Search

Background: Continuous glucose monitors (CGM) are underutilized by individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D), particularly during the adolescent years. Little is known about perceptions of CGM benefit and burdens, and few tools exist to quantify this information., Methods: Two questionnaires were developed and validated-Benefit of CGM (BenCGM) and Burdens of CGM (BurCGM)-in a sample of adolescents ages 12-19 years involved in the T1D Exchange Registry. We chose to start the validation process with adolescents given their low CGM uptake and high risk for suboptimal glycemic outcomes. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to confirm factor structure and select items. The resultant scales were tested for internal reliability and convergent/divergent validity with critical diabetes and quality of life outcomes: age, depression, diabetes distress, self-efficacy, technology attitudes, and diabetes technology attitudes., Results: A total of 431 adolescents with T1D completed the questionnaires (51% female, mean age 16.3 ± 2.26, 83% white non-Hispanic, 70% having used CGM). Two single factor scales emerged, and scales were reduced to 8 items each. Those who perceived higher benefit of CGM exhibited lower diabetes distress, higher self-efficacy, and more positive attitudes toward technology. Those who perceived higher burden of CGM exhibited higher diabetes distress, lower self-efficacy, and less positive technology attitudes., Conclusion: The BenCGM and BurCGM questionnaires each comprise 8-items that demonstrate robust psychometric properties for use in adolescents with T1D, and can be used to develop targeted interventions to increase CGM wear to improve diabetes management.

Background: To assess the occurrence of white coat adherence, defined as an increase in adherence to treatment regimens prior to a study appointment, in adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using insulin pumps and participating in a randomized adherence intervention trial., Methods: Blood glucose monitoring (BGM) readings, carbohydrate inputs, and insulin boluses delivered were downloaded from the insulin pumps of adolescents, aged 10-18 years, at 3 consecutive T1D study visits. Linear mixed models were used to analyze patterns of BGM, carbohydrate inputs, and insulin boluses delivered in patients who had 40 consecutive days of data stored in their insulin pumps prior to the study visit., Results: Stratified linear mixed models revealed that adolescents randomized to the Tailored Feedback Intervention group increased their blood glucose monitoring ( P < .01), carbohydrate inputs ( P < .0001), and insulin bolusing ( P < .0001) prior to study appointments. In contrast, white coat adherence did not occur in adolescents randomized to the Treatment as Usual group ( Ps > .42)., Conclusions: White coat adherence may occur in adolescents participating in clinical trials. Meter and insulin pump data downloads representing the 1- to 2-week period prior to a study visit are likely to overestimate actual adherence during the time frame between study visits.

Background: Parents of young children are responsible for daily type 1 diabetes (T1DM) cares including insulin bolusing. For optimal insulin pump management, parents should enter a blood glucose result (SMBG) and a carbohydrate estimate (if food will be consumed) into the bolus advisor in their child's pump to assist in delivering the recommended insulin bolus. Previously, pump adherence behaviors were described in adolescents; we describe these behaviors in a sample of young children., Methods: Pump data covering between 14-30 consecutive days were obtained for 116 children. Assessed adherence to essential pump adherence behaviors (eg, SMBG, carbohydrate entry, and insulin use) and adherence to 3 Wizard/Bolus Advisor steps: SMBG-carbohydrate entry-insulin bolus delivered., Results: Parents completed SMBG ≥4 times on 99% of days, bolused insulin ≥3 times on 95% of days, and entered carbohydrates ≥3 times on 93% of days, but they corrected for hyperglycemia (≥250 mg/dl or 13.9 mmol/l) only 63% of the time. Parents completed Wizard/Bolus Advisor steps (SMBG, carbohydrate entry, insulin bolus) within 30 minutes for 43% of boluses. Inverse correlations were found between children's mean daily glucose and the percentage of days with ≥4 SMBG and ≥3 carbohydrate entries as well as the percentage of boluses where all Wizard/Bolus Advisor steps were completed., Conclusions: Parents of young children adhered to individual pump behaviors, but showed some variability in their adherence to Wizard/Bolus Advisor steps. Parents showed low adherence to recommendations to correct for hyperglycemia. Like adolescents, targeting pump behaviors in young children may have the potential to optimize glycemic control.

Background: The purpose was to assess the occurrence of white coat adherence, defined as an increase in adherence to treatment regimens prior to a clinic appointment, in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) who use insulin pumps., Methods: Blood glucose monitoring (BGM) data, carbohydrate inputs, and insulin boluses delivered were downloaded from the insulin pumps of children and adolescents, aged 7-19 years with T1D, at 2 consecutive routine diabetes clinic visits. Linear mixed models were used to analyze patterns of BGM, carbohydrate inputs, and insulin boluses delivered in patients who had ≥28 days of data stored in their insulin pumps., Results: In general, younger children engaged in more frequent BGM, carbohydrate inputs, and insulin boluses delivered than older children and adolescents. White coat adherence occurred with frequency of BGM, carbohydrate inputs, and insulin boluses delivered, but only in younger children., Conclusions: Diabetes care providers need to be aware that white coat adherence may occur, particularly in young children. Providers routinely download meter and insulin pump data for the 1- to 2-week period before the clinic visit. For patients exhibiting white coat adherence, their data will overestimate the patient's actual adherence., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© 2016 Diabetes Technology Society.)

Background: The objective was to determine if there were differences in blood glucose monitoring (BGM) data downloaded from insulin pumps of patients who use meters that wirelessly transmit data to their insulin pumps (i.e., wireless group) and those who do not (i.e., nonwireless group)., Methods: Blood glucose monitoring data were downloaded from the meters and insulin pumps of 47 children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Independent and paired t tests compared BGM data downloaded from meters and BGM data downloaded from insulin pumps., Results: There were significant differences in BGM data downloaded from the insulin pumps of patients using wireless meters compared to those using nonwireless meters. Wireless patients appeared to engage in more BGM, had more low and in-range BG readings and fewer very high BG readingss than nonwireless patients. However, a comparison of BGM data downloaded from meters and insulin pumps of nonwireless patients indicated that their insulin pump data significantly underestimated the number of BGM readings conducted, as well as the number of low and in-range readings, while overestimating the number of very high BGM readings., Conclusions: Because patients who use nonwireless-compatible meters do not manually enter their low and in-range BGM readings into the insulin pump, BGM data downloaded only from pumps may provide an incomplete representation of BGM frequency or results. It is recommended that patients use meters that directly communicate with pumps or perform bolus calculations. Patients should be educated about the importance of manually entering all BGM readings if they do not use a wireless-compatible meter with their insulin pump., (© 2013 Diabetes Technology Society.)

Background: Insulin bolusing calculators alleviate the burden of having to calculate insulin bolus doses for patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Three important pieces of information are needed: a blood glucose monitoring (BGM) result, carbohydrates to be consumed, and the amount of insulin bolus delivered. The purpose of this study was to describe insulin pump adherence behaviors associated with the use of bolus calculators in youth who use Medtronic insulin pumps., Methods: Data were downloaded from the MiniMed Paradigm insulin pumps (Medtronic) of 31 youth with T1DM. Areas of adherence that were evaluated included fundamental insulin pump adherence behaviors (e.g., BGM, carbohydrate entry, and insulin bolusing), decisions about Wizard® recommendations, and three Wizard steps: BGM result-carbohydrate input-insulin bolus., Results: On average, patients conducted BGM ≥4 times/day on 69% of days, inputted carbohydrates ≥3 times/day on 63% of days, and insulin bolused ≥3 times/day on 85% of days. Participants generally followed Wizard recommendations. Finally, participants completed all three Wizard steps (BGM, carbohydrate input, insulin bolus) within 30 min for an average of 29% of boluses. Almost 3% of boluses that were preceded by Wizard use were delivered without conducting BGM or inputting carbohydrates., Conclusion: There was substantial variability in insulin pump adherence behaviors (e.g., days when no BGM occurred, reliance on basal insulin). Interventions targeting insulin pump adherence behaviors have the potential to optimize diabetes health outcomes and glycemic control. Improving insulin pump software reports is one promising avenue for improving adherence., (© 2013 Diabetes Technology Society.)