An Occlusive Hydrocolloid-Based Patch Is Effective, Feasible, and Safe As a Treatment of Irritant Contact Dermatitis Due to Diabetes Devices in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes

Irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) occurs frequently with the use of diabetes devices, but no guidelines for treatment exist. Since subsequent devices need intact skin for intended use, quick healing is crucial. Normal wound healing is expected to be 7-10 days. This was a single-center cross-over study that investigated the effectiveness of an occlusive hydrocolloid-based patch versus nonocclusive treatment of ICD. Participants were aged 6-20 years with active ICD caused by using diabetes device. First study period was patch treatment for 3 days. A control arm was initiated if a new ICD occurred within 30 days. ICD healed completely in 21% of the patch group but none in the controls. Itching was reported as an adverse event (AE) in both arms, but only one additional AE was noted in the patch arm: an infection at a different site from investigated. The hydrocolloid-based patch showed signs of faster healing of ICD with no additional AEs, but larger studies are needed.

A Cross-Sectional Pilot Survey of Rural Clinic Attitudes and Proficiency with Insulin Pumps and Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices

Purpose: To examine the perceptions, proficiencies, and barriers of diabetes device use among rural clinic providers. Methods: A total of 210 surveys were sent through e-mail and/or U.S. Postal Service to rural clinics throughout Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, and Utah based on discussions with rural clinic network leadership in the states. Responses were included if the participant was 18 years of age and older, and worked at a rural clinic as a physician, physician assistant, nurse, nurse practitioner, allied health worker, or clinic manager. Results: Respondents included clinic management (13%), midlevel providers (physician assistants and nurse practitioners) and allied health workers (pharmacists, dietitians, and social workers, 30.8%), nurses (30.8%), and physicians (23.1%). We had a low response rate (20%; n = 41), but of those who said they work with patients who have diabetes, only 47.4% indicated that they use diabetes devices as part of their patients' treatment. The most common barrier reported among respondents suggested that additional medical team expertise is needed in their community or clinic to adopt insulin pumps and/or continuous glucose monitoring for qualified patients (75.9% and 80.8%, respectively). Conclusion: Lack of provider experience and having patients managed by out-of-area experts were the biggest reasons for providers not seeing or managing patients using these devices. Lack of provider access, patient satisfaction with current diabetes regimens, unsupportive health care team, patient literacy, and patient fear showed limited to negligible endorsements from survey respondents. A variety of potential solutions to this problem of limited provider experience and training are also offered.