Factors associated with disordered eating behaviours in adolescents with Type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To assess the occurrence of disordered eating behaviours in teenagers with Type 1 diabetes and to compare characteristics according to level of disordered eating behaviours. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we collected adolescents' demographic and diabetes management data by parent-youth interview and chart review. Teenagers completed psychosocial surveys, including the Diabetes Eating Problem Survey-Revised (DEPS-R), a diabetes-specific measure of disordered eating behaviours. We categorized teenagers according to level of disordered eating behaviours: low, DEPS-R score <10; moderate, DEPS-R score 10-19; and high, DEPS-R score ≥20. RESULTS: The 178 teenagers (48% girls) were aged 14.9±1.3 years, with diabetes duration of 7.4±3.7 years. Most (59%) had low, 26% had moderate, and 15% had high levels of disordered eating behaviours. Several biomedical and psychosocial characteristics differed by level of disordered eating behaviours. There were more girls in the moderate (62%) and high (65%) than in the low level of disordered eating behaviours group (37%; P=0.003) and more obese teenagers in the moderate (13%) and high (27%) groups than in the low group (4%; P=0.0003). Frequency of daily blood glucose monitoring decreased (P=0.0006) and HbA1c level increased (P=0.01) with greater level of disordered eating behaviours. A greater level of disordered eating behaviours was also associated with poorer treatment adherence, more negative affect regarding blood glucose monitoring, poorer quality of life, and more depressive symptoms (all P<0.0001), along with more diabetes-specific family conflict (P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Identifying teenagers with Type 1 diabetes who have moderate and high levels of disordered eating behaviours may prevent progression to eating disorders and substantial morbidity by directing support and intervention efforts to those in need.

Text-message responsiveness to blood glucose monitoring reminders is associated with HbA1c benefit in teenagers with Type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To evaluate an 18-month text-messaging intervention in teenagers with Type 1 diabetes and to assess factors associated with text responsiveness and glycaemic benefit. METHODS: Teenagers with diabetes (N = 147), aged 13-17 years, received two-way text reminders at self-selected times to check blood glucose levels and reply with blood glucose results. RESULTS: At baseline, the participants (48% boys, 78% white, 63% pump-treated) had a mean ± sd age of 14.9 ± 1.3 years, diabetes duration of 7.1 ± 3.9 years and HbA1c concentration of 69 ± 12 mmol/mol (8.5 ± 1.1%). The mean proportion of days with ≥1 blood glucose response declined over time (0-6 months, 60 ± 26% of days, 7-12 months, 53 ± 31% of days, 13-18 months, 43 ± 33% of days). Over 18 months, 49% responded with ≥1 blood glucose result on ≥50% of days (high responders). Regression analysis controlling for baseline HbA1c revealed no significant change in HbA1c from baseline to 18 months in high responders (P = 0.54) compared with a significant HbA1c increase in low responders (+0.3%, P = 0.01). In participants with baseline HbA1c ≥64 mmol/mol (≥8%), high responders were 2.5 times more likely than low responders to have a clinically significant [≥5.5 mmol/mol (≥0.5%)] HbA1c decrease over 18 months (P < 0.05). In participants with baseline HbA1c <64 mmol/mol(<8%), high responders were 5.7 times more likely than low responders to have an 18-month HbA1c <58 mmol/mol (<7.5%; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Teenagers with Type 1 diabetes who responded to text reminders on ≥50% of days over 18 months experienced clinically significant glycaemic benefit. There remains a need to tailor interventions to maintain teenager engagement and optimize improvements.

Predictors of changing insulin dose requirements and glycaemic control in children, adolescents and young adults with Type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To investigate trajectories of daily insulin dose requirements and glycaemic control in children, adolescents and young adults with Type 1 diabetes and to identify factors associated with changing insulin needs and deterioration in HbA1c . METHODS: The sample was a dynamic cohort of 635 children, adolescents and young adults with Type 1 diabetes from one centre. Data from clinic visits occurring over 20 years (1993-2013) were extracted from medical records. From age 7-24 years, we evaluated HbA1c and insulin dose according to sex, insulin regimen and weight status. RESULTS: Participants provided a mean ± sd of 10.7±4.3 years of insulin dose data and 12.0±4.6 years of HbA1c data. At first observation, the mean ± sd age was 10.0±2.6 years, diabetes duration was 2.8±2.1 years, insulin dose was 0.8±0.2 units/kg and HbA1c was 74±18 mmol/mol (8.9±1.6%). Insulin dose was higher in girls at ages 8-13 years (P<0.0001 to P<0.01), but higher in boys/young men at ages 16-21 years (P<0.0001 to P=0.04). HbA1c was higher in girls/young women at ages 16-24 years (P<0.0001 to P=0.01). Compared with injection therapy, pump therapy was associated with lower insulin dose at ages 8-24 years (P<0.0001 to P=0.03) and lower HbA1c at ages 8-22 years (P<0.0001 to P=0.005). HbA1c did not differ between overweight/obese and normal weight individuals, but overweight/obese individuals had higher insulin dose at ages 8-13 years (P<0.0001 to P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: This longitudinal assessment identifies clinically meaningful modifiable (e.g. insulin regimen) and non-modifiable (e.g. sex) factors predictive of insulin requirements and HbA1c levels in young people with Type 1 diabetes; anticipatory insulin adjustments may improve glycaemic control.

Validation of the Diabetes Family Impact Scale: a new measure of diabetes-specific family impact.

AIMS: To develop and validate the Diabetes Family Impact Scale, a scale to measure the impact of diabetes on families. METHODS: The Diabetes Family Impact Scale was developed by an iterative process, with input from multidisciplinary diabetes providers and parents of children with Type 1 diabetes. The psychometric properties of the Diabetes Family Impact Scale were assessed in parents of children with Type 1 diabetes. This assessment included internal consistency, convergent validity and exploratory factor analysis. RESULTS: Parents (n = 148) of children (mean ± sd age 12.9 ± 3.3 years) with Type 1 diabetes (mean ± sd duration 6.2 ± 3.6 years) completed the 15-item Diabetes Family Impact Scale. After eliminating one item, the 14-item measure demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's α  =  0.84). Correlations between the Diabetes Family Impact Scale and measures of parent diabetes burden (r = 0.48, P < 0.0001), stressful life events (r = 0.28, P = 0.0007), and child's quality of life (r = -0.52 and -0.54, P < 0.0001 for generic and diabetes-specific quality of life, respectively) supported the convergent validity of the instrument. Factor analysis identified four factors corresponding to the four survey domains (school, work, finances and family well-being). CONCLUSIONS: The Diabetes Family Impact Scale measures diabetes-specific family impacts with good internal consistency and convergent validity and may be a useful tool in clinical and research settings.

Validation of a contemporary adherence measure for children with Type 1 diabetes: the Diabetes Management Questionnaire.

AIMS: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Diabetes Management Questionnaire, a brief, self-report measure of adherence to contemporary diabetes management for young people with Type 1 diabetes and their caregivers. METHODS: A total of 273 parent-child dyads completed parallel versions of the Diabetes Management Questionnaire. Eligible children (aged 8-18 years) had Type 1 diabetes for ≥1 year. A multidisciplinary team designed the Diabetes Management Questionnaire as a brief, self-administered measure of adherence to Type 1 diabetes management over the preceding month; higher scores reflect greater adherence. Psychometrics were evaluated for the entire sample and according to age of the child. RESULTS: The children (49% female) had a mean ± sd (range) age 13.3 ± 2.9 (8-18) years and their mean ± sd HbA1c was 71 ± 15 mmol/mol (8.6 ± 1.4%). Internal consistency was good for parents (α = 0.83) and children (α = 0.79). Test-retest reliability was excellent for parents (intraclass correlation coefficient =0.83) and good for children (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.65). Parent and child scores had moderate agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.54). Diabetes Management Questionnaire scores were inversely associated with HbA1c (parents: r = -0.41, P < 0.0001; children: r = -0.27, P < 0.0001). Psychometrics were stronger in the children aged ≥13 years compared with those aged < 13 years, but were acceptable in both age groups. Mean ± sd Diabetes Management Questionnaire scores were higher among children who were receiving insulin pump therapy (n = 181) than in children receiving multiple daily injections (n = 92) according to parent (75.9 ± 11.8 vs. 70.5 ± 15.5; P = 0.004) and child report (72.2 ± 12.1 vs. 67.6 ± 13.9; P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The Diabetes Management Questionnaire is a brief, valid self-report measure of adherence to contemporary diabetes self-management for people aged 8-18 years who are receiving either multiple daily injections or insulin pump therapy.

The impact of blood glucose and HbA(1c) goals on glycaemic control in children and adolescents with Type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To evaluate parents' goals and parents' perceptions of physicians' goals for blood glucose and HbA(1c) in children and adolescents with Type 1 diabetes. METHODS: In a cross-sectional observational assessment, parents (80% mothers) of 153 children/adolescents (56% female), aged 12.9 ± 2.3 years (range 8-16 years) with Type 1 diabetes for 6.3 ± 3.5 years, completed surveys regarding their goals and their perceptions of physicians' goals for their child's blood glucose and HbA(1c) levels. RESULTS: Children/adolescents had a mean HbA(1c) of 69 ± 16 mmol/mol (8.4 ± 1.4%) and checked blood glucose levels 3.8 ± 1.2 times/day; 23% received pump therapy. Almost half of parents reported a blood glucose goal of 130 (80-180) mg/dl [7.2 (4.4-10) mmol/l]; 75% of parents reported a HbA(1c) goal of 42-64 mmol/mol (6-8%). HbA(1c) was significantly lower when parents reported HbA(1c) goals ≤ 64 mmol/mol (≤ 8%) vs. > 64 mmol/mol (> 8%) [67 ± 14 mmol/mol (8.3 ± 1.2%) vs. 76 ± 20 mmol/mol (9.1 ± 1.8%), respectively, P = 0.02]. Parents' blood glucose and HbA(1c) goals were tightly linked with parents' perceptions of physicians' blood glucose and HbA(1c) goals (69% concordant, P < 0.0001; 88% concordant, P < 0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant association between lower parent HbA(1c) goals and lower child/adolescent HbA(1c) . Further, parents appear to set glycaemic goals based upon their perceptions of physician goals. Future studies should assess the relationship between parents' perceptions of health-care providers' goals and health-care providers' actual goals and the impact of unified family/provider goal-setting on glycaemic control.

Contemporary rates of severe hypoglycaemia in youth with type 1 diabetes: variability by insulin regimen.

AIMS: To determine incidence rates of severe hypoglycaemia and compare incidence rates by insulin regimen in a diverse sample of youth with Type 1 diabetes from two sites. METHODS: In this observational study, 255 youth (51% female) aged 9-15 years receiving varied insulin regimens provided data prospectively for a median of 1.2 years. Reported episodes of severe hypoglycaemia, defined as episodes requiring help from another person for oral treatment or episodes resulting in seizure/coma, and current insulin regimens were collected systematically. Incidence rates were calculated and compared according to insulin regimen in bivariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: At first encounter, participants had a median age of 12.2 years (range 9.0-15.0), median diabetes duration of 4.4 years (range 1.0-13.0) and mean HbA(1c) of 67 ± 12 mmol/mol (8.3 ± 1.1%). The incidence rate was 37.6/100 patient-years for all severe hypoglycaemia and 9.6/100 patient-years for seizure/coma. The incidence rate for severe hypoglycaemia was 31.8/100 patient-years on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (pump therapy), 34.4/100 patient-years on basal-bolus injections and 46.1/100 patient-years on NPH (NPH vs. pump therapy: P = 0.04). The incidence rate for seizure/coma was 4.5/100 patient-years on pump therapy, 11.1/100 patient-years on basal-bolus injections and 14.4/100 patients-years on NPH (NPH vs. pump therapy: P = 0.004). In the multivariate analysis, the rate of seizure/coma was significantly higher for those on NPH vs. pump therapy (rate ratio 2.9, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of severe hypoglycaemia in youth with Type 1 diabetes remain high. Pump therapy was associated with lower rates of all severe hypoglycaemia and seizure/coma in comparison with NPH.

Re-examining a measure of diabetes-related burden in parents of young people with Type 1 diabetes: the Problem Areas in Diabetes Survey - Parent Revised version (PAID-PR).

AIMS: In a pediatric patients, the burden of diabetes lies within the family. In the current era of intensive insulin therapy, perceived parental burden may affect the family's efforts at effective diabetes management. The aims of this study were to re-examine and revise a measure of perceived parental burden associated with caring for a child with diabetes in the current era. METHODS: A geographically diverse population of young people (N = 376) with Type 1 diabetes and their parents included participants in the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation continuous glucose monitoring study and patients from the Joslin Diabetes Center. Participants provided data on demographics, diabetes management, diabetes-specific family conflict, and quality of life at baseline and after 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS: Young people were 12.9 ± 2.7 years old with diabetes duration of 6.3 ± 3.5 years. Mean HbA(1C) was 8.0 ± 1.2%(64 mmol/mol), 58% received insulin pump therapy, and young people monitored blood glucose 5.2 ± 2.3 times/day. Factor analysis yielded two factors, 'Immediate Burden' and 'Theoretical Burden'. The Problem Areas in Diabetes Survey - Parent Revised version (PAID-PR) demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.87; factor 1 α = 0.78; factor 2 α = 0.83). Greater parental burden was associated with more frequent blood glucose monitoring, higher HbA(1C) levels, greater diabetes-specific family conflict, and lower quality of life. Test-retest analysis was acceptable (r = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: The PAID-PR demonstrated excellent internal consistency, good test-retest reliability, and associations with diabetes-specific family conflict and quality of life. This brief measure may have both clinical and research utility in the management of young people with Type 1 diabetes.

Validation of an abbreviated adherence measure for young people with Type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: Adherence to diabetes-related tasks is an important construct. The Diabetes Self-Management Profile is a validated, semi-structured interview assessing adherence in paediatric patients with Type 1 diabetes. We created and validated a brief questionnaire version of the Diabetes Self-Management Profile called the Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire. METHODS: Young people with Type 1 diabetes, ages 9-15 years (n = 338) and their parents provided data from chart review, interview and questionnaires. RESULTS: Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire scores correlated significantly with Diabetes Self-Management Profile scores, HbA(1c) , blood glucose monitoring frequency and other measures associated with adherence and/or glycaemic control (P ≤ 0.01 for all). Young people and parent scores were correlated (r = 0.55, P < 0.0001). The Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire demonstrated modest internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.59), adequate for a brief measure of multidimensional adherence. In addition, factor analysis confirmed one factor. CONCLUSIONS: This brief adherence questionnaire demonstrated construct validity in young people 9-15 years old and their parents and may have utility in clinical and research settings.

Comparison of longitudinal point-of-care and high-performance liquid chromatography HbA1c measurements in a multi-centre trial.

AIMS: Point-of-care HbA(1c) is routine in clinical practice. Comparison of point-of-care HbA(1c) against laboratory measurements across sites and over time is warranted. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-one young persons with Type 1 diabetes from four centres provided 450 paired samples collected over 10 months for point-of-care HbA(1c) and central laboratory-based high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) HbA(1c) determinations. Change in HbA(1c) over time was assessed by difference from initial to final HbA(1c) and by growth modelling with annualized slope calculation. Change in HbA(1c) was categorized as improved (decrease of ≥ 0.5% or negative slope), no change (± 0.4% of initial HbA(1c) or slope = 0) or worsened (increase of ≥ 0.5% or positive slope). RESULTS: The 450 paired samples (median of four pairs/patient) were highly correlated (r = 0.97, P < 0.0001), as were time-specific and site-specific pairs (r = 0.94 to 0.98, P < 0.0001). Initial-to-final point-of-care HbA(1c) and HPLC HbA(1c) changes were 0.3 ± 1.1% (range -2.7 to 4.1) and 0.4 ± 1.2% (-3.9 to 4.5), respectively, with 21% of patients (n = 26) discordant for change categories. ΔHbA(1c) by point-of-care HbA(1c) vs. HPLC HbA(1c) differed across the HbA(1c) range and by ≥ 0.5% absolute difference in ΔHbA(1c) in 14 (54%) of the 26 patients discordant for HbA(1c) change categories. Mean annual HbA(1c) slope was 0.4 ± 1.5% (-5.4 to 4.8) for point-of-care HbA(1c) and 0.4 ± 1.6% (-6.9 to 5.2) for HPLC HbA(1c), with 18% (n = 22 pairs) discordant for change categories. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of absolute HbA(1c) change may not be different for point-of-care HbA(1c) compared with HPLC HbA(1c); however, misclassification of patients by discrete cut-off values may occur with point-of-care HbA(1c) compared with HPLC HbA(1c) determinations.

Occurrence of microalbuminuria in young people with Type 1 diabetes: importance of age and diabetes duration.

AIMS: To determine the occurrence of microalbuminuria in young people with Type 1 diabetes mellitus followed prospectively for 2 years and to relate the presence of persistent elevations in urinary albumin excretion (UAE) to age, diabetes duration, puberty and other factors. METHODS: During a 2 year period, random urine samples were obtained from 471 patients, aged 8-18 years (mean +/-sd 12.9 +/- 2.3 years) with Type 1 diabetes duration 5.6 +/- 3.0 years, as part of routine clinical care. Urine albumin and creatinine concentrations were measured in 1310 samples (median, 3 samples per patient) and the albumin:creatinine ratio was calculated (in micrograms albumin per milligram creatinine). Height, weight, blood pressure (BP), glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)), blood glucose monitoring frequency and Tanner staging were collected from patients' medical records. RESULTS: Twenty-three per cent of patients had one or more sample with elevated UAE (> or =20 microg/mg) and 9.3% had persistent elevations (> or =2 samples > or =20 microg/mg). Those with and without persistent microalbuminuria did not differ significantly in age, diabetes duration, z-score for body mass index, pubertal status or BP percentile. Ten per cent of children <13 years old and 9% of children > or =13 years old had persistent microalbuminuria. Persistent microalbuminuria was significantly associated with diabetes duration only in older children (duration 0.5-3 years, 4%; 4-6 years, 8%; > or =7 years, 14%; P = 0.02, trend test). Mean HbA(1c) over the 2 years was 8.7 +/- 1.2%. In a logistic regression model, mean HbA(1c) was the only significant predictor of persistent microalbuminuria (odds ratio 1.3, 95% confidence interval 1.0-1.6, P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Microalbuminuria in older children with Type 1 diabetes is likely to be clinically significant. In younger children, it may reflect functional, reversible renal changes. Longitudinal analysis is needed to confirm the probable transient nature of microalbuminuria in young patients with Type 1 diabetes.

Self-reported history of overweight and its relationship to disordered eating in adolescent girls with Type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: Increased body weight and disordered eating attitudes/behaviours are common in adolescent girls with Type 1 diabetes (T1D). Disordered eating increases risks for diabetes-related complications. This study aimed to identify a rapid screening approach for disordered eating attitudes and behaviours in adolescent girls with T1D and to examine the relationship between disordered eating and body weight in this population. METHODS: Ninety adolescent girls, aged 12-19 years, provided a self-assessment of weight status. Participants also completed questionnaires to assess attitudes/behaviours toward food and eating, appetitive responsiveness to the food environment, disinhibition in eating and weight history. RESULTS: Forty-three per cent of participants reported a history of overweight. Compared with participants who reported never being overweight, those who reported ever being overweight were significantly older, scored significantly higher on all measures of disordered eating attitudes/behaviours (P < or = 0.009) and were 4.8 times more likely to be currently overweight or obese (P < 0.001). Glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) was similar between those who did and did not report ever being overweight. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the ill-health effects of disordered eating and the higher rate of overweight in adolescent girls with T1D, effective screening tools are warranted. The single question 'Have you ever been overweight?' may be sufficient as a first question to screen for those at high risk for disordered eating attitudes/behaviours and to provide early intervention and prevention.