quality of life benefits for themselves. Among late adolescents (17+ years), parents were simply remote because their son/daughter had not permitted access to their data. Participants recommended clear ground rules be put in place about when, and how, data sharing should be used. Conclusions: To help parent-child dyads use data sharing in ways which minimize conflict and optimize constructive parental support, we recommend tailored input and support, which takes account of family dynamics, the young person's developmental maturity, and the different ways in which data are used across the adolescent age range.