Browsing by Subject "Blood glucose self-monitoring"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    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
    (American Diabetes Association, 2021) Strategies to Enhance New CGM Use in Early Childhood (SENCE) Study Group; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    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.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Lived experience of CamAPS FX closed loop system in youth with type 1 diabetes and their parents
    (Wiley, 2022) Hood, Korey K.; Garcia-Willingham, Natasha; Hanes, Sarah; Tanenbaum, Molly L.; Ware, Julia; Boughton, Charlotte K.; Allen, Janet M.; Wilinska, Malgorzata E.; Tauschmann, Martin; Denvir, Louise; Thankamony, Ajay; Campbell, Fiona; Wadwa, R. Paul; Buckingham, Bruce A.; Davis, Nikki; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Mauras, Nelly; Besser, Rachel E. J.; Ghatak, Atrayee; Weinzimer, Stuart A.; Fox, D. Steven; Kanapka, Lauren; Kollman, Craig; Sibayan, Judy; Beck, Roy W.; Hovorka, Roman; DAN05 Consortium
    Aim: To examine changes in the lived experience of type 1 diabetes after use of hybrid closed loop (CL), including the CamAPS FX CL system. Materials and methods: The primary study was conducted as an open-label, single-period, randomized, parallel design contrasting CL versus insulin pump (with or without continuous glucose monitoring). Participants were asked to complete patient-reported outcomes before starting CL and 3 and 6 months later. Surveys assessed diabetes distress, hypoglycaemia concerns and quality of life. Qualitative focus group data were collected at the completion of the study. Results: In this sample of 98 youth (age range 6-18, mean age 12.7 ± 2.8 years) and their parents, CL use was not associated with psychosocial benefits overall. However, the subgroup (n = 12) using the CamAPS FX system showed modest improvements in quality of life and parent distress, reinforced by both survey (p < .05) and focus group responses. There were no negative effects of CL use reported by study participants. Conclusions: Closed loop use via the CamAPS FX system was associated with modest improvements in aspects of the lived experience of managing type 1 diabetes in youth and their families. Further refinements of the system may optimize the user experience.