Article

Continued Reduction in the Prevalence of Retinopathy in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes

Institute of Endocrinology and Diabetes, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Diabetes care (Impact Factor: 8.57). 11/2011; 34(11):2368-73. DOI: 10.2337/dc11-0102
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To examine trends in microvascular complications in adolescents with type 1 diabetes between 1990 and 2009 in Sydney, Australia.
We used analysis of complications in 1,604 adolescents (54% female, aged 12-20 years, median duration 8.6 years), stratified by four time periods using Generalized Estimation Equations as follows: T1 (1990-1994), T2 (1995-1999), T3 (2000-2004), and T4 (2005-2009). Early retinopathy was detected using seven-field fundal photography, albumin excretion rate (AER) using timed overnight urine collections, and albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR) and peripheral nerve function using thermal and vibration threshold.
Retinopathy declined (53, 38, 23, and 12%; P < 0.001), as did borderline elevation of AER/ACR (45, 30, 26, and 30%; P < 0.001) and microalbuminuria (8, 4, 3, and 3%; P = 0.006). Multiple daily injections (MDI)/continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) use increased (17, 54, 75, and 88%; P < 0.001), median HbA(1c) decreased (9.1, 8.9, 8.5, and 8.5%; P < 0.001), and severe hypoglycemia was unchanged (6, 8, 10, and 7%; P = 0.272). Retinopathy was associated with diabetes duration (odds ratio [OR] 1.12 [95% CI 1.08-1.17]), age (1.13 [1.06-1.20]), HbA(1c) (1.16 [1.08-1.25]), systolic blood pressure (BP) SDS (1.31 [1.16-1.48]), socioeconomic disadvantage (1.42 [1.04-1.95]), and 1 to 2 injections per day (vs. MDI/CSII; 1.35 [1.05-1.73]); borderline AER/ACR with male sex (1.32 [1.02-1.70]), age (1.19 [1.12-1.26]), HbA(1c) (1.18 [1.08-1.29]), weight SDS (1.31 [1.21-1.53]), insulin dose per kilograms (1.64 [1.13-2.39]), 1 to 2 injections per day (1.41 [1.08-1.84]), and socioeconomic disadvantage (1.68 [1.23-2.31]); and microalbuminuria with age (1.14 [1.01-1.29]), HbA(1c) (1.20 [1.05-1.37]), diastolic BP SDS (1.76 [1.26-2.46]), and 1 to 2 injections per day (1.95 [1.11-3.41]).
The decline in retinopathy supports contemporary guidelines that recommend lower glycemic targets and use of MDI/CSII in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Albert K F Chan, Apr 04, 2014
1 Follower
 · 
112 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this grounded theory study was to explore and discuss how fathers involved in caring for a child with type 1 diabetes experienced support from Swedish paediatric diabetes teams (PDTs) in everyday life with their child. Eleven fathers of children with type 1 diabetes, living in Sweden and scoring high on involvement on the Parental Responsibility Questionnaire, participated. Data were collected from January 2011 to August 2011, initially through online focus group discussions in which 6 of 19 invited fathers participated. Due to high attrition, the data collection continued in eight individual interviews. A semi-structured interview guide was used, and the fathers were asked to share experiences of their PDT's support in everyday life with their child. A simultaneous and constant comparison approach to data collection and analysis allowed the core category to emerge: the tension between general recommendations and personal experience. This core category illuminates how the fathers experienced tension between managing their unique everyday life with their child and balancing this to meet their PDT's expectations with regard to blood glucose levels. The core category was supported by two categories: the tension between the fathers'and their PDT's knowledge, whereby fathers reported discrepancies between their PDT's medical knowledge and their own unique knowledge of their child; and the tension between the fathers'and their PDT's goals, whereby the fathers identified differences between the familys' and their PDT's goals. As a dimension of the core category, fathers felt trust or distrust in their PDT. We conclude that to achieve high-quality support for children with diabetes and to enhance their health and well-being, involved fathers' knowledge of their unique family situation needs to be integrated into the diabetes treatment.
    Health & Social Care in the Community 11/2012; 21(3). DOI:10.1111/hsc.12013 · 1.15 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Glucose meters (GMs) are routinely used for self-monitoring of blood glucose by patients and for point-of-care glucose monitoring by health care providers in outpatient and inpatient settings. Although widely assumed to be accurate, numerous reports of inaccuracies with resulting morbidity and mortality have been noted. Insulin dosing errors based on inaccurate GMs are most critical. On October 28, 2011, the Diabetes Technology Society invited 45 diabetes technology clinicians who were attending the 2011 Diabetes Technology Meeting to participate in a closed-door meeting entitled New Criteria for Assessing the Accuracy of Blood Glucose Monitors. This report reflects the opinions of most of the attendees of that meeting. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the public, and several medical societies are currently in dialogue to establish a new standard for GM accuracy. This update to the FDA standard is driven by improved meter accuracy, technological advances (pumps, bolus calculators, continuous glucose monitors, and insulin pens), reports of hospital and outpatient deaths, consumer complaints about inaccuracy, and research studies showing that several approved GMs failed to meet FDA or International Organization for Standardization standards in postapproval testing. These circumstances mandate a set of new GM standards that appropriately match the GMs' analytical accuracy to the clinical accuracy required for their intended use, as well as ensuring their ongoing accuracy following approval. The attendees of the New Criteria for Assessing the Accuracy of Blood Glucose Monitors meeting proposed a graduated standard and other methods to improve GM performance, which are discussed in this meeting report.
    Journal of diabetes science and technology 03/2012; 6(2):466-74. DOI:10.1177/193229681200600236
  • Diabetes Technology &amp Therapeutics 04/2012; 14(6):449-52. DOI:10.1089/dia.2012.0078 · 2.29 Impact Factor