Article

Factors predictive of severe hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes: analysis from the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation continuous glucose monitoring randomized control trial dataset.

Diabetes care (Impact Factor: 7.74). 03/2011; 34(3):586-90. DOI: 10.2337/dc10-1111
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Identify factors predictive of severe hypoglycemia (SH) and assess the clinical utility of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) to warn of impending SH.
In a multicenter randomized clinical trial, 436 children and adults with type 1 diabetes were randomized to a treatment group that used CGM (N = 224), or a control group that used standard home blood glucose monitoring (N = 212) and completed 12 months of follow-up. After 6 months, the original control group initiated CGM while the treatment group continued use of CGM for 6 months. Baseline risk factors for SH were evaluated over 12 months of follow-up using proportional hazards regression. CGM-derived indices of hypoglycemia were used to predict episodes of SH over a 24-h time horizon.
The SH rate was 17.9 per 100 person-years, and a higher rate was associated with the occurrence of SH in the prior 6 months and female sex. SH frequency increased eightfold when 30% of CGM values were ≤ 70 mg/dL on the prior day (4.5 vs. 0.5%; P < 0.001), but the positive predictive value (PPV) was low (<5%). Results were similar for hypoglycemic area under the curve and the low blood glucose index calculated by CGM.
SH in the 6 months prior to the study was the strongest predictor of SH during the study. CGM-measured hypoglycemia over a 24-h span is highly associated with SH the following day (P < 0.001), but the PPV is low.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
85 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives Optimizing glycemic control in pediatric type 1 diabetes (T1D) is essential to minimizing long-term risk of complications. We used the T1D Exchange database from 58 US diabetes clinics to identify differences in diabetes management characteristics among children categorized as having excellent vs. poor glycemic control.Methods Among registry participants 6–17 yr old with diabetes duration ≥2 yr, those with excellent control [(A1c <7%)(53 mmol/mol) (N = 588)] were compared with those with poor control [(A1c ≥9% )(75 mmol/mol) (N = 2684)] using logistic regression.ResultsThe excellent and poor control groups differed substantially in diabetes management (p < 0.001 for all) with more of the excellent control group using insulin pumps, performing blood glucose monitoring ≥5×/d, missing fewer boluses, bolusing before meals rather than at the time of or after a meal, using meal-specific insulin:carbohydrate ratios, checking their blood glucose prior to giving meal time insulin, giving insulin for daytime snacks, giving more bolus insulin, and using a lower mean total daily insulin dose than those in poor control. After adjusting for demographic and socioeconomic factors, diabetes management characteristics were still strongly associated with good vs. poor control. Notably, frequency of severe hypoglycemia was similar between the groups while DKA was more common in the poorly controlled group.Conclusions Children with excellent glycemic control tend to exhibit markedly different diabetes self-management techniques than those with poor control. This knowledge may further inform diabetes care providers and patients about specific characteristics and behaviors that can be augmented to potentially improve glycemic control.
    Pediatric Diabetes 03/2014; 15(2). · 2.08 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE Optimizing glycemic control in type 1 diabetes is important to minimize the risk of complications. We used the large T1D Exchange Clinic Registry database to identify characteristics and diabetes management techniques in adults with type 1 diabetes, differentiating those under excellent glycemic control from those with poorer control.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS The cross-sectional analysis included 627 participants with HbA1c <6.5% (excellent control) and 1,267 with HbA1c ≥8.5% (fair/poor control) at enrollment who were ≥26 years of age (mean ± SD 45.9 ± 13.2 years), were not using continuous glucose monitoring, and had type 1 diabetes for ≥2 years (22.8 ± 13.0 years).RESULTSCompared with the fair/poor control group, participants in the excellent control group had higher socioeconomic status, were more likely to be older and married, were less likely to be overweight, were more likely to exercise frequently, and had lower total daily insulin dose per kilogram (P < 0.0001 for each). Excellent control was associated with more frequent self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), giving mealtime boluses before a meal rather than at the time of or after a meal, performing SMBG before giving a bolus, and missing an insulin dose less frequently (P < 0.0001 for each). Frequency of severe hypoglycemia was similar between groups, whereas diabetic ketoacidosis was more common in the fair/poor control group.CONCLUSIONS Diabetes self-management related to insulin delivery, glucose monitoring, and lifestyle tends to differ among adults with type 1 diabetes under excellent control compared with those under poorer control. Future studies should focus on modifying diabetes management skills in adult type 1 diabetes patients with suboptimal glycemic control.
    Diabetes care 09/2013; · 7.74 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Severe hypoglycemia is a major complication of insulin treatment in patients with type 1 diabetes, limiting full realization of glycemic control. It has been shown in the past that low levels of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), a marker of average plasma glucose, predict a high risk of severe hypoglycemia, but it is uncertain whether this association still exists. Based on advances in diabetes technology and pharmacotherapy, we hypothesized that the inverse association between severe hypoglycemia and HbA1c has decreased in recent years. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We analyzed data of 37,539 patients with type 1 diabetes (mean age ± standard deviation 14.4±3.8 y, range 1-20 y) from the DPV (Diabetes Patienten Verlaufsdokumentation) Initiative diabetes cohort prospectively documented between January 1, 1995, and December 31, 2012. The DPV cohort covers an estimated proportion of >80% of all pediatric diabetes patients in Germany and Austria. Associations of severe hypoglycemia, hypoglycemic coma, and HbA1c levels were assessed by multivariable regression analysis. From 1995 to 2012, the relative risk (RR) for severe hypoglycemia and coma per 1% HbA1c decrease declined from 1.28 (95% CI 1.19-1.37) to 1.05 (1.00-1.09) and from 1.39 (1.23-1.56) to 1.01 (0.93-1.10), respectively, corresponding to a risk reduction of 1.2% (95% CI 0.6-1.7, p<0.001) and 1.9% (0.8-2.9, p<0.001) each year, respectively. Risk reduction of severe hypoglycemia and coma was strongest in patients with HbA1c levels of 6.0%-6.9% (RR 0.96 and 0.90 each year) and 7.0%-7.9% (RR 0.96 and 0.89 each year). From 1995 to 2012, glucose monitoring frequency and the use of insulin analogs and insulin pumps increased (p<0.001). Our study was not designed to investigate the effects of different treatment modalities on hypoglycemia risk. Limitations are that associations between diabetes education and physical activity and severe hypoglycemia were not addressed in this study. CONCLUSIONS: The previously strong association of low HbA1c with severe hypoglycemia and coma in young individuals with type 1 diabetes has substantially decreased in the last decade, allowing achievement of near-normal glycemic control in these patients. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.
    PLoS Medicine 10/2014; 2014 Oct 7;11(10):e1001742. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001742. eCollection 2014 Oct.. · 15.25 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

Download
24 Downloads
Available from
Jun 2, 2014