Search

Objective A central part of family adjustment to a new diagnosis of type 1 diabetes (T1D) is integrating T1D management into the child’s school/daycare. This may be particularly challenging for young children who rely on adults for their diabetes management. This study aimed to describe parent experiences with school/daycare during the first 1.5 years following a young child’s T1D diagnosis. Methods As part of a randomized controlled trial of a behavioral intervention, 157 parents of young children with new-onset ( Results While most children were enrolled in school/daycare at all time points, over 50% of parents endorsed that T1D affected their child’s enrollment, rejection, or removal from school/daycare at 9 or 15 months. We generated five themes related to parents’ school/daycare experiences: Child factors, Parent factors, School/Daycare factors, Cooperation between Parents and Staff, and Socio-historical factors. Parents of younger children and those with lower subjective socioeconomic status were significantly more likely to endorse challenges with school/daycare enrollment. Conclusions School/daycare settings present challenges for parents of young children with T1D. Changes may need to occur across contexts to support early childhood education, including advocacy resources for parents to navigate school policies, increased training for school staff, and healthcare team outreach initiatives to parents and schools.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Objective To examine psychosocial, sociodemographic, medical, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) experiences as correlates of COVID-19 vaccination intentions among parents of children with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods 121 parents of children with T1D (Mchild age = 7.78 ± 1.70; MA1c = 8.3% ± 1.5%) in the mid-Atlantic and Southwest regions completed self-report measures in February to March 2021. Results Parents’ general vaccination behaviors and attitudes were associated with COVID-19 vaccination intentions. Child insurance type and social distancing adherence were associated with vaccination intention in the Southwest site. Higher A1c was associated with lower intention. Vaccine safety was the top reported concern. Conclusions COVID-19 vaccination intentions are important to address in parents of youth with health conditions.

OBJECTIVE: Examine the utility of suicide-risk items embedded within depression screeners for identifying the presence of suicide risk in adolescents and young adults (AYA) with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value of self-report of suicide risk on the Patient Health Questionniaire-9 (PHQ-9) were compared with the pediatric psychologist–administered Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) as the reference standard for AYA with type 1 diabetes seen in a multidisciplinary AYA Diabetes Program clinic. RESULTS: Of 133 participants, 9.8% and 11.3% reported suicide risk on the PHQ-9 and C-SSRS, respectively. Sensitivity of the PHQ-9 risk item was 53.3% (95% CI 27.4%–77.7%), specificity was 95.7% (95% CI 89.9%–98.4%), positive predictive value was 61.5% (95% CI 32.3%–84.9%), and negative predictive value was 94.2% (95% CI 87.9–97.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Depression screeners appear to under-identify AYA with type 1 diabetes who may otherwise be at risk for suicide.

Despite potential glycemic benefits of continuous glucose monitor (CGM) use in young children with type 1 diabetes, psychosocial and behavioral challenges may interfere with sustained use. We developed a 5-session family behavioral intervention (FBI) to support CGM use.We report on the multi-step development of the FBI, training interventionists, implementation in a 14-site clinical trial, and participant satisfaction.A multidisciplinary team created the FBI based on mixed-methods (i.e., survey data, qualitative research) preliminary work with parents of young children. Investigators trained non-physician staff to deliver the 5 sessions per an intervention manual. Trial participants received the FBI either during the first (FBI group, n = 50) or second 6-months (Crossover group, n = 44) of the 1-year trial. Investigators listened to session recordings to rate intervention fidelity, and participants rated satisfaction with the FBI.The complete 5-session FBI was delivered to 89% of participants, in-person (73%) or by telephone (23%). Sessions lasted 23 min on average, and fidelity was high across sessions. Over 80% of participants rated very high satisfaction with all aspects of the FBI and offered few recommendations for improvement.Having been developed based on experiences and input of families of young children with type 1 diabetes, the FBI represented a novel behavioral approach to enhance sustained CGM use during a challenging developmental period. Evidence of strong feasibility and acceptability supports its potential for implementation in research and clinical care. As diabetes technologies evolve, the FBI may continue to be refined to address parents' most relevant concerns.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Living with and managing diabetes is challenging during young adulthood, and social support may help relieve or minimize the burdens young adults with diabetes experience. This article reviews the types and sources of support young adults with diabetes receive and their associations with behavioral, psychosocial, and glycemic outcomes. Intervention research integrating social support and future directions for care are discussed.

Having a child with type 1 diabetes (T1D) impacts the entire family system. Parental distress and burden have been well studied, but other family members, including siblings, have received little attention. Based on research about family life and sibling experiences in other chronic condition populations (e.g., autism, cancer), we expected parents of youth with T1D would report that siblings participated in T1D management and that T1D had a psychological impact on siblings. As part of a larger qualitative study, parents of youth with T1D age 5-17 (M = 10.8 ± 3.6 years) participated in semistructured interviews about T1D-specific health-related quality of life. For this study, we conducted secondary analyses on transcripts from 20 parents (95% mothers) from households with at least 1 sibling of the child with T1D. Three themes emerged: (a) siblings share the workload and help with T1D management, (b) T1D takes an emotional toll on siblings, and (c) parents feel guilty about prioritizing T1D over siblings' needs and desires. Parents recognized siblings have impactful roles in T1D management and family functioning. Future research into these themes can guide clinical and research efforts to develop sibling-inclusive resources and interventions for families with T1D. Enhancing family-focused interventions to recognize and support the needs of siblings may ultimately improve family T1D-related quality of life. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Background: Given parents' elevated stress following children's diagnoses of type I diabetes (T1D), more information about protective factors is needed. The current study examined social support from various sources (e.g., partner, family, general) in relation to stress among mothers and fathers of young children shortly following T1D diagnosis. Methods: Participants included 157 children ages 1-6 recently diagnosed with T1D and their parents (152 mothers and 59 fathers) who were enrolled in a behavioral randomized controlled trial (RCT). Mothers and fathers self-reported on their demographic background, social support and stress; T1D data were parent report and/or gathered from medical records. Results: Maternal and paternal stress were examined in two separate regression models. Higher general social support predicted less stress for both mothers and fathers. For mothers, higher family support predicted less stress, while college educations status predicted more stress. For fathers, more partner support predicted less stress. Discussion: Findings contribute to the literature on gender differences in source-specific social support and psychosocial functioning in a pediatric health population. Sample characteristics limit generalizability of results, and future studies should aim to include diverse samples. Results have both scientific and clinical implications for supporting families following T1D diagnosis. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Objective Although mood and anxiety symptoms are common in youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D), little research has described their worries across developmental stages or the strategies they use to cope with these worries. This secondary data analysis aimed to describe and characterize common T1D-related worries and coping strategies from middle childhood through young adulthood. Methods Twenty-three youth (9 children, 7 adolescents, and 7 young adults) completed semistructured qualitative interviews about health-related quality of life. We coded interview transcripts using thematic analysis to generate common themes of diabetes-related worries and coping strategies. Results Participants’ worries fell into four major themes: Managing Blood Glucose, Self-Efficacy for Diabetes Management, Interpersonal Relationships, and Lifestyle Impact, and eight youth denied having diabetes-related worries. Coping strategies fell into the three major themes: Attempts to Change Source of Worry, Attempts to Change Reactions to Worry, and Attempts to Orient Away from the Worry. Conclusions Youths’ worries about various aspects of living with and feeling able to self-manage diabetes are important to consider across pediatric development as they can impact youths’ participation in daily activities and future plans. By adolescence, youth report longer-term worries about the health and lifestyle implications of diabetes. Youths’ reported coping strategies are generally consistent with existing coping frameworks, though our data suggest some possible refinements. Social support emerged as an important coping strategy for all age groups. Thus, interventions supporting youth in building and strengthening their social networks may be particularly beneficial in helping youth cope with their diabetes-related worries across development.

Background: For teens with T1D, stress related to neighborhood disadvantage may exacerbate diabetes distress and contribute to disparities in care and outcomes. Objective: We explored associations among neighborhood disadvantage and clinical/psychosocial outcomes to identify patterns to inform future stress-resilience interventions. Methods: At baseline of a 2-site psychosocial intervention trial, 173 teens aged 13-18 years with T1D ≥1 year and elevated diabetes distress (57% Female, 2% American Indian/Alaska Native, 4% Asian, 15% Black, 11% Hispanic White, 6% Hispanic Non-White, 63% Non-Hispanic White, mean A1c= 8.7±2.1, 66% pump use) completed a demographics form and measures of resilience, diabetes distress, diabetes quality of life and family conflict.. We retrieved area deprivation index (ADI) scores for home addresses; this measure of neighborhood disadvantage considers factors related to income, education, employment, and housing quality at the census block group level and provides a state-relative decile score (higher scores indicate more disadvantage) . Fisher’s exact tests and regression analyses were used to examine associations of ADI with A1c and survey data. Results: Participant ADI spanned all deciles, M = 3.7± 2.4. Hispanic White/Non-White and Black teens and those not using pump had higher mean ADI. Higher ADI was associated with higher A1c (β=.18 [.06, 0.29], p=.003) and higher family conflict (β=.63 [.12, 1.1], p=.015) . ADI was not significantly related to resilience, diabetes distress, or quality of life. Conclusions: In a diverse sample of distressed teens with T1D, neighborhood disadvantage was associated with Hispanic ethnicity and Black race, lower pump use, poorer glycemic control and greater family conflict. Considering neighborhood disadvantage may help providers deliver personalized care to target systemic sources of stress, ultimately improving clinical and psychosocial outcomes. Disclosure M.B.O'donnell: None. M.E.Hilliard: None. J.Yi-frazier: None. B.Duran: None. C.Zhou: None. F.Malik: n/a. C.Pihoker: None. S.R.Scott: None. B.M.Ellisor: None. S.Garcia perez: None. D.Desalvo: Consultant; Dexcom, Inc., Insulet Corporation, Research Support; Insulet Corporation. Funding US National Institutes of Health R01DK121224

Introduction: Teens with T1D are at risk for depression and diabetes distress. While diabetes distress is typically more predictive of A1C, less is known about teens experiencing both concerns. In teens with T1D with elevated diabetes distress, we explored clinical and psychological differences between those with or without depression. Methods: At baseline of a psychosocial intervention trial, teens (N=173) with PAID-T scores ≥30 (elevated diabetes distress) reported demographics and Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) of depression, general/T1D resilience, diabetes quality of life (QoL) , and family conflict. A1C and pump use were extracted from medical records. Using Fisher’s exact, X-square, and Wilcoxon rank sum tests, we compared demographics, pump use, A1C, and PROs by depression status (clinical cutoff of PHQ-8 ≥10) . Results: Distressed teens with depression (34%) were more likely to be female and have unemployed caregivers. Compared to participants without depression, distressed teens with depression reported lower resilience and QoL and higher distress and family conflict. There were no differences in mean HbA1c or insulin pump use. Conclusions: Screening for depression is an important clinical initiative-teens with general and T1D-specific mood concerns are at risk for multiple psychosocial challenges that may warrant intervention and may be impacted by social determinants of health. Disclosure S.R.Scott: None. J.Yi-frazier: None. M.B.O'donnell: None. C.Zhou: None. F.Malik: n/a. C.Pihoker: None. D.Desalvo: Consultant; Dexcom, Inc., Insulet Corporation, Research Support; Insulet Corporation. M.Bradford: None. A.Rosenberg: None. M.E.Hilliard: None. Funding NIH 1R01DK121224-01

Objective: Vaccination can help prevent COVID-infection and serious health complications. This is particularly important for people with diabetes, who may be at higher risk for COVID-complications. While unvaccinated adults tend to be younger in general, there are no data on vaccine attitudes or uptake in young adults with T1D. We explored vaccine uptake in young adults with T1D across demographic and clinical factors and identified common reasons for not getting the vaccine. Methods: At baseline of an ongoing behavioral intervention trial (Feb-Dec 2021) , 35 young adults with T1D (M age= 20.2±1.6, 57% female, 54% non-Hispanic White, 23% Hispanic, 9% Black, 14% other/multiple, M A1c=8.9±2.4%) reported on vaccination status. Unvaccinated participants provided open-text comments on their reasons. Results: Overall, 69% of participants were vaccinated (2 doses) . Unvaccinated participants had higher median A1c than vaccinated participants (9.7% vs. 7.6%, p=0.03) ; every 1.0% increase in A1c was associated with 22.2% decreased odds of being vaccinated. There were no differences in vaccine uptake by age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, employment, pump or CGM use, or health insurance. The unvaccinated participants reported reasons including: distrust of the vaccine research/effectiveness (4) , uncertainty about health impacts (including T1D) /waiting to see impact on others’ health (2) , no time to get vaccinated (1) , indifference (1) , no desire for vaccination (2) , and still thinking about it (1) . Conclusion: In a small, diverse sample of young adults with T1D, COVID-vaccinations mirrored national rates. Some participants may have been vaccinated after completing surveys at baseline. Patterns of high A1c and unvaccinated status may place young adults at increased risk as the pandemic continues. Healthcare providers are well positioned to counsel young adults about vaccine information and considerations related to T1D, which may reduce misinformation and increase uptake. Disclosure K.R.Desai: None. S.Devaraj: None. C.G.Minard: None. M.E.Hilliard: None. S.A.Carreon: None. B.Duran: None. W.Levy: None. S.Lyons: None. R.Streisand: None. T.S.Tang: None. S.Mckay: None. B.Anderson: None.

Introduction: T1D management, age-related stressors and the COVID-pandemic may impair sleep for young adults with T1D. Disparities in A1c and exposure to life stressors may contribute to poorer sleep among people from minoritized racial/ethnic groups. We aimed to describe sleep, correlations with A1c, and sleep patterns across racial/ethnic groups in young adults with T1D during the pandemic. Methods: Young adults with T1D (n=37, M age=20.2±1.6 yrs, 57% female, M A1c=8.9±2.4%) completed an adapted Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and 1 sleep-related question from a COVID-questionnaire at baseline of a behavioral trial. Results Overall, 41% endorsed worse sleep during the pandemic, which was correlated with poorer sleep quality (r=-.69, p Conclusions: Young adults with T1D experienced disrupted sleep, worsened by the pandemic. Clinicians should counsel patients about optimizing sleep and overnight diabetes management, especially those with higher A1c. While small sizes reduced power to detect group differences, initial patterns suggest a need for future research examining disparities in sleep for young adults with T1D. Disclosure S.A.Carreon: None. B.Anderson: None. S.Devaraj: None. A.Butler: None. M.E.Hilliard: None. C.G.Minard: None. K.R.Desai: None. W.Levy: None. S.Lyons: None. B.Duran: None. R.Streisand: None. T.S.Tang: None. S.Mckay: None. Funding NIDDK RDK119246 (PI Hilliard) ; NIH/NIDDK Research Supplement to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research (3R01DK119246-03S1, PI: Hilliard, Mentee: Carreon)

Fear of hypoglycemia (FOH) and low hypoglycemia confidence (HC) can lead to hypoglycemia avoidance behaviors which may influence glycemia in people with T1D. Despite links with A1c, there are limited data on the correlation of FOH or HC with time in range (TIR) , which represents a more complete picture of glycemia. We explored FOH and HC in relation to CGM-derived glycemic metrics. Methods: Participants (n=20, M age 16.3 ± 2.5y, 45% female, M A1c 7.3 ± 1.3%, 100% CGM use; 70% pump use) completed questionnaires assessing FOH and HC, and CGM data were collected over the next 12 weeks. Data were analyzed using Pearson correlations. Results: Table 1 presents correlations between FOH, HC and glycemic metrics. FOH in young adults, specifically Worry, was associated with less time below range ( Conclusion: Young adults’ worries related to FOH correlate with less level 1 hypoglycemia ( Disclosure S.Menon: None. D.Desalvo: Consultant; Dexcom, Inc., Insulet Corporation, Research Support; Insulet Corporation. M.Erraguntla: None. K.Pamidimukkala: None. S.Mckay: None. C.Villegas: None. M.E.Hilliard: None. Funding Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is an important yet understudied construct for individuals with hypospadias (HS). An important barrier towards understanding HRQoL and integrating it into research and clinical care for people with HS is the absence of an underlying conceptual framework to illustrate this construct. We propose a conceptual framework for HS-specific HRQoL based upon a scoping review of the HS literature. We conducted a literature review of articles published between 1989 and 2019. Our search in Embase and Pubmed used the keyword “hypospadias” in combination with “quality of life” and “patient-reported outcomes.” We used thematic analysis of the resulting publications to identify core HRQOL domains. From these results and review of HRQoL literature in other pediatric populations, we developed a conceptual framework representing HS-specific HRQoL. We identified five domains of HRQOL previously studied in research with youth and adults with HS: penile appearance, voiding, social interaction, sexual health, and psychological or behavioral function. We propose a model of HS-specific HRQoL comprised of these domains and their areas of overlap, based upon the findings and conceptual mapping of our literature review. This novel conceptual framework provides a foundation for understanding disease-specific HRQoL in individuals with HS and may serve as a guide for the conduct of future qualitative studies of the HS population. The overlapping biopsychosocial domains illustrate the possible effects of HS on day-to-day life. This framework may guide future surgical, clinical, and behavioral interventions that aim to improve medical care and quality of life outcomes for HS patients.

A Type 1 diabetes (T1D) diagnosis in young children can cause significant family stress. Parents may experience increased depressive symptoms, but less is known about early diabetes-specific functioning (i.e., parental self-efficacy to manage diabetes, hypoglycemia fear, and coparenting conflict). We evaluated a theoretically based model of diabetes-specific functioning among parents of young children newly diagnosed with T1D (YC-T1D). The model included parent demographic variables, child illness-factors, family protective factors, and general parent emotional functioning.One hundred fifty-seven newly diagnosed YC-T1D (More difficulties with parent emotional functioning were related to more problems with parent diabetes-specific functioning, and higher family protective factors were related to fewer problems with diabetes-specific functioning. Child-illness factors were also directly related to more difficulties with parent diabetes-specific functioning and emotional functioning. Parents with college education reported more difficulties with emotional functioning and parent diabetes-specific functioning. Younger child age was associated with fewer difficulties with emotional functioning and more family protective factors.Results provide initial support for a model of parent diabetes specific-functioning at young child T1D diagnosis. Future research may examine this model in relation to children's glycemic outcomes over the first year after diagnosis. Implications are made for parent screening at the time of YC-T1D diagnosis. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Despite the known challenges of parental adjustment to new-onset type 1 diabetes (T1D) in young children, little is known about parental sleep soon after diagnosis.Parents (n = 157) of young children (4.5 ± 1.6 years) with new-onset T1D (29 ± 15 days) self-reported their sleep (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, PSQI) at the baseline of a behavioral randomized control trial. We examined sleep patterns and relations with continuous glucose monitor (CGM) use.Over two-thirds (68.8%) reported poor sleep quality (PSQI 5, M = 8.3 ± 4.1). The mean reported sleep duration was 5.9 ± 1.4 h/night. PSQI scores did not significantly differ by CGM use.Sleep disruption is a pervasive self-reported problem among parents of young children emerging early after the T1D diagnosis. Healthcare providers should discuss parental sleep as part of diabetes care soon after diagnosis. Further interventions targeting parental sleep may be of benefit.

Background Emerging adulthood presents unique challenges for type 1 diabetes (T1D) management. Barriers to achieving optimal diabetes outcomes have been studied but less is known about how emerging adults overcome these challenges. Characterizing emerging adults' protective factors may help guide T1D care during this developmental period. We anticipated identifying social, cognitive, and behavioral protective factors and were open to additional themes. Methods We analyzed transcripts from semi-structured qualitative interviews with 62 emerging adults (age 18-24 years) with T1D using hybrid thematic analysis. Interviews queried about participants' perspectives on diabetes management challenges, how they overcome challenges, and diabetes resilience. Results We categorized responses into three types of protective factors: (1) Social: Interpersonal strategies such as obtaining tangible support (especially from parents) and emotional support from friends, medical professionals, and community leaders. (2) Cognitive: Believing one can live a "normal" life with T1D, benefit-finding, and viewing diabetes management as an important part of life. (3) Behavioral: Proactively planning for diabetes challenges, maintaining a consistent routine while allowing for flexibility, balancing diabetes and non-diabetes activities, and using diabetes-specific and general technologies to support self-management. Conclusions The adaptive approaches emerging adults with T1D use to handle the challenges of diabetes include seeking interpersonal support, managing their thoughts about T1D, and taking specific actions to prevent or resolve challenges. Helping emerging adults identify and strengthen their protective factors has potential to affect clinical outcomes. Strengths-based assessment and clinical attention to protective factors may prepare adolescents to successfully manage the challenges of transition to adult care. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

There are multiple information sources available to assist families in learning about rapidly advancing diabetes technologies as care options for their children. This study explored where and from whom families of young children with type 1 diabetes get information about diabetes technologies and the valence (positive vs. negative) of that information. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with parents (86% mothers) of 79 youth

Objective The 2017 Society of Pediatric Psychology (SPP) Workforce Survey provides self-reported compensation by pediatric psychologists, identifies predictors of compensation, and establishes a better understanding of compensation within the context of gender and race/ethnicity minority status. Methods SPP members who attended the SPP Annual Conference (SPPAC; April 2017) were invited to complete the survey at the conference through electronic tablets provided on-site by the Workforce Survey Committee. The survey was subsequently distributed online to SPP members who did not complete the survey at SPPAC. The statistical analyses used for this salary data employed flexible semi-parametric models, cross-validation, and prediction models for both the overall sample and academic rank subgroups. Results Of 27 potential demographic and employment-related predictors from the 2017 SPP Workforce Survey, significant predictors of salary emerged within this sample: academic rank, time since obtaining doctoral degree, managing internal and external funds (of at least $50,000), years in primary employment position, obtaining Fellowship status in the American Psychological Association (APA), and managing other employees (at least 10 people). Given low response rates for males and individuals who identify as belonging to racial and ethnic minority subgroups, only limited, exploratory results are reported for these subgroups. Conclusions These findings suggest that not only is longevity in one’s career important but managing funds/personnel and obtaining professional designations are also predictors of higher salaries for pediatric psychologists, in general. Specific implications of salary according to the psychologist’s academic rank, gender, and racial/ethnicity group status are also explored.

Adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) are at high risk for elevated diabetes distress, which greatly impacts diabetes management, glycemic outcomes and overall quality of life. Developing protective skills and "resilience resources" to navigate adversity and manage diabetes distress has high potential to help adolescents with T1D achieve optimal behavioral, psychological, and health outcomes. The "Promoting Resilience in Stress Management" (PRISM) program is a manualized, brief, skills-based intervention delivered over 6 months via two 45-60 min one-on-one sessions and a family meeting with a PRISM coach, and supplemented by booster calls and a digital app. This trial (PRISM versus usual care)is designed to:: (1) assess PRISM's impact on glycemic outcomes and diabetes distress among adolescents with T1D, and (2) explor PRISM's impact on resilience, self-reported adherence, and quality of life.We describe the protocol for a multi-site randomized controlled trial designed for adolescents ages 13-18 with elevated diabetes distress. The primary trial outcomes are glycemic outcomes and diabetes distress 6 months post-randomization. Secondary outcomes include resilience, self-reported adherence, and QOL 6 months post-randomization. Our hypothesis is that youth in the PRISM group will demonstrate better glycemic outcomes and improved diabetes distress, adherence, resilience, and QOL compared to usual care.This study will provide methodologically rigorous data and evidence regarding a novel intervention to promote resilience among adolescents with T1D and elevated diabetes distress. This research has the potential to offer a practical, skills-based curriculum designed to improve outcomes for this high-risk group.Prospectively registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03847194).

BACKGROUND: Across all age groups, management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) places substantial responsibility and emotional burden upon families. This study explored parent perceptions of the burdens of caring for very young children with T1D. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with parents (85% mothers) of 79 children with T1D, aged 1 to

OBJECTIVE Despite the emotional challenges of parental adjustment to a child’s type 1 diabetes diagnosis and the unique complexities of early childhood, there are few programs designed to meet the needs of parents of young children at new onset. This study evaluated First STEPS (Study of Type 1 in Early childhood and Parenting Support), a stepped-care behavioral intervention designed to support parents’ psychosocial functioning and promote children’s glycemic outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Using a two-site randomized clinical trial design, parents (n = 157) of children aged 1–6 years completed baseline data within 2 months of diabetes diagnosis and were randomly assigned to intervention (n = 115) or usual care (n = 42) for 9 months. Intervention steps included: 1) peer parent coaching, with step-ups to 2) structured behavioral counseling and 3) professional consultations with a diabetes educator and psychologist, based on parent mood and child HbA1c. Participants completed follow-ups at 9 and 15 months postrandomization. Primary outcomes were parent depressive symptoms and child HbA1c. RESULTS Depressive symptoms improved in both groups, and intervention parents had significantly lower depressive symptoms at the 9- and 15-month follow-ups compared with usual care. HbA1c decreased in both groups, but there were no between-group differences at 9 or 15 months. CONCLUSIONS First STEPS improved parents’ mood following young children’s type 1 diabetes diagnosis. Results indicate likely benefits of parent coach support, supplemented by intervention intensifications, including behavioral intervention and diabetes education. This model has high potential for patient engagement. The absence of a medical intervention component may explain null findings for HbA1c; incorporating targeted behavioral support for intensive diabetes treatment may maximize intervention impact.

Objective The COVID-19 pandemic increased economic, social, and health stressors for families, yet its impacts on families of youth with chronic conditions, such as type 1 diabetes (T1D), are not well understood. Self-regulation (SR)—or the capacities to control emotions, cognition, and behavior in response to challenge—is known to support T1D management and coping in the face of stress. Strong SR may have protected youth with T1D from the impacts of pandemic-related stressors. This study compared youth and parent emotional functioning and T1D management before and after the pandemic’s onset in relation to family pandemic-related stress and youth SR. Methods Parents of youth with T1D (N = 88) and a subset of these youth (N = 43; Mean age 15.3 years [SD 2.2]) completed surveys regarding SR, stress, emotional functioning, and T1D-related functioning prior to and after March 2020. Outcomes were compared using mixed effects models adjusting for covariates. Family pandemic-related stress experiences and youth SR were tested as moderators of change. Results Parents’ responsibility for T1D management increased across pandemic onset and their diabetes-related distress decreased. Family pandemic-related stress was associated with decreased emotional functioning over time. Youth SR, particularly emotional and behavioral aspects, predicted better emotional and T1D-related functioning. Discussion While youth with T1D whose families experienced higher pandemic-related stress had poorer adjustment, strong emotional and behavioral SR appeared to protect against worsening youth mood and adherence across pandemic onset. Both social-contextual and individual factors are important to consider when working with families managing T1D.

Individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) experience greater sleep disturbances than people without diabetes. However, the nature, causes and effects of sleep disruption in individuals with T1D and their family are not well understood. The purpose of this study was to explore and characterise the perspectives of parents, partners and individuals with diabetes about T1D-related sleep issues.Participants included 44 youth and adults with T1D (ages 9-69), 24 parents of youth with T1D, and 14 partners of adults with T1D, recruited from diabetes clinics at two academic medical centres in the Southwestern and Midwestern United States. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were transcribed verbatim, coded and analysed using hybrid thematic analysis.We identified two central themes: Emotional Distress and Sleep Disruption. Each theme had multiple subthemes, and the two central themes were related to one another via a shared subtheme, Worry Impacting Sleep.Complex T1D-related emotional and behavioural factors both contributed to and resulted from sleep difficulties. Diabetes care providers should routinely assess for sleep concerns in people with T1D and their parents and partners. It may be important to consider both diabetes-related causes of sleep disruptions and potential impacts on self management and emotional functioning.

Purpose of Review The manuscript reviews the extant literature on suicide-related thoughts and behaviors among youth and young adults with pediatric diabetes. This evidence is presented within the context of current theories of the etiology of suicidal behavior to highlight how diabetes may contribute to suicide risk, and to support providers in understanding the interplay between pediatric diabetes and suicide risk. The manuscript also reviews evidence-based approaches to suicide prevention suitable for use in pediatric healthcare settings, with suggestions for their application to this unique population. Recent Findings Several recent studies identify heightened rates of suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide among youth and young adults with pediatric diabetes, as compared with their peers without diabetes. Evidence-based suicide prevention approaches frequently emphasize the importance of reducing suicidal youths’ access to potentially lethal means for suicidal behavior. This approach may require special considerations for youth with pediatric diabetes, due to their need to carry sufficient quantities of insulin and the dangers of inaccurate insulin dosing and/or overdose. Suggestions for suicide prevention for this population include risk screening as part of routine diabetes care, early prevention, education for youth and families, and provider awareness of risk factors, warning signs, and implications for diabetes care. Summary Youth and young adults with diabetes reported elevated rates of suicide-related behaviors as compared with their peers without diabetes. Existing suicide prevention approaches may require substantial adaptation for use with youth and young adults with diabetes. Further research is needed to examine how to best prevent suicidal behaviors among this population.

OBJECTIVE: To describe sociodemographic and parent psychosocial characteristics associated with patterns of continuous glucose monitor (CGM) use across the first 18 months post-type 1 diabetes (T1D) diagnosis among young children. METHODS: One hundred fifty-seven parent–child dyads enrolled in a behavioral intervention for parents of young children (1–6 years) newly diagnosed with T1D. Parents reported on baseline sociodemographic characteristics and psychosocial functioning; child CGM use was assessed at five time points during the first 18 months post-diagnosis. RESULTS: Most participants (81.8%) used CGM at least once. Four CGM trajectories emerged (always, later/stable, inconsistent, and never). Participants with private insurance were more likely to be in the always, later/stable, or inconsistent groups versus the never group. Youth in the always and later/stable groups had lower mean HbA1c at 18 months than those in the never group. CONCLUSIONS: Given the health benefits of CGM, further exploration of barriers to CGM use in families with public health insurance is needed. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02527525

Objective Recruitment and retention are paramount to the success of randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, strategies and challenges to optimize recruitment and retention are often omitted from outcomes papers. The current manuscript presents strategies used to recruit and retain over 97% parents of young children newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes for over 15-months post-randomization enrolled in First STEPS, a behavioral, two-site RCT. Method Participants included 157 primary caregivers of young children newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. Recruitment and retention strategies are described and include collaboration with medical teams, careful selection and training of study staff, inclusion of a behavioral run-in prior to randomization, financial incentives, creation of a study identity using retention items, obtainment of feedback from community stakeholders, and minimization of participant burden. Results Use of recruitment and retention strategies resulted in enrollment of 58% of eligible and reached families, with retention of the enrolled sample above 97% for over 15 months. Participants reported high acceptability of and satisfaction with specific recruitment and retention strategies. Conclusions The strategies used to recruit and retain caregivers of young children newly diagnosed with a chronic illness were feasible to implement within multidisciplinary diabetes clinics and may apply to other pediatric populations. Future research may benefit from a focus on strategies to engage more diverse samples. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02527525

Introduction: Parents of children with T1D experience substantial caregiving distress, and child behavior problems are common among children with T1D. Stressors associated with the COVID-19 pandemic may disrupt T1D management and/or parent psychological functioning. This study examined the associations among pediatric parenting stress, child behavior, and diabetes- and COVID-19-specific psychosocial experiences among parents of children with T1D during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Participants were 100 parents of young children with T1D (M age=6.7±1.6; M T1D duration=2.9±.5 years), who had completed participation in a multi-site behavioral intervention trial. In June/July 2020 (≥6 months after trial completion), parents self-reported on demographics, pediatric parenting stress (Pediatric Inventory for Parents; PIP), child behavior (Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory; ECBI), and a newly developed questionnaire measuring negative/positive impact of COVID-19 on T1D management and parent mood related to COVID-19. Results: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there were significantly lower ECBI scores for married versus non-married participants (t=2.53, p Conclusion: Given the increased demands of managing home, school, work and adhering to social distancing measures while managing a chronic illness, parents of children with T1D are particularly vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinically, findings highlight the importance of assessing parent psychosocial functioning, child behavior, and challenges to children’s T1D management. Disclosure K. Rooney: None. C. H. Wang: None. M. E. Hilliard: None. R. Streisand: None. C. Danko: None.