Search

BackgroundA composite metric for the quality of glycemia from continuous glucose monitor (CGM) tracings could be useful for assisting with basic clinical interpretation of CGM data.MethodsWe assembled a data set of 14-day CGM tracings from 225 insulin-treated adults with diabetes. Using a balanced incomplete block design, 330 clinicians who were highly experienced with CGM analysis and interpretation ranked the CGM tracings from best to worst quality of glycemia. We used principal component analysis and multiple regressions to develop a model to predict the clinician ranking based on seven standard metrics in an Ambulatory Glucose Profile: very low-glucose and low-glucose hypoglycemia; very high-glucose and high-glucose hyperglycemia; time in range; mean glucose; and coefficient of variation.ResultsThe analysis showed that clinician rankings depend on two components, one related to hypoglycemia that gives more weight to very low-glucose than to low-glucose and the other related to hyperglycemia that likewise gives greater weight to very high-glucose than to high-glucose. These two components should be calculated and displayed separately, but they can also be combined into a single Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) that corresponds closely to the clinician rankings of the overall quality of glycemia (r = 0.95). The GRI can be displayed graphically on a GRI Grid with the hypoglycemia component on the horizontal axis and the hyperglycemia component on the vertical axis. Diagonal lines divide the graph into five zones (quintiles) corresponding to the best (0th to 20th percentile) to worst (81st to 100th percentile) overall quality of glycemia. The GRI Grid enables users to track sequential changes within an individual over time and compare groups of individuals.ConclusionThe GRI is a single-number summary of the quality of glycemia. Its hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia components provide actionable scores and a graphical display (the GRI Grid) that can be used by clinicians and researchers to determine the glycemic effects of prescribed and investigational treatments.

AimsThis study evaluated the implementation costs of two group interventions, one focused on diabetes education (KnowIt) and one focused directly on diabetes distress (OnTrack), that reduced diabetes distress and HbA1C in adults with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes (T1DM) in the T1-REDEEM trial.MethodsResources used to provide interventions were enumerated using activity-based micro-costing methods. Costs were assigned to resources in 2017 US dollars. US median wage and benefit rates were used to calculate costs of staff time. Cost per unit change was calculated for diabetes distress and HbA1C.ResultsFor both interventions, per participant implementation costs were approximately $250 and cost per 1.0 percentage point (11 mmol/mol) change in HbA1C was $1400. Cost per unit change in diabetes distress was $364 for KnowIt and $335 for OnTrack. No statistically significant differences in costs were observed.ConclusionsThis is the first study to examine the costs of implementing interventions targeting diabetes distress in the context of T1DM. Both interventions had per participant implementation costs in the lower end of the range of previously examined diabetes self-management interventions ($219 to $5390). These inventions and their costs merit further attention because reducing diabetes distress may impact long term T1DM outcomes.Clinical trials registrationClinicalTrials.govNCT02175732.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of three interventions to reduce diabetes distress (DD) and improve HbA1c among adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Individuals with T1D (n = 276) with elevated DD (a score >2 on the total Type 1 Diabetes Distress Scale) and HbA1c (>7.5%) were recruited from multiple settings and randomly assigned to one of three virtual group-based programs: 1) Streamline, an educator-led education and diabetes self-management program; 2) TunedIn, a psychologist-led program focused exclusively on emotional-focused DD reduction; or 3) FixIt, an integration of Streamline and TunedIn. Assessments of the primary outcomes of DD and HbA1c occurred at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: All three programs demonstrated substantive and sustained reductions in DD (Cohen's d = 0.58–1.14) and HbA1c (range, −0.4 to −0.72) at 12-month follow-up. TunedIn and FixIt participants reported significantly greater DD reductions compared with Streamline participants (P = 0.007). Streamline and TunedIn participants achieved significantly greater HbA1c reductions than did FixIt participants (P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: DD can be successfully reduced among individuals with T1D with elevated HbA1c using both the educational/behavioral and emotion-focused approaches included in the study. Although both approaches are associated with significant and clinically meaningful reductions in DD and HbA1c, TunedIn, the emotion-focused program, had the most consistent benefits across both DD and HbA1c. The study findings suggest the overall value of group-based, fully virtual, and time-limited emotion-focused strategies, like those used in TunedIn, for adults with T1D. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of two interventions to reduce diabetes distress (DD) and improve glycemic control among adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D).Research design and methodsIndividuals with T1D (n = 301) with elevated DD and HbA1c were recruited from multiple settings and randomly assigned to OnTrack, an emotion-focused intervention, or to KnowIt, an educational/behavioral intervention. Each group attended a full-day workshop plus four online meetings over 3 months. Assessments occurred at baseline and 3 and 9 months. Primary and secondary outcomes were change in DD and change in HbA1c, respectively.ResultsWith 12% attrition, both groups demonstrated dramatic reductions in DD (effect size d = 1.06; 78.4% demonstrated a reduction of at least one minimal clinically important difference). There were, however, no significant differences in DD reduction between OnTrack and KnowIt. Moderator analyses indicated that OnTrack provided greater DD reduction to those with initially poorer cognitive or emotion regulation skills, higher baseline DD, or greater initial diabetes knowledge than those in KnowIt. Significant but modest reductions in HbA1c occurred with no between-group differences. Change in DD was modestly associated with change in HbA1c (r = 0.14, P = 0.01), with no significant between-group differences.ConclusionsDD can be successfully reduced among distressed individuals with T1D with elevated HbA1c using both education/behavioral and emotion-focused approaches. Reductions in DD are only modestly associated with reductions in HbA1c. These findings point to the importance of tailoring interventions to address affective, knowledge, and cognitive skills when intervening to reduce DD and improve glycemic control.

The article highlights the intersection of type 1 diabetes and dementia in aging populations, emphasizing the challenges faced by patients and caregivers. Topics discussed include the increased risk of cognitive decline in individuals with type 1 diabetes, the reluctance of patients to share diabetes management details, and strategies for healthcare providers to assist with diabetes management and support caregivers effectively.

AimsTo identify the unique sources of diabetes distress (DD) for adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D).MethodsSources of DD were developed from qualitative interviews with 25 T1D adults and 10 diabetes health care providers. Survey items were then developed and analyzed using both exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory CFA) analyses on two patient samples. Construct validity was assessed by correlations with depressive symptoms (PHQ8), complications, HbA1C, BMI, and hypoglycemia worry scale (HWS). Scale cut-points were created using multiple regression.ResultsAn EFA with 305 U.S. participants yielded 7 coherent, reliable sources of distress that were replicated by a CFA with 109 Canadian participants: Powerlessness, Negative Social Perceptions, Physician Distress, Friend/Family Distress, Hypoglycemia Distress, Management Distress, Eating Distress. Prevalence of DD was high with 41.6% reporting at least moderate DD. Higher DD was reported for women, those with complications, poor glycemic control, younger age, without a partner, and non-White patients.ConclusionsWe identified a profile of seven major sources of DD among T1D using a newly developed assessment instrument. The prevalence of DD is high and is related to glycemic control and several patient demographic and disease-related patient characteristics, arguing for a need to address DD in clinical care.

Aims: While peer support research is growing in the Type 1 diabetes (T1D) community, the peer supporter training (PST) process is rarely documented in detail. This study provides a comprehensive description of PST and evaluation for the REACHOUT mental health support intervention, and examines the feasibility and perceived utility of PST. Methods: Fifty‐three adults with T1D were recruited to participate in a 6‐hour, zoom‐based PST program for mental health support. The program was structured in three parts: (1) internal motivation, resilience and empathy; (2) mindfulness, emotions and diabetes distress; and (3) active listening and deferring clinical questions to professionals. Candidates were evaluated based on eight pre‐established competency criteria during a 5‐day support trial with an assigned standardized T1D participant. Perceived usefulness of training skills was also assessed 3 months into the REACHOUT mental health support intervention. Results: Fifty‐one of the fifty‐three candidates who completed training achieved the criteria to graduate. Mean scores for the eight competency domains were: listens actively (4.55); asks open‐ended questions (4.12); expresses empathy (4.42); avoids passing judgment (4.67); sits with strong emotions (4.44); refrains from giving advice (4.38); makes reflections (4.5); and defers medical questions (4.58). Of the skills learned during the PST, 95% rated interpreting and discussing diabetes distress profile and expressing empathy as moderately to extremely useful. Conclusions: Findings demonstrate that it is feasible to recruit and graduate the number of trainees needed using a rigorous process. Only by making training protocols available can the PST be replicated and translated to other T1D populations (e.g. adolescents, parents of children with T1D). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveTo identify the pattern of relationships between the 17-item Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS17) and diabetes variables to establish scale cut points for high distress among patients with type 2 diabetes.Research design and methodsRecruited were 506 study 1 and 392 study 2 adults with type 2 diabetes from community medical groups. Multiple regression equations associated the DDS17, a 17-item scale that yields a mean-item score, with HbA(1c), diabetes self-efficacy, diet, and physical activity. Associations also were undertaken for the two-item DDS (DDS2) screener. Analyses included control variables, linear, and quadratic (curvilinear) DDS terms.ResultsSignificant quadratic effects occurred between the DDS17 and each diabetes variable, with increases in distress associated with poorer outcomes: study 1 HbA(1c) (P < 0.02), self-efficacy (P < 0.001), diet (P < 0.001), physical activity (P < 0.04); study 2 HbA(1c) (P < 0.03), self-efficacy (P < 0.004), diet (P < 0.04), physical activity (P = NS). Substantive curvilinear associations with all four variables in both studies began at unexpectedly low levels of DDS17: the slope increased linearly between scores 1 and 2, was more muted between 2 and 3, and reached a maximum between 3 and 4. This suggested three patient subgroups: little or no distress,

Background: The majority of individuals referred to diabetes self-management education and support (DSMES) programs do not access this resource. Of those who do, attrition is high, with anecdotal reports pointing to the didactic and impersonal nature of these programs contributing to low utilization and completion rates. In an effort to develop a more engaging form of DSMES for adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D), we constructed a non-didactic, "discovery learning"-based DSMES program centered on real-time flash glucose monitoring (FGM).Methods: In this single-arm pilot study, 35 adults with T2D duration 1 - 5 years, ages 21 - 75 years, not using insulin and HbA1c >8.0% were introduced to FGM and participated in five weekly group sessions. DSMES content was personalized, emerging from the concerns and questions arising from participants' FGM discoveries. The primary outcome was glycemic change as assessed by blinded FGM at baseline and month 3. Secondary outcomes included psychosocial and behavioral measures.Results: There was a significant gain in % TIR 70 -180 mg/dL from baseline (55%) to month 3 (74%), and a parallel drop in TAR > 180 mg/dL from 44% to 25% (ps = 0.01). Overall well-being rose significantly (p = 0.04), while diabetes distress showed a non-significant drop. Participants reported improvements in healthy eating (p < 0.001) and physical activity, though the latter did not reach statistical significance.Conclusions: These findings support a new approach to DSMES, a method that integrates FGM with a highly interactive and engaging, patient-driven, "discovery learning" approach to education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]