Lower Independent Self-Care Readiness Persists over Time in Teens with Type 1 Diabetes and Executive Function Challenges.

PURPOSE: Management of type 1 diabetes is complex and benefits from adequate executive function (EF) (planning, organization, problem-solving). Teens with diabetes and executive dysfunction may have challenges with acquisition of self-care skills. METHODS: Over 18 months, parents of teens with type 1 diabetes aged 13-17 completed the Diabetes Family Responsibility Questionnaire (DFRQ) and Readiness for Independent Self-Care Questionnaire (RISQ) every 6 months. Parents assessed teen EF, completing the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF). T-score ≥60 defined EF challenges. EF, demographic, and diabetes treatment variables predicted RISQ score over time using longitudinal mixed modeling with false discovery rate adjustment. RESULTS: There were 169 teen participants (54% male) aged 15.9±1.3 years, diabetes duration 8.4±3.7 years, and A1c 8.6±1.2%. About a third (31.4%) of teens had parent-reported BRIEF Global Executive Composite (GEC) scores ≥60. After adjusting for age, gender, and DFRQ, those with GEC <60 had RISQ score 4.1 points higher than those with GEC ≥60, p=0.016. Behavioral regulation index (BRI; adjusted for age, CGM use, DFRQ, and A1c) did not predict RISQ while metacognition index (MI; adjusted for age, gender, and DFRQ) did; those with MI <60 had RISQ score 5.3 points higher than those with MI ≥60, p<0.001. In all models, older teen age (p<0.05) and less parental involvement (p<0.001) predicted higher RISQ score. CONCLUSIONS: EF skills, especially metacognition, appear important for acquisition of self-care behaviors in teens with type 1 diabetes. Evaluating EF during adolescence may identify teens needing extra support during the transition process.

Transition to self-management among emerging adults with type 1 diabetes: a mixed methods study.

Introduction: Emerging adulthood is challenging for young people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). This study evaluated transition to diabetes self-management and perceptions of care transfer using mixed methods. Methods: An online survey queried demographics, management characteristics, diabetes knowledge, self-care readiness, adherence, and diabetes distress. T-tests compared survey scores between those with self-reported target A1c <7.0% versus ≥7.0%. Pearson correlations assessed associations between A1c and diabetes distress, stratified by A1c <7.0% versus ≥7.0%. Qualitative semi-structured interviews elicited perceptions of young adults; transcripts were analyzed using directed qualitative content analysis. Results: Of 141 participants (30% male, 84% non-Hispanic white) completing the survey, 41% self-reported target A1c <7.0%. Diabetes knowledge and self-care readiness scores did not differ between those with A1c <7.0% versus ≥7.0%, while diabetes distress was lower (45 ± 20 vs 52 ± 20, p=0.01) and adherence higher (77 ± 12 vs 71 ± 14, p=0.02) in those with A1c <7.0% versus ≥7.0%. Diabetes distress was significantly associated with glycemic outcomes in those reporting A1c ≥7.0% (R=0.36, p<0.01). Qualitative analysis (24 participants) revealed five themes and two sub-themes, notable for need for more mental health support, support from others with T1D, benefits of technology for care autonomy, and challenges of obtaining diabetes supplies. Discussion: Emerging adults with self-reported target A1c endorsed lower diabetes distress and higher adherence than those with elevated A1c. Mental health access, support from others with T1D, technology use, and guidance for supply acquisition may improve transition to self-management and care transfer for emerging adults with T1D.