Managing Impending Nonsevere Hypoglycemia With Oral Carbohydrates in Type 1 Diabetes: The REVERSIBLE Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Current guidelines recommend initiating treatment for nonsevere (NS) hypoglycemia with 15 g carbohydrates (CHO) at 15-min intervals when blood glucose (BG) reaches <70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L). Despite this recommendation, NS hypoglycemia management remains challenging for individuals living with type 1 diabetes (T1D). We aimed to assess the efficacy of 15 g CHO at higher BG levels. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 29 individuals with T1D participated in an open-label crossover study. After an inpatient subcutaneous insulin-induced decrease in BG in the fasting state, 16 g CHO was administered orally at a plasma glucose (PG) of <70 (3.9), ≤80 (4.5), or ≤90 mg/dL (5.0 mmol/L). The primary outcome was time spent in hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) after initial CHO intake. RESULTS: When comparing the <70 (control) with the ≤80 and ≤90 mg/dL treatment groups, 100 vs. 86 (P = 0.1201) vs. 34% (P < 0.0001) of participants reached hypoglycemia, respectively. These hypoglycemic events lasted 26.0 ± 12.6 vs. 17.9 ± 14.7 (P = 0.026) vs. 7.1 ± 11.8 min (P = 0.002), with a PG nadir of 56.57 ± 9.91 vs. 63.60 ± 7.93 (P = 0.008) vs. 73.51 ± 9.37 mg/dL (P = 0.002), respectively. In the control group, 69% of participants required more than one treatment to reach or maintain normoglycemia (≥70 mg/dL), compared with 52% in the ≤80 mg/dL group and 31% in the ≤90 mg/dL group, with no significant rebound hyperglycemia (>180 mg/dL) within the first hour. CONCLUSIONS: For some impending NS hypoglycemia episodes, individuals with TID could benefit from CHO intake at a higher BG level.

Non-severe hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes: a randomized crossover trial comparing two quantities of oral carbohydrates at different insulin-induced hypoglycemia ranges.

Aims: Non-severe hypoglycemia (NS-H) is challenging for people living with type 1 diabetes (PWT1D) and often results from relative iatrogenic hyper-insulinemia. Current guidelines recommend a one-size-fits-all approach of 15-20 g of simple carbohydrates (CHO) every 15 min regardless of the triggering conditions of the NS-H event. We aimed to test different amounts of CHO to treat insulin-induced NS-H at various glucose ranges. Methods: This is a randomized, four-way, crossover study involving PWT1D, testing NS-H treatment outcomes with 16 g vs. 32 g CHO at two plasma glucose (PG) ranges: A: 3.0-3.5 mmol/L and B: <3.0 mmol/L. Across all study arms, participants consumed an additional 16 g of CHO if PG was still <3.0 mmol/L at 15 min and <4.0 mmol/L at 45 min post-initial treatment. Subcutaneous insulin was used in a fasting state to induce NS-H. Participants had frequent venous sampling of PG, insulin, and glucagon levels. Results: Participants (n = 32; 56% female participants) had a mean (SD) age of 46.1 (17.1) years, had HbA1c at 54.0 (6.8 mmol/mol) [7.1% (0.9%)], and had a diabetes duration of 27.5 (17.0) years; 56% were insulin pump users. We compared NS-H correction parameters between 16 g and 32 g of CHO for range A, 3.0-3.5 mmol/L (n = 32), and range B, <3.0 mmol/L (n = 29). Change in PG at 15 min for A: 0.1 (0.8) mmol/L vs. 0.6 (0.9) mmol/L, p = 0.02; and for B: 0.8 (0.9) mmol/L vs. 0.8 (1.0) mmol/L, p = 1.0. Percentage of participants with corrected episodes at 15 min: (A) 19% vs. 47%, p = 0.09; (B) 21% vs. 24%, p = 1.0. A second treatment was necessary in (A) 50% vs. 15% of participants, p = 0.001; (B) 45% vs. 34% of participants, p = 0.37. No statistically significant differences in insulin and glucagon parameters were observed. Conclusions: NS-H, in the context of hyper-insulinemia, is difficult to treat in PWT1D. Initial consumption of 32 g of CHO revealed some advantages at the 3.0-3.5 mmol/L range. This was not reproduced at lower PG ranges since participants needed additional CHO regardless of the amount of initial consumption. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03489967.

Families navigating community resources: understanding and supporting Nunavimmiut families.

In a project aiming to develop community-led resources for families in northern Quebec, Canada, members (Inuit and non-Inuit) of the project decided to meet with Inuit parents to hear their experiences and needs, and to better understand how family dynamics might be related to ways of using resources within communities. In this article, we present secondary analyses of interviews conducted in 2015 with 14 parents living in a community of Nunavik, northern Quebec, accompanied by participatory analysis sessions. A dual data analysis strategy was adopted. Non-Inuit researchers and research assistants with significant lived experience in Nunavik explored what they learned from the stories that Inuit parents shared with them through the interviews and through informal exchanges. Inuit partners then discussed the large themes identified by the research team to guide non-Inuit researchers in their analysis. The aim was to better inform non-Inuit service providers and people whose mandate it is to support community mobilisation in relation to the heterogeneous realities of Inuit families, and the ways in which they can be of support to families based on their specific realities and needs.

Communities being well for family well-being: Exploring the socio-ecological determinants of well-being in an Inuit community of Northern Quebec.

Inuit communities of Canada experience many disparities in health and psychosocial context. Research in community psychology has shown associations between such socio-ecological factors and individual well-being. The objective of the study was to explore how community-level determinants of well-being influence family well-being in a northern community of Nunavik, Quebec. A total of 14 participants were interviewed. A thematic inductive analysis was conducted to extract community determinants of family well-being from the data. A system science approach was used to explore the associations between determinants and larger psychosocial dynamics. A community workshop was held to discuss the results and their meaning. A total of 25 determinants were coded, 16 of which were community-level. Community-level stressors were highly interrelated, whereas community supports were generally disconnected and superimposed on narratives of stressors. Participants spoke of desired supports. In their narratives, these supports were connected to a variety of determinants of well-being, suggesting the need to connect, redefine and support existing resources rather than simply add on new ones. We discuss intricate links between family and community well-being in small and geographically isolated communities.