Search

Aims: Evidence is lacking on whether diabetes duration is associated with type 1 diabetes (T1D) self‐management during late adolescence before transfer from paediatric to adult care. We examined associations of diabetes duration with dimensions of perceived comfort with diabetes self‐management (self‐efficacy, transition readiness, diabetes distress) and glycaemic control in late adolescence. Methods: Using a cross‐sectional design, we conducted a secondary analysis of baseline data of adolescents (ages 16–17 years) with T1D followed at paediatric diabetes academic hospitals in Montreal and enrolled in the Group Education Trial to Improve Transition (GET‐IT‐T1D). Participants completed validated questionnaires on self‐efficacy (Self‐Efficacy for Diabetes Self‐Management Measure [SEDM], score 1 to 10), diabetes distress and transition readiness, as well as a haemoglobin (HbA1c) capillary blood test. Our primary outcome was self‐efficacy. We examined associations of diabetes duration with self‐efficacy, diabetes distress, transition readiness and HbA1c using linear and logistic regression models adjusted for sex, socioeconomic status, insulin pump use, glucose sensor use and psychiatric comorbidity. Results: Of 203 adolescents with T1D, mean diabetes duration (SD) was 7.57 (4.44) years. Mean SEDM score was 6.83 (SD 1.62). Diabetes duration was not associated with self‐efficacy, diabetes distress or transition readiness. Each additional year of diabetes duration was associated with 0.11% (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.16) higher HbA1c. Conclusions: Although diabetes duration is not associated with dimensions of perceived comfort with diabetes self‐management, adolescents with longer diabetes duration are at risk for higher HbA1c and may need additional support to improve glycaemic control before transition to adult care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The genetics care pathway experienced by families affected by autism spectrum disorder (ASD) around the time of diagnosis is currently uncharacterized and potentially variable across contexts. The lack of consensus on outcome measures to capture the impact of genetic services for these families shows a gap in understanding and optimizing this genetics care pathway. The Genetic Counseling Outcome Scale (GCOS‐24) is a validated outcome measure of clinical genetics services. The current study aims to adapt and validate the GCOS‐24 as an outcome measure in the context routine genetic testing in ASD and related conditions. Families seen for their child's developmental evaluation for ASD and related conditions were invited to participate in a genomics cohort between 2016 and 2018. Families (n = 111) completed the mGCOS‐24 (modified GCOS‐24), adapted from the original GCOS‐24 by clinicians working in the target population's routine care pathway. The mGCOS‐24 has acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.84) and high test–retest reliability (ICC = 0.88). It also inversely correlates with stress as measured by Perceived Stress Scale (PSS‐10) and distress, as measured by the Distress Thermometer, rs ≥ 0.39, ps < 0.001. The mGCOS‐24 had adequate readability, as supported by cognitive interviews completed by a sub‐sample of five mothers of a child with ASD. Together, our findings show that the mGCOS‐24 has good validity for the target population. Preliminary characterization of the genetics care pathway in this population revealed remarkable variability in pre‐test counseling and limited post‐test counseling. The use of the mGCOS‐24 as an outcome measure is useful in filling some of these gaps by offering a way to assess, and in the future, optimize the genetics care pathway for families affected by autism and related neurodevelopmental conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]