Detection and treatment efficacy of hypoglycemic events in the everyday life of children younger than 7 yr

Prevalence and associations of impaired awareness of hypoglycemia in a pediatric type 1 diabetes population - The Norwegian Childhood Diabetes Registry

AIMS

To determine the prevalence and associations of impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) in pediatric type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Nationwide, population-based cross-sectional study with 51 % participation. Participants (n = 1329; 53 % males) aged 2-19 years (median 13.3) with type 1 diabetes ≥ 6 months (median 4.6 years) self-assessed hypoglycemia awareness with a validated questionnaire ('Clarke'). Parents responded for children aged < 9 years (n = 235). We estimated associations between IAH and clinical data in the Norwegian Childhood Diabetes Registry.

RESULTS

The overall prevalence of IAH was 22 %, but gradually decreased from 53 % in preschoolers to 12 % in adolescents aged ≥ 16 years. IAH was associated (adjusted OR; 95 %CI) with episodes of severe hypoglycemia (6.0; 3.04, 11.8) and diabetic ketoacidosis (3.45; 1.37, 8.68) the preceding year, increased fear of hypoglycemia (highest quartile vs. lowest: 2.27; 1.51, 3.40), female sex (1.41; 1.05, 1.90), and HbA1c ≥ 8.5 % (69 mmol/mol) vs. 7.5-8.4 % (58-68 mmol/mol) (1.48; 1.01, 2.18), but not with disease duration, use of insulin pump or continuous glucose monitoring, or HbA1c < 7.5 % (58 mmol/mol).

CONCLUSIONS

IAH is prevalent in pediatric diabetes and more likely reported in young children. IAH is associated with severe hypoglycemia and fear of hypoglycemia, but good metabolic control seems achievable without increased risk of IAH.

Long-term Continuous Glucose Monitor Use in Very Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes: One-Year Results From the SENCE Study

OBJECTIVES

Achieving optimal glycemic outcomes in young children with type 1 diabetes (T1D) is challenging. This study examined the durability of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) coupled with a family behavioral intervention (FBI) to improve glycemia.

STUDY DESIGN

This one-year study included an initial 26-week randomized controlled trial of CGM with FBI (CGM+FBI) and CGM alone (Standard-CGM) compared with blood glucose monitoring (BGM), followed by a 26-week extension phase wherein the BGM Group received the CGM+FBI (BGM-Crossover) and both original CGM groups continued this technology.

RESULTS

Time in range (70-180 mg/dL) did not improve with CGM use (CGM+FBI: baseline 37%, 52 weeks 41%; Standard-CGM: baseline 41%, 52 weeks 44%; BGM-Crossover: 26 weeks 38%, 52 weeks 40%). All three groups sustained decreases in hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) with CGM use (CGM+FBI: baseline 3.4%, 52 weeks 2.0%; Standard-CGM: baseline 4.1%, 52 weeks 2.1%; BGM-Crossover: 26 weeks 4.5%, 52 weeks 1.7%, P-values <.001). Hemoglobin A1c was unchanged with CGM use (CGM+FBI: baseline 8.3%, 52 weeks 8.2%; Standard-CGM: baseline 8.2%, 52 weeks 8.0%; BGM-Crossover: 26 weeks 8.1%, 52 weeks 8.3%). Sensor use remained high (52-week study visit: CGM+FBI 91%, Standard-CGM 92%, BGM-Crossover 88%).

CONCLUSION

Over 12 months young children with T1D using newer CGM technology sustained reductions in hypoglycemia and, in contrast to prior studies, persistently wore CGM. However, pervasive hyperglycemia remained unmitigated. This indicates an urgent need for further advances in diabetes technology, behavioral support, and diabetes management educational approaches to optimize glycemia in young children.

MiniMed 780G™ in 2- to 6-Year-Old Children: Safety and Clinical Outcomes After the First 12 Weeks

Objective: The safety and impact of the advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system on glycemic outcome in 2- to 6-year-old children with type 1 diabetes and the diabetes distress of caregivers were evaluated. Research Design and Methods: This was an open-label prospective study (n = 35) with historical controls matched by treatment unit, diabetes duration, age, gender, and baseline treatment modality. The inclusion criteria were (1) type 1 diabetes diagnosis >6 months, (2) total daily dose of insulin ≥8 U/day, (3) HbA1c <10% (85 mmol/mol), and (4) capability to use insulin pump and continuous glucose monitoring. The MiniMed 780G™ AHCL in SmartGuard™ Mode was used for 12 weeks. Parental diabetes distress was evaluated with a validated Problem Areas In Diabetes-Parent, revised (PAID-PR) survey. Results: No events of diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia occurred. Between 0 and 12 weeks, HbA1c (mean change = -2.7 mmol/mol [standard deviation 5.7], P = 0.010), mean sensor glucose value (SG) (-0.8 mmol/L [1.0], P < 0.001), and time above range (TAR) (-8.6% [9.5], P < 0.001) decreased and time in range (TIR) (8.3% [9.3], P < 0.001) increased significantly, whereas no significant change in time below range (TBR) was observed. At the same time, PAID-PR score decreased from 37.5 (18.2) to 27.5 (14.8) (P = 0.006). Conclusions: MiniMed 780G™ AHCL is a safe system and 12-week use was associated with improvements in glycemic control in 2- to 6-year-old children with type 1 diabetes. In addition, AHCL is associated with a reduction in parental diabetes distress after 12-week use. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT04949022.

Related factors associated with fear of hypoglycemia in parents of children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes - A systematic review

PROBLEM

Fear of hypoglycemia is a significant concern for parents of children/ adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Although some studies have explained the parental fear of hypoglycemia, the related factors were yet to be determined. This systematic review aims to identify the related factors of fear of hypoglycemia in the parents of children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes and provide a theoretical basis for further intervention.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, EBSCO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched from 2010 to 2021. Studies evaluating the fear of hypoglycemia of parents and its associated factors were included.

SAMPLE

Twenty-three observational articles met the criteria.

RESULTS

Significant associations were found between fear of hypoglycemia and specific factors, including motherhood, nocturnal hypoglycemia, and the number of blood glucose monitoring. Psychological factors, including anxiety, depression, pediatric parenting stress, mindfulness, self-efficacy, quality of life, and sleep disorders, were conclusive and associations with parental fear of hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding parental fear of hypoglycemia can help parents prevent potential problems in diabetes management, thus promoting children's growth. According to current evidence, effective targeted interventions based on modifiable relevant factors can be developed to reduce the fear of hypoglycemia in parents while maintaining optimal blood glucose control in children/ adolescents.

IMPLICATIONS

Health professionals should pay more attention to the mental health of parents, and parents should be involved in the care plan and have the opportunity to discuss their fear of hypoglycemia in the most appropriate way to manage type 1 diabetes.

A practical approach to continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) and FreeStyle Libre systems (isCGM) in children and young people with Type 1 diabetes

Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) and FreeStyle Libre glucose monitoring systems (isCGM) are new evolving technologies used in the management of Type 1 diabetes. They offer potential to improve diabetes control and reduce hypoglycaemia. rtCGM can be linked to insulin pump providing hybrid closed loop therapy. Families of children and young people are keen to have the benefit from these technologies. These are relatively expensive so it is important that health care professionals, families of children and young people (CYP) with diabetes are adequately trained in the use of these devices. Health care professionals need to be able to make patient selection based on individual needs and preferences to achieve maximum benefit. Association of Children's Diabetes Clinicians (ACDC) developed a comprehensive guideline in 2017 to help identify which patients may be most likely to benefit and how these technologies may be practically implemented. Since then new technologies have been introduced and the use of GCM has expanded in routine clinical practice. This article, aims to provide a practical approach and help identify which patients may be most likely to benefit and how the technology may be implemented in order to maximise the clinical benefits.

Randomized Trial of Closed-Loop Control in Very Young Children with Type 1 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

The possible advantage of hybrid closed-loop therapy (i.e., artificial pancreas) over sensor-augmented pump therapy in very young children with type 1 diabetes is unclear.

METHODS

In this multicenter, randomized, crossover trial, we recruited children 1 to 7 years of age with type 1 diabetes who were receiving insulin-pump therapy at seven centers across Austria, Germany, Luxembourg, and the United Kingdom. Participants received treatment in two 16-week periods, in random order, in which the closed-loop system was compared with sensor-augmented pump therapy (control). The primary end point was the between-treatment difference in the percentage of time that the sensor glucose measurement was in the target range (70 to 180 mg per deciliter) during each 16-week period. The analysis was conducted according to the intention-to-treat principle. Key secondary end points included the percentage of time spent in a hyperglycemic state (glucose level, >180 mg per deciliter), the glycated hemoglobin level, the mean sensor glucose level, and the percentage of time spent in a hypoglycemic state (glucose level, <70 mg per deciliter). Safety was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 74 participants underwent randomization. The mean (±SD) age of the participants was 5.6±1.6 years, and the baseline glycated hemoglobin level was 7.3±0.7%. The percentage of time with the glucose level in the target range was 8.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.4 to 9.9) higher during the closed-loop period than during the control period (P<0.001). The mean adjusted difference (closed-loop minus control) in the percentage of time spent in a hyperglycemic state was -8.5 percentage points (95% CI, -9.9 to -7.1), the difference in the glycated hemoglobin level was -0.4 percentage points (95% CI, -0.5 to -0.3), and the difference in the mean sensor glucose level was -12.3 mg per deciliter (95% CI, -14.8 to -9.8) (P<0.001 for all comparisons). The time spent in a hypoglycemic state was similar with the two treatments (P = 0.74). The median time spent in the closed-loop mode was 95% (interquartile range, 92 to 97) over the 16-week closed-loop period. One serious adverse event of severe hypoglycemia occurred during the closed-loop period. One serious adverse event that was deemed to be unrelated to treatment occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

A hybrid closed-loop system significantly improved glycemic control in very young children with type 1 diabetes, without increasing the time spent in hypoglycemia. (Funded by the European Commission and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03784027.).

Technological Ecological Momentary Assessment Tools to Study Type 1 Diabetes in Youth: Viewpoint of Methodologies

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is one of the most common chronic childhood diseases, and its prevalence is rapidly increasing. The management of glucose in T1D is challenging, as youth must consider a myriad of factors when making diabetes care decisions. This task often leads to significant hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, and glucose variability throughout the day, which have been associated with short- and long-term medical complications. At present, most of what is known about each of these complications and the health behaviors that may lead to them have been uncovered in the clinical setting or in laboratory-based research. However, the tools often used in these settings are limited in their ability to capture the dynamic behaviors, feelings, and physiological changes associated with T1D that fluctuate from moment to moment throughout the day. A better understanding of T1D in daily life could potentially aid in the development of interventions to improve diabetes care and mitigate the negative medical consequences associated with it. Therefore, there is a need to measure repeated, real-time, and real-world features of this disease in youth. This approach is known as ecological momentary assessment (EMA), and it has considerable advantages to in-lab research. Thus, this viewpoint aims to describe EMA tools that have been used to collect data in the daily lives of youth with T1D and discuss studies that explored the nuances of T1D in daily life using these methods. This viewpoint focuses on the following EMA methods: continuous glucose monitoring, actigraphy, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, personal digital assistants, smartphones, and phone-based systems. The viewpoint also discusses the benefits of using EMA methods to collect important data that might not otherwise be collected in the laboratory and the limitations of each tool, future directions of the field, and possible clinical implications for their use.

A Randomized Clinical Trial Assessing Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) Use With Standardized Education With or Without a Family Behavioral Intervention Compared With Fingerstick Blood Glucose Monitoring in Very Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the effects of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) combined with family behavioral intervention (CGM+FBI) and CGM alone (Standard-CGM) on glycemic outcomes and parental quality of life compared with blood glucose monitoring (BGM) in children ages 2 to <8 years with type 1 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a multicenter (N = 14), 6-month, randomized controlled trial including 143 youth 2 to <8 years of age with type 1 diabetes. Primary analysis included treatment group comparisons of percent time in range (TIR) (70-180 mg/dL) across follow-up visits.

RESULTS

Approximately 90% of participants in the CGM groups used CGM ≥6 days/week at 6 months. Between-group TIR comparisons showed no significant changes: CGM+FBI vs. BGM 3.2% (95% CI -0.5, 7.0), Standard-CGM vs. BGM 0.5% (-2.6 to 3.6), CGM+FBI vs. Standard-CGM 2.7% (-0.6, 6.1). Mean time with glucose level <70 mg/dL was reduced from baseline to follow-up in the CGM+FBI (from 5.2% to 2.6%) and Standard-CGM (5.8% to 2.5%) groups, compared with 5.4% to 5.8% with BGM (CGM+FBI vs. BGM, P < 0.001, and Standard-CGM vs. BGM, P < 0.001). No severe hypoglycemic events occurred in the CGM+FBI group, one occurred in the Standard-CGM group, and five occurred in the BGM group. CGM+FBI parents reported greater reductions in diabetes burden and fear of hypoglycemia compared with Standard-CGM (P = 0.008 and 0.04) and BGM (P = 0.02 and 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

CGM used consistently over a 6-month period in young children with type 1 diabetes did not improve TIR but did significantly reduce time in hypoglycemia. The FBI benefited parental well-being.

Time spent outside of target glucose range for young children with type 1 diabetes: a continuous glucose monitor study

AIM

To assess the associations between demographic and clinical characteristics and sensor glucose metrics in young children with type 1 diabetes, using masked, continuous glucose monitoring data from children aged 2 to < 8 years.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The analysis included 143 children across 14 sites in the USA, enrolled in a separate clinical trial. Eligibility criteria were: age 2 to <8 years; type 1 diabetes duration ≥3 months; no continuous glucose monitoring use for past 30 days; and HbA_1c concentration 53 to <86 mmol/mol (7.0 to <10.0%). All participants wore masked continuous glucose monitors up to 14 days.

RESULTS

On average, participants spent the majority (13 h) of the day in hyperglycaemia (>10.0 mmol/l) and a median of ~1 h/day in hypoglycaemia (<3.9 mmol/l). Participants with minority race/ethnicity and higher parent education levels spent more time in target range, 3.9-10.0 mmol/l, and less time in hyperglycaemia. More time in hypoglycaemia was associated with minority race/ethnicity and younger age at diagnosis. Continuous glucose monitoring metrics were similar in pump and injection users.

CONCLUSIONS

Given that both hypo- and hyperglycaemia negatively impact neurocognitive development, strategies to increase time in target glucose range for young children are needed.

Assessing awareness of hypoglycemia in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: Evaluation of established questionnaires

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the use of two questionnaires assessing awareness of hypoglycemia, in a pediatric type 1 diabetes (T1D) population.

METHODS

Prospective observational study with children (aged 9-18 years) and parents (for children aged 2-11 years) answering the Gold and Clarke questionnaires assessing awareness of hypoglycemia. Psychometric properties of the questionnaires were evaluated, and the most appropriate cut-off score to classify participants as having normal vs impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) was determined by ability to recognize subsequent hypoglycemia and hypoglycemia severity, documented in a 4-week blood glucose diary. Questionnaires were readministered at follow-up assessment approximately 1.5 years later.

RESULTS

In total, 112 participants (51% male) with median (IQR) age 13.7 (11.1-15.8) years, T1D duration 4.7 (2.2-7.8) years, and HbA1c 62 (57-73) mmol/mol (7.8%) were included. Both questionnaires demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties. Using score ≥3 to classify IAH gave a prevalence of IAH of 41% (Gold) and 22% (Clarke). When classified using the Gold questionnaire, IAH participants had higher incidences of mild asymptomatic hypoglycemia, whereas with the Clarke questionnaire, they had higher incidences of clinically significant and severe hypoglycemia. Subgroup analyses confirmed these associations only in participants aged ≥9 years. Follow-up was completed in 90% of the participants, and a change of awareness status was observed in 22% to 36%.

CONCLUSIONS

The Gold and Clarke questionnaires may be used to assess awareness of hypoglycemia in pediatric T1D in those ≥9 years of age, but the more detailed Clarke questionnaire has higher specificity and is superior in predicting risk of clinically significant hypoglycemia.

Intervention to reduce hypoglycemia fear in parents of young kids using video-based telehealth (REDCHiP)

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of a new video-based telehealth intervention to reduce hypoglycemia fear in parents of young children with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

We randomized 42 parents to either immediate treatment (reducing emotional distress for childhood hypoglycemia in parents, REDCHiP; n = 22) or a waitlist control (WAITLIST; n = 21) condition. REDCHiP parents completed a 10-session video-based telehealth intervention, while WAITLIST parents continued in usual care. After 14-weeks, WAITLIST parents completed the telehealth treatment. We examined for between group changes in parental hypoglycemia fear and parenting stress (n = 18 per condition), 3-month maintenance of treatment effects for parents randomized to REDCHiP (n = 15), and pre-post changes for the entire sample (n = 36).

RESULTS

Mostly mothers participated (97.6%). They reported a mean age of 35.2 ± 5.0 years at pre-treatment. Children were 4.4 ± 1.4 years old and 59.5% boys. Between group comparisons showed a significant reduction in hypoglycemia fear (P = .04) and a trend toward reduction in parenting stress-frequency (P = .092) for REDCHiP parents compared to WAITLIST parents. After the three-month maintenance period, REDCHiP parents reported significant reductions in hypoglycemia fear, parenting stress-frequency, and parenting stress-difficulty (P's < .01) compared to pre-treatment. When all parents received the telehealth treatment, we also observed significant reductions in hypoglycemia fear, parenting stress-frequency, and parenting stress-difficulty (P's < .001), and sensitivity analyses revealed a significant reduction in child glycated hemoglobin for children who entered the treatment above target (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Our new video-based telehealth intervention appears to reduce hypoglycemia fear and parenting stress and may help parents of very young children with T1D to better achieve optimal child glycemic control when children are above target.

An Intervention to Reduce Hypoglycemia Fear in Parents of Young Kids with Type 1 Diabetes Through Video-Based Telemedicine (REDCHiP): Trial Design, Feasibility, and Acceptability

Background: Fear of hypoglycemia (FH) is common in parents of young children with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and problematically linked to maladaptive behaviors to avoid low blood glucose, parenting stress, and burnout. This study examined the feasibility and acceptability of a novel group-based telemedicine intervention to reduce FH in parents of young children with T1D. Materials and Methods: Forty-three families of a young child with T1D (1-6 years of age; diagnosed with T1D for at least 6 months) enrolled in the study and 36 completed the Reducing Emotional Distress for Childhood Hypoglycemia in Parents (REDCHiP) intervention. We assessed intervention feasibility with rates of attrition, intervention attendance, and fidelity to the treatment manual. We assessed acceptability with treatment satisfaction surveys and qualitative interviews (from a subset of completers; n = 10) about intervention acceptability, facilitators, and challenges. Results: Study attrition was 21%, including long-term follow-up (16% before or during the treatment phase). On average, parents attended 94% of intervention sessions and fidelity to the treatment manual was 89%. Intervention completers reported high satisfaction with the treatment groups (89% average satisfaction rating). Parent-reported positive influencers of the REDCHiP intervention were increased knowledge, fear awareness, coping strategies, confidence, behavioral parenting strategies, and support, whereas intervention challenges included feeling fearful or overwhelmed, family stress, lack of trust, and difficulty connecting with other group members. Conclusions: The REDCHiP intervention demonstrated initial feasibility and acceptability. Next steps include determining the intervention's impact on objective parent and child outcomes (e.g., glycemic control, parental FH, and parental stress/distress) as well as large-scale efficacy testing.

The road from intermittently scanned glucose monitoring to hybrid closed-loop systems: Part A. Keys to success: subject profiles, choice of systems, education

Managing type 1 diabetes (T1DM) is challenging and requires intensive glucose monitoring and titration of insulin in order to reduce the risk of complications. The use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, either flash or intermittently scanned glucose monitoring (isCGM) or real-time (RT) CGM, has positively affected the management of type 1 diabetes with the potential to lower HbA1c, enhance time spent in range, reduce frequency and time spent in hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia, lower glycemic variability, and improve quality of life. In recent years, both CGM and pump technology have advanced, with improved functional features and integration, including low glucose suspend (LGS), predictive low glucose suspend (PLGS), and hybrid closed-loop (HCL) systems. In this review, we highlight the benefits and limitations of use of isCGM/RT-CGM for open-loop control and recent progress in closed-loop control systems. We also discuss different subject profiles for the different systems, and focus on educational aspects that are key to successful use of the systems.

Closing the Loop on Managing Youth With Type 1 Diabetes: Children Are Not Just Small Adults

As hybrid closed-loop (HCL) insulin delivery systems permeate clinical practice, it is critical to ensure all with diabetes are afforded the opportunity to benefit from this technology. Indeed, due to the suboptimal control achieved by the vast majority of youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D), pediatric patients are positioned to see the greatest benefit from automated insulin delivery systems. To ensure these systems are well poised to deliver the promise of more targeted control, it is essential to understand the unique characteristics and factors of childhood. Herein, the developmental and physiological needs of youth with T1D are reviewed and consideration is given to how HCL could address these issues. Studies of HCL technologies in youth are briefly reviewed. As future-generation closed-loop systems are being devised, features that could make this technology more attractive to youth and to their families are discussed. Integration of HCL has the potential to minimize the burden of this chronic medical condition while improving glycemic control and ultimately allowing our pediatric patients to fulfill the primary goal of childhood, to be a kid.

Nighttime is the worst time: Parental fear of hypoglycemia in young children with type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Fear of hypoglycemia is common in parents of young children with type 1 diabetes (T1D), but little is known about the specific fears that parents most often experience. Hypoglycemia fear has been associated with poorer glycemic control in older children, though not yet studied in a large cohort of very young children.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Parents of 549 children <7 years (mean 5.2 ± 1.2 years [19% <3 years]) with a mean diabetes duration of 2.4 ± 1.0 years (range 1-6 years) and mean HbA1c 8.2% ± 1.1% (66 ± 12 mmol/mol) registered in the T1D Exchange completed the worry scale of the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey modified for parents (HFS-P).

RESULTS

Mean parental fear of hypoglycemia worry score was 36.1 ± 23.1 (possible range 0-100), with most frequent worries related to the child having a low while asleep and the child not recognizing a low. The mean worry score was not associated with the child's age, glycemic control, or recent severe hypoglycemic event. Parental worries about lows while sleeping were significantly higher in pump users than non-users (61% vs. 45%; P < .001), and tended to be higher in CGM users than non-users (62% vs 51%; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

The greatest worries of parents of young children with T1D were related to hypoglycemia during sleep and other times/circumstances during which it would be difficult to detect hypoglycemia. Using advanced diabetes technologies may be an effort to temper fears about hypoglycemia during sleep, though the directionality of this relationship is undetermined. Additional studies can clarify this association and leverage use of diabetes technologies to improve glycemic control.

Reduced prevalence of impaired awareness of hypoglycemia in a population-based clinic sample of youth with type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH) is associated with an increased risk for severe hypoglycemia (SH). However, reduced rates of SH raise the question as to whether there has been a reduction in IAH. The aim of this study was to determine the change in prevalence of IAH in a population-based cohort of adolescents with Type 1 diabetes (T1D).

METHODS

Children older than 12 years with T1D documented their responses to hypoglycemia based on the modified Clarke questionnaire. The prevalence of IAH was also analyzed in a similar population-based cohort using the same questionnaire in 2002. The clinical details of the participants and the number of SH events in the preceding year were determined from the Western Australian diabetes database.

RESULTS

The questionnaire was administered to 413 children in 2002 and to 444 children in 2015 with similar baseline characteristics. The prevalence of IAH was 33% in 2002 and 21% in 2015 (P < .001). A lower HbA1c, younger age at diagnosis and longer duration of diabetes correlated with IAH in 2002 but not in 2015. There was a significant decline in the rates of SH in 2015 compared with 2002 (P < .001) despite a reduced HbA1c in 2015. IAH increased the risk of SH in both cohorts (52 vs 16 events/100 patient years in 2002 and 8 vs 2 events/100 patient years in 2015).

CONCLUSIONS

Although IAH has reduced, IAH is still prevalent in a substantial minority of adolescents and continues to be associated with an increased risk of SH.

Insulin pump failures in Italian children with Type 1 diabetes: retrospective 1-year cohort study

AIMS

Insulin pump failure and/or malfunction requiring replacement have not been thoroughly investigated. This study evaluated pump replacement in children and adolescents with Type 1 diabetes using insulin pump therapy.

METHODS

Data were collected for all participants younger than 19 years, starting insulin pump therapy before 31 December 2013. For each child, age, disease duration, date of insulin pump therapy initiation, insulin pump model, failure/malfunction/replacement yes/no and reason were considered for the year 2013.

RESULTS

Data were returned by 40 of 43 paediatric centres belonging to the Diabetes Study Group of the Italian Society of Paediatric Endocrinology and Diabetology. In total, 1574 of 11 311 (13.9%) children and adolescents with Type 1 diabetes were using an insulin pump: 29.2% Animas VIBE^™ , 9.4% Medtronic MiniMed 715/515^™ , 34.3% Medtronic MiniMed VEO^™ , 24.3% Accu-Check Spirit Combo^™ and 2.8% other models. In 2013, 0.165 insulin pump replacements per patient-year (11.8% due to pump failure/malfunction and 4.7% due to accidental damage) were recorded. Animas VIBE^™ (22.1%) and Medtronic MiniMed VEO^™ (17.7%) were the most replaced.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large cohort of Italian children and adolescents with Type 1 diabetes, insulin pump failure/malfunction and consequent replacement are aligned with rates previously reported and higher in more sophisticated pump models.

Reexamining the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey for Parents of Young Children in a Sample of Children Using Insulin Pumps

BACKGROUND

We update the psychometric properties of the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey-Parents of Young Children (HFS-PYC), a 26-item measure of parents' hypoglycemia fear for young children using an insulin pump.

METHODS

We combined three similar datasets for the analyses. The data analyzed included parents' responses to the HFS-PYC and a demographic form. For a subset of children (n = 91), we also analyzed self-monitoring of blood glucose data. We used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to confirm the measure's original factor structure. Additional analyses examined reliability and validity of a revised HFS-PYC for parents of young children using pumps.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 116 parents (93% mothers). Mean child age and HbA1c were 5.2 ± 1.3 years and 8.2% ± 1.1%, respectively. CFA identified a 22-item two-factor solution (χ² (208, n = 116) = 368.688, P < 0.001, root mean square error of approximation = 0.08, comparative fit index = 0.94, and Tucker-Lewis index = 0.93) with factors corresponding to the original subscales: worry and behavior. The revised subscales demonstrated at least adequate internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha >0.65). Correlations revealed significant negative associations between current HFS-PYC worry scores and children's mean daily blood glucose and percent of very high glucose levels per day, suggesting less fear among parents of young children with elevated glycemic levels. In addition, there was a positive association with the percent of glucose levels in target, suggesting greater hypoglycemia fear among parents of children who have better control.

CONCLUSIONS

Results provide preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity of a reduced 22-item HFS-PYC for parents of children using insulin pumps.

Health-related quality of life in preschool children with Type 1 diabetes

AIMS

To describe health-related quality of life in children aged < 7 years with Type 1 diabetes mellitus compared with healthy children of the same age, and to investigate how health-related quality of life was correlated with aspects of insulin treatment and glycaemic control.

METHODS

The participants in this study were 24 children with diabetes (12 girls, mean age 4.5 years) and 27 healthy children (14 girls, mean age 4.6 years). All participants completed the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory 4.0 Generic Core Scales and the participants with diabetes also completed the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory 3.0 Type 1 Diabetes Module Scales. HbA1c levels were measured in children with diabetes and the plasma glucose meter memories were uploaded.

RESULTS

Children aged <7 years with diabetes had lower parent-rated generic health-related quality of life compared with healthy children (score: 80 vs 91; P = 0.003). The difference was largest in children aged < 5 years (score: 79 vs 93; P = 0.004). Among the parents of children with Type 1 diabetes, 22% rated their child's generic health-related quality of life to be at a level of concern (- 1 sd of a general population). Of the children with Type 1 diabetes aged between 5 and 7 years, 40% rated their own generic health-related quality of life at the same level of concern.

CONCLUSION

This study shows a significantly lower level of generic health-related quality of life in very young children with diabetes in comparison with healthy children. We suggest screening for health-related quality of life in children of all ages with Type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Hypoglycemia induced by insulin as a triggering factor of cognitive deficit in diabetic children

This paper provides an overview of insulin-induced hypoglycemia as a triggering factor of cognitive deficit in children with type 1 diabetes mellitus. For this purpose, databases from 1961 to 2013 were used with the objective of detecting the primary publications that address the impact of hypoglycemia on cognitive performance of diabetic children. The results obtained from experimental animals were excluded. The majority of studies demonstrated that the cognitive deficit in diabetic children involves multiple factors including duration, intensity, severity, and frequency of hypoglycemia episodes. Additionally, age at the onset of type 1 diabetes also influences the cognitive performance, considering that early inception of the disease is a predisposing factor for severe hypoglycemia. Furthermore, the results suggest that there is a strong correlation between brain damage caused by hypoglycemia and cognitive deterioration. Therefore, a more cautious follow-up and education are needed to impede and treat hypoglycemia in children with diabetes mellitus.

Feasibility of overnight closed-loop therapy in young children with type 1 diabetes aged 3-6 years: comparison between diluted and standard insulin strength

OBJECTIVE

To assess feasibility of overnight closed-loop therapy in young children with type 1 diabetes and contrast closed loop using diluted versus standard insulin strength.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Eleven children (male 6; age range 3.75-6.96 years; glycated hemoglobin 60 (14) mmol/mol; body mass index SD score 1.0 (0.8); diabetes duration 2.2 (1.0) years, mean (SD); total daily dose 12.9 (10.6, 16.5) IU/day, median (IQR)) were studied at a clinical research facility on two occasions. In random order, participants received closed loop with diluted insulin aspart (CL_Dil; 20 IU/mL) or closed loop with standard aspart (CL_Std; 100 IU/mL) from 17:00 until 8:00 the following morning. Children consumed an evening meal at 17:00 (44 (12) gCHO) and an optional bedtime snack (6 (7) gCHO) identical on both occasions. Meal insulin boluses were calculated by standard pump bolus calculators. Basal rates on insulin pump were adjusted every 15 min as directed by a model-predictive-control algorithm informed by a real-time glucose sensor values.

RESULTS

Mean plasma glucose was 122 (24) mg/dL during CL_Dil vs 122 (23) mg/dL during CL_Std (p=0.993). The time spent in the target glucose range 70-145 mg/dL was 83 (70, 100)% vs 72 (54, 81)% (p=0.328). Time above 145 mg/dL was 13 (0, 27)% vs 19 (10, 45)% (p=0.477) and time spent below 70 mg/dL was 0.0 (0.0, 1.4)% vs 1.4 (0.0, 11.6)% (p=0.161). One asymptomatic hypoglycemia below 63 mg/dL occurred in one participant during CL_Dil versus six episodes in five participants during CL_Std (p=0.09). Glucose variability measured by CV of plasma glucose tended to be reduced during CL_Dil (20% (13, 31) vs 32% (24, 42), p=0.075).

CONCLUSIONS

In this feasibility study, closed-loop therapy maintained good overnight glucose control with tendency towards reduced hypoglycemia and reduced glucose variability using diluted insulin.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01557634.