Demographic, Clinical, Management, and Outcome Characteristics of 8,004 Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare demographic, clinical, and therapeutic characteristics of children with type 1 diabetes age <6 years across three international registries: Diabetes Prospective Follow-Up Registry (DPV; Europe), T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Network (T1DX-QI; U.S.), and Australasian Diabetes Data Network (ADDN; Australasia). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: An analysis was conducted comparing 2019-2021 prospective registry data from 8,004 children. RESULTS: Mean ± SD ages at diabetes diagnosis were 3.2 ± 1.4 (DPV and ADDN) and 3.7 ± 1.8 years (T1DX-QI). Mean ± SD diabetes durations were 1.4 ± 1.3 (DPV), 1.4 ± 1.6 (T1DX-QI), and 1.5 ± 1.3 years (ADDN). BMI z scores were in the overweight range in 36.2% (DPV), 41.8% (T1DX-QI), and 50.0% (ADDN) of participants. Mean ± SD HbA1c varied among registries: DPV 7.3 ± 0.9% (56 ± 10 mmol/mol), T1DX-QI 8.0 ± 1.4% (64 ± 16 mmol/mol), and ADDN 7.7 ± 1.2% (61 ± 13 mmol/mol). Overall, 37.5% of children achieved the target HbA1c of <7.0% (53 mmol/mol): 43.6% in DPV, 25.5% in T1DX-QI, and 27.5% in ADDN. Use of diabetes technologies such as insulin pump (DPV 86.6%, T1DX 46.6%, and ADDN 39.2%) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM; DPV 85.1%, T1DX-QI 57.6%, and ADDN 70.5%) varied among registries. Use of hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems was uncommon (from 0.5% [ADDN] to 6.9% [DPV]). CONCLUSIONS: Across three major registries, more than half of children age <6 years did not achieve the target HbA1c of <7.0% (53 mmol/mol). CGM was used by most participants, whereas insulin pump use varied across registries, and HCL system use was rare. The differences seen in glycemia and use of diabetes technologies among registries require further investigation to determine potential contributing factors and areas to target to improve the care of this vulnerable group.

Increasing Continuous Glucose Monitoring Use for Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic People With Type 1 Diabetes: Results From the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative Equity Study.

Despite the benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), there is lower use of this technology among non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic people with type 1 diabetes compared with their non-Hispanic White counterparts. The T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative recruited five endocrinology centers to pilot an equity-focused quality improvement (QI) study to reduce racial inequities in CGM use. The centers used rapid QI cycles to test and expand interventions such as provider bias training, translation of CGM materials, provision of CGM education in multiple languages, screening for social determinants of health, and shared decision-making. After implementation of these interventions, median CGM use increased by 7% in non-Hispanic White, 12% in non-Hispanic Black, and 15% in Hispanic people with type 1 diabetes. The gap between non-Hispanic White and non-Hispanic Black patients decreased by 5%, and the gap between non-Hispanic White and Hispanic patients decreased by 8%.

Understanding Providers' Readiness and Attitudes Toward Autoantibody Screening: A Mixed-Methods Study.

Screening for autoantibodies associated with type 1 diabetes can identify people most at risk for progressing to clinical type 1 diabetes and provide an opportunity for early intervention. Drawbacks and barriers to screening exist, and concerns arise, as methods for disease prevention are limited and no cure exists today. The availability of novel treatment options such as teplizumab to delay progression to clinical type 1 diabetes in high-risk individuals has led to the reassessment of screening programs. This study explored awareness, readiness, and attitudes of endocrinology providers toward type 1 diabetes autoantibody screening.

Increasing Social Determinants of Health Screening Rates Among Six Endocrinology Centers Across the United States: Results From the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative.

Social determinants of health (SDOH) are strongly associated with outcomes for people with type 1 diabetes. Six centers in the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative applied quality improvement principles to design iterative Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles to develop and expand interventions to improve SDOH screening rates. The interventions tested include staff training, a social risk index, an electronic health record patient-facing portal, partnerships with community organizations, and referrals to community resources. All centers were successful in improving SDOH screening rates, with individual site improvements ranging from 41 to 70% and overall screening across the six centers increasing from a baseline of 1% to 70% in 27 months.

Stakeholder Engagement in Type 1 Diabetes Research, Quality Improvement, and Clinical Care.

The integration of stakeholder engagement (SE) in research, quality improvement (QI), and clinical care has gained significant traction. Type 1 diabetes is a chronic disease that requires complex daily management and care from a multidisciplinary team across the lifespan. Inclusion of key stakeholder voices, including patients, caregivers, health care providers and community advocates, in the research process and implementation of clinical care is critical to ensure representation of perspectives that match the values and goals of the patient population. This review describes the current framework for SE and its application to research, QI, and clinical care across the lifespan.

Prevalence of fear of hypoglycemia in adults with type 1 diabetes using a newly developed screener and clinician's perspective on its implementation.

INTRODUCTION: Fear of hypoglycemia (FoH) affects quality of life, emotional well-being, and diabetes management among people with type 1 diabetes (PwT1D). American Diabetes Association's (ADA) guidelines recommend assessing FoH in clinical practice. However, existing FoH measures are commonly used in research and not in clinical practice. In this study, prevalence of FoH was assessed in PwT1D using a newly developed FoH screener for clinical practice; its association with established measures and outcomes was also determined. In addition, healthcare providers' (HCPs) perspectives on implementing FoH screener into real-world practice were explored. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This multiphase observational study used mixed methods in two phases. First, we collected a cross-sectional survey (including the screener) from PwT1D (≥18 years) from T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative adult clinics. Pearson correlations and regression analyses were performed on diabetes outcome measures using screener scores. Second, we conducted focus groups among HCPs who treat PwT1D and descriptive analysis to summarize results. RESULTS: We included 553 PwT1D. Participants had a mean±SD age of 38.9±14.2 years and 30% reported a high FoH total score. Regression analyses showed that higher A1c and higher number of comorbidities were significantly associated with high FoH (p<0.001). High FoH worry and behavior scores were significantly associated with 8-Item Patient Health Questionnaire and 7-Item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale scores. Participants with ≥1 severe hypoglycemia event(s) and impaired awareness of hypoglycemia had higher odds of high FoH. Eleven HCPs participated in focus group interviews; they expressed that the FoH screener is clinically necessary and relevant but poses implementation challenges that must be addressed. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate FoH is common in PwT1D and affects their psychosocial well-being and diabetes management. In alignment with ADA position statement, HCP focus group results emphasize importance of screening for FoH. Implementing this newly developed FoH screener may help HCPs identify FoH in PwT1D.

Connecting From Afar: Implementation of Remote Data-Sharing for Patients With Type 1 Diabetes on Insulin Pump Therapy.

Quality Improvement Success Stories are published by the American Diabetes Association in collaboration with the American College of Physicians and the National Diabetes Education Program. This series is intended to highlight best practices and strategies from programs and clinics that have successfully improved the quality of care for people with diabetes or related conditions. Each article in the series is reviewed and follows a standard format developed by the editors of Clinical Diabetes. The following article describes an effort to improve the remote collection of insulin pump data in an academic center in South Florida.

Patient Demographics and Clinical Outcomes Among Type 1 Diabetes Patients Using Continuous Glucose Monitors: Data From T1D Exchange Real-World Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) on glycemic management have been demonstrated in numerous studies; however, widespread uptake remians limited. The aim of this study was to provide real-world evidence of patient attributes and clinical outcomes associated with CGM use across clinics in the U.S. based T1D Exchange Quality Improvement (T1DX-QI) Collaborative. METHOD: We examined electronic Health Record data from eight endocrinology clinics participating in the T1DX-QI Collaborative during the years 2017-2019. RESULTS: Among 11,469 type 1 diabetes patients, 48% were CGM users. CGM use varied by race/ethnicity with Non-Hispanic Whites having higher rates of CGM use (50%) compared to Non-Hispanic Blacks (18%) or Hispanics (38%). Patients with private insurance were more likely to use CGM (57.2%) than those with public insurance (33.3%) including Medicaid or Medicare. CGM users had lower median HbA1c (7.7%) compared to nonusers (8.4%). Rates of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and severe hypoglycemia were significantly higher in nonusers compared to CGM users. CONCLUSION: In this real-world study of patients in the T1DX-QI Collaborative, CGM users had better glycemic control and lower rates of DKA and severe hypoglycemia (SH) events, compared to nonusers; however, there were significant sociodemographic disparities in CGM use. Quality improvement and advocacy measures to promote widespread and equitable CGM uptake have the potential to improve clinical outcomes.

The association between depression symptom endorsement and glycemic outcomes in adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of depression among adolescents with type 1 diabetes is estimated to be 2-3 times higher than in the general population. In adults with type 1 diabetes and depression, short-term outcomes are worse compared to individuals just diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. This study aims to determine if depressive symptom endorsement is associated with glycemic outcomes and short-term complications in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Analysis was conducted using electronic medical records from the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative. Adolescents with type 1 diabetes, aged 12-18, receiving treatment in a diabetes clinic who had been screened for depression with the PHQ-9 between 2016 and 2018 were eligible for inclusion. Individuals must have also had HbA1c data available from the day of depression screening and from 10 to 24 weeks after screening; the final sample size was 1714. RESULTS: Almost 30% of adolescents endorsed mild or greater (PHQ-9 ≥ 5) depressive symptoms. Endorsement of mild or greater depressive symptoms was associated with an 18% increased risk of an HbA1c ≥7.5% and a 42% increased risk of an HbA1c ≥9.0% on the day of screener administration. Depressive symptom endorsement was also associated with an 82% increased risk for DKA. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that depression symptoms are associated with an increased risk for elevated HbA1c and short-term complications. With the rising incidence of type 1 diabetes in youth, routine screening, and appropriate management of depression is needed.

Factors Associated With Improved A1C Among Adults With Type 1 Diabetes in the United States.

Many adults with diabetes do not reach optimal glycemic targets, and, despite advances in diabetes management, diabetes technology use remains significantly lower in racial/ethnic minority groups. This study aimed to identify factors associated with achieving the recommended A1C target of <7% using data on 12,035 adults with type 1 diabetes from 15 centers participating in the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative. Individuals attaining the target A1C were more likely to be older, White, have private health insurance, and use diabetes technology and less likely to report depressive symptoms or episodes of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis than those with higher A1C levels. These findings highlight the importance of overcoming inequities in diabetes care.

Baseline Quality Improvement Capacity of 33 Endocrinology Centers Participating in the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative.

This article describes the evolution of the Type 1 Diabetes Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative (T1DX-QI) and provides insight into the development and growth of a successful type 1 diabetes quality improvement (QI) program. Since its inception 8 years ago, the collaborative has expanded to include centers across the United States with varying levels of QI experience, while simultaneously achieving many tangible improvements in type 1 diabetes care. These successes underscore the importance of learning health systems, data-sharing, benchmarking, and peer collaboration as drivers for continuous QI. Future efforts will include recruiting additional small- to medium-sized centers focused on adult care and underserved communities to further the goal of improving care and outcomes for all people living with type 1 diabetes.

Facilitators and Barriers to Smart Insulin Pen Use: A Mixed-Method Study of Multidisciplinary Stakeholders From Diabetes Teams in the United States.

This study sought to identify barriers and facilitators to successful smart insulin pen (SIP) use and gauge prescribing practices and integration into clinical practice by assessing provider and care team perspectives at participating endocrinology clinics within the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative. The identified provider-related, patient-related, and clinic- and operational-level barriers and facilitators varied based on clinic knowledge, capacity, and resources. High-impact barriers included insurance coverage and prescribing processes; high-impact facilitators included improved diabetes clinic visit quality and use of SIPs as an alternative to insulin pump therapy. Findings indicated the need for provider and care team education and training on proper SIP features, use, and prescribing.

Feasibility of Electronic Health Record Assessment of 6 Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes Self-management Habits and Their Association With Glycemic Outcomes.

Importance: A low-burden electronic health record (EHR) workflow has been devised to systematize the collection and validation of 6 key diabetes self-management habits: (1) checks glucose at least 4 times/day or uses continuous glucose monitor (CGM); (2) gives at least 3 rapid-acting insulin boluses per day; (3) uses insulin pump; (4) delivers boluses before meals; (5) reviewed glucose data since last clinic visit, and (6) has changed insulin doses since the last clinic visit. Objective: To describe the performance of these habits and examine their association with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and time in range (TIR). Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included individuals with known type 1 diabetes who were seen in a US pediatric diabetes clinic in 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Habit performance, total habit score (sum of 6 habits per person), HbA1c levels, and TIR. Results: Of 1344 patients, 1212 (609 [50.2%] males; 66 [5.4%] non-Hispanic Black; 1030 [85.0%] non-Hispanic White; mean [SD] age, 15.5 [4.5] years) were included, of whom 654 (54.0%) were using CGM and had a TIR. Only 105 patients (8.7%) performed all 6 habits. Habit performance was lower among older vs younger patients (age ≥18 years vs ≤12 years: 17 of 411 [4.1%] vs 57 of 330 [17.3%]; P < .001), Black vs White patients (3 [4.5%] vs 95 [9.2%]; P < .001), those with public vs private insurance (14 of 271 [5.2%] vs 91 of 941 [9.7%]; P < .001), and those with lower vs higher parental education levels (