Use of complementary and alternative medicine in children with type 1 diabetes mellitus - prevalence, patterns of use, and costs.

BACKGROUND: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is increasingly used in adults and children. Studies on CAM in diabetes have mainly focused on the adult population and its use among children with type 1 diabetes has not been well characterized. OBJECTIVES: This study determines prevalence, parental reasons and motivations, perceived effectiveness, costs, and communication of CAM use. Moreover, caregiver-related variables associated with the use of CAM were investigated. METHODS: A self-completed anonymous questionnaire was administered to parents of children with type 1 diabetes in four pediatric diabetes centers in Germany (Leipzig, Berlin, Stuttgart, and Bonn). RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty eight (65.9%) of 346 families completed the survey. Mean age of the diabetic patients was 11.9 +/- 3.8 yr. Forty two (18.4%) received one or more types of CAM, with the most common types being homeopathy (14.5%), vitamins and minerals (13.7%), modified diet (12.9%), aloe vera (7.3%), and cinnamon (5.6%). Users had a significantly higher family income and parental tertiary education (p < 0.05) and stated a significantly stronger interest in self-care (p < 0.01). Parents' motivations for using CAM were the hope for an improved well-being (92.1%), to try everything (77.8%), and assumption of fewer side effects (55.2%). Costs for the entire treatment varied between less than euro100 and up to euro5000, with mostly no reimbursement. CONCLUSIONS: Use of CAM in children with type 1 diabetes is less common than that documented for adults. Parents using CAM do not question the need for insulin. When using CAM, improved well-being and quality of life are important considerations where CAM can have a role.

Effect of insulin concentration on bioavailability during nasal spray administration.

The bioavailability of rapid-acting insulin administered as a nasal spray was studied in 6 type 1 (insulin-dependent) diabetic patients. They received long-acting bovine insulin (Ultratardum 40 U/ml, Organon) as basal treatment at 8 a.m. Rapid-acting insulin was also administered at 8 a.m., then at noon and 6 p.m, subcutaneously on day 1 as a 100 U/ml solution and intranasally by aerosol spray as a 100 U/ml and 500 U/ml with 1% (w/v) 9 lauryl ether solution on day 2 and day 3 respectively. On days 2 and 3, the dose of insulin was at least nine times higher than the subcutaneous dose on day 1. Free and total plasma insulin concentrations were assayed after the noon insulin administration. The peaks of the free and total plasma insulin levels were reached earlier and the return to basal levels was obtained earlier after nasal insulin administration than after insulin injected subcutaneously. The bioavailability of nasal spray insulin versus subcutaneous insulin with a 100 U/ml insulin solution was similar to that with a 500 U/ml insulin solution: 5.14 +/- 0.38% (m +/- SEM) and 4.64 +/- 0.46% according to the total plasma insulin level. This study suggests that the bioavailability of nasal spray insulin is not increased by increasing insulin concentration in our experimental conditions.