Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background/Objective The aim of this study was to systematically assess the association of insulin‐manipulation (intentional under‐ and/or overdosing of insulin), psychiatric comorbidity and diabetes complications. Methods Two diagnostic interviews (Diabetes‐Self‐Management‐Patient‐Interview and Children's‐Diagnostic‐Interview for Psychiatric Disorders) were conducted with 241 patients (age 10‐22) with type 1 diabetes (T1D) from 21 randomly selected Austrian diabetes care centers. Medical data was derived from medical records. Results Psychiatric comorbidity was found in nearly half of the patients with insulin‐manipulation (46.3%) compared to a rate of 17.5% in patients, adherent to the prescribed insulin therapy. Depression (18.3% vs 4.9%), specific phobia (21.1% vs 2.9%), social phobia (7.0% vs 0%), and eating disorders (12.7% vs 1.9%) were elevated in patients with insulin‐manipulation. Females (37.7%) were more often diagnosed (P = 0.001) with psychiatric disorders than males (18.4%). In females, the percentage of psychiatric comorbidity significantly increased with the level of non‐adherence to insulin therapy. Insulin‐manipulation had an effect of +0.89% in HbA1c (P = <0.001) compared to patients adherent to insulin therapy, while there was no association of psychiatric comorbidity with metabolic control (HbA1c 8.16% vs 8.12% [65.68 vs 65.25 mmol/mol]). Ketoacidosis, severe hypoglycemia, and frequency of outpatient visits in a diabetes center were highest in patients with insulin‐manipulation. Conclusions This is the first study using a systematic approach to assess the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in patients who do or do not manipulate insulin in terms of intentional under‐ and/or overdosing. Internalizing psychiatric disorders were associated with insulin‐manipulation, especially in female patients and insulin‐manipulation was associated with deteriorated metabolic control and diabetes complications.

Aims/hypothesisThe aim of this work was to evaluate geographical variability and trends in the prevalence of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), between 2006 and 2016, at the diagnosis of childhood-onset type 1 diabetes in 13 countries over three continents.MethodsAn international retrospective study on DKA at diagnosis of diabetes was conducted. Data on age, sex, date of diabetes diagnosis, ethnic minority status and presence of DKA at diabetes onset were obtained from Australia, Austria, Czechia, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Norway, Slovenia, Sweden, USA and the UK (Wales). Mean prevalence was estimated for the entire period, both overall and by country, adjusted for sex and age group. Temporal trends in annual prevalence of DKA were estimated using logistic regression analysis for each country, before and after adjustment for sex, age group and ethnic minority status.ResultsDuring the study period, new-onset type 1 diabetes was diagnosed in 59,000 children (median age [interquartile range], 9.0 years [5.5–11.7]; male sex, 52.9%). The overall adjusted DKA prevalence was 29.9%, with the lowest prevalence in Sweden and Denmark and the highest in Luxembourg and Italy. The adjusted DKA prevalence significantly increased over time in Australia, Germany and the USA while it decreased in Italy. Preschool children, adolescents and children from ethnic minority groups were at highest risk of DKA at diabetes diagnosis in most countries. A significantly higher risk was also found for females in Denmark, Germany and Slovenia.Conclusions/interpretationDKA prevalence at type 1 diabetes diagnosis varied considerably across countries, albeit it was generally high and showed a slight increase between 2006 and 2016. Increased awareness of symptoms to prevent delay in diagnosis is warranted, especially in preschool children, adolescents and children from ethnic minority groups.

Objective To evaluate the experiences of families with very young children aged 1 to 7 years (inclusive) with type 1 diabetes using day‐and‐night hybrid closed‐loop insulin delivery. Methods Parents/caregivers of 20 children aged 1 to 7 years with type 1 diabetes completed a closed‐loop experience survey following two 3‐week periods of unrestricted day‐and‐night hybrid closed‐loop insulin therapy using Cambridge FlorenceM system at home. Benefits, limitations, and improvements of closed‐loop technology were explored. Results Responders reported reduced burden of diabetes management, less time spent managing diabetes, and improved quality of sleep with closed‐loop. Ninety percent of the responders felt less worried about their child's glucose control using closed‐loop. Size of study devices, battery performance and connectivity issues were identified as areas for improvement. Parents/caregivers wished for more options to input information to the system such as temporary glucose targets. Conclusions Parents/caregivers of very young children reported important quality of life benefits associated with using closed‐loop, supporting adoption of this technology in this population.

The aim of this study was to assess accuracy of the three most commonly used continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems in almost real‐life situation during a diabetes camp in children with type 1 diabetes (T1D) aged 9–14 years. Data was gathered during a 2‐week summer camp under physicians' supervision. Out of 38 participating children with T1D (aged: 11.0 [9.9; 12.1] years; 57% girls, mean HbA1c 7.2 [6.9; 7.7] %,) 37 wore a CGM system (either Abbott FreeStyle Libre (FSL), Dexcom G6 (DEX) or Medtronic Enlite (ENL)) throughout the camp. All concomitantly available data pairs of capillary glucose measurements and sensor values were used for the analysis. Mean absolute relative difference (MARD) was calculated and Parkes Error Grid analyses were done for all three systems used. In total 2079 data pairs were available for analysis. The overall MARDs of CGM systems used at the camp was FSL: 13.3% (6.7;21.6). DEX: 10.3% (5.8; 16.7) and ENL 8.5% (3.6; 15.6). During eu‐, hypo‐ and hyperglycemia MARDs were lowest in ENL. Highest MARDs were seen in hypoglycemia, where all three systems exhibited MARDs above 15%. Overnight MARDs of all systems was higher than during daytime. All sensors performed worst in hypoglycemia. Performance of the adequately calibrated Medtronic system outperformed the factory‐calibrated sensors. For clinical practice, it is important to adequately train children with T1D and families in the correct procedures for sensors that require calibrations.

Objective Insulin dose‐adjusted hemoglobin A1c (HbA1C, IDAA1c) correlates well with stimulated C‐peptide levels, but has not yet been evaluated in a large cohort of patients with Type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods We investigated prevalence of partial remission (PREM) defined by IDAA1c ≤9 in 3657 in children with new‐onset T1D who were continuously followed over 6 years. We evaluated the predictors of PREM using the multicenter database from the DPV (Diabetes Patienten Verlaufsdokumentation) registry. Results PREM occurred in 71% of patients. Median duration was 9 (0‐21) months. Compared to children <5 years at T1D onset, those aged 5‐10 and ≥10 years had twice the chance of developing PREM (OR: 2.08, CI: 1.67‐2.60; P < .001 and OR: 2.16, CI: 1.70‐2.75; P < .001). Boys were more likely to develop PREM than girls (OR 1.41, CI: 1.18‐1.69; P = .0002). Further predictors for PREM were: ketoacidosis, autoantibodies, and HbA1c at T1D onset. These results were confirmed by quantile regression analysis with duration of PREM as dependent variable. Conclusion This research on a large cohort provides insight into epidemiologic characteristics of PREM in T1D defined by IDAA1c. As IDAA1c does not discriminate between insulin sensitivity and secretion, available data cannot resolve whether the sex‐difference in PREM reflects innate higher insulin resistance in girls, or better beta‐cell recovery in boys. Further research is needed to clarify the usefulness and performance of IDAA1c in clinical practice.

If pump therapy is not available, multiple daily injections (MDIs), with consideration of use of an injection port, should be used from the onset of diabetes (E). ○ For preschool children using intensive insulin therapy, preprandial administration of bolus insulin given for correction if blood glucose is high and for at least part of the meal is preferable to giving the whole dose during or after the meal (C). ○ Carbohydrate counting is best introduced at onset of diabetes (E). ○ The small insulin doses of preschool children may necessitate diluting insulin for precise dosing (E). ○ Syringes with ½ unit marking and pens with at least ½ unit dosing increments should be used to facilitate more accurate insulin dosing if a pump is not used (or as a back-up to pump use) (E). ○ Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) can be helpful as an approach to adjusting insulin doses (E). Weight, height (or length if <18 months), and Body Mass Index Standard Deviation Score (or percentiles) should be monitored on growth charts in all children with type 1 diabetes (E). Optimizing glycemic control for children in this age group often requires treatment using strategies that differ from those employed for older children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Screening and promotion of optimal health-related quality of life should be regularly undertaken in preschool children with type 1 diabetes as in any child with type 1 diabetes.

Objective To analyze the time trends of nationwide diabetes incidence <15 years of age from 1989 until 2017 in Austria. Methods The Austrian Diabetes Incidence Study Group registers all newly diagnosed patients with diabetes mellitus <15 years of age in a prospective population‐based study. The diabetes type was classified on the basis of clinical and laboratory findings according to American Diabetes Association criteria. Time trends were estimated by Joinpoint analysis. Results 1311 patients were diagnosed with type 1 diabetes (T1D) between 1989 and 1999 and 4624 patients with any type of diabetes (1999‐2017). T1D accounted for the majority of cases (94.2%), 1.8% were classified as type 2 (T2D) and 4.0% as other specific types of diabetes (1999‐2017). In the total cohort (age 0 to <15 years), a constant increase until 2012 (annual percent change [APC] 4.5, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.94, 5.06) was observed, followed by a leveling off with a corresponding drop (APC 0.28, 95%CI: −3.94, 4.69). This observation was mainly driven by the dynamic in the youngest age group (0‐4 years) with a steep increase until 2007 (APC 7.1, 95%CI: 5.05, 9.19) and a decrease from 2007 to 2017 (APC −0.86, 95%CI: 4.41, 2.82). No significant increase of T2D <15 years was detected. Over the observed time period (APC = 3.7, 95%CI: −0.30, 7.78). Conclusions The incidence of T1D is declining in young children aged 0 to 4 years, but is still rising in children 5 to 14 years in Austria. Incidence of T2D did not increase significantly and other specific types of diabetes occur twice as often compared to T2D.

Objectives To identify differences and similarities in HbA1c levels and patterns regarding age and gender in eight high‐income countries. Subjects 66 071 children and adolescents below18 years of age with type 1 diabetes for at least 3 months and at least one HbA1c measurement during the study period. Methods Pediatric Diabetes Quality Registry data from Austria, Denmark, England, Germany, Norway, Sweden, the United States, and Wales were collected between 2013 and 2014. HbA1c, gender, age, and duration were used in the analysis. Results Distribution of gender and age groups was similar in the eight participating countries. The mean HbA1c varied from 60 to 73 mmol/mol (7.6%‐8.8%) between the countries. The increase in HbA1c between the youngest (0‐9 years) to the oldest (15‐17 years) age group was close to 8 mmol/mol (0.7%) in all countries (P < .001). Females had a 1 mmol/mol (0.1%) higher mean HbA1c than boys (P < .001) in seven out of eight countries. Conclusions In spite of large differences in the mean HbA1c between countries, a remarkable similarity in the increase of HbA1c from childhood to adolescence was found.

This study aimed to analyze the effect of HbA1c variability on the occurrence of diabetic retinopathy in type 1 diabetes patients. 35,891 patients with childhood, adolescent or adult onset of type 1 diabetes from a large multicentre survey, the German/Austrian prospective documentation system (DPV), were analysed. Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine whether intra-individual HbA1c variability expressed as variation coefficient is an independent risk factor for the occurrence of diabetic retinopathy. Kaplan-Meier curves stratified by median HbA1c and variation coefficient revealed that retinopathy-free survival probability is lower when both median HbA1c and HbA1c variability are above the 50th percentile. Cox regression models confirmed this finding: After adjustment for age at diabetes onset, gender and median HbA1c, HbA1c variability was independently associated with the occurrence of diabetic retinopathy. Time-covariate interactions used to model non-proportionality indicated an effect decreasing with duration of diabetes for both median HbA1c and HbA1c variability. Predictive accuracy increased significantly when adding HbA1c variability to the Cox regression model. In patients with type 1 diabetes, HbA1c variability adds to the risk of diabetic retinopathy independently of average metabolic control.

Objectives We explored parents' views about healthcare professionals having remote access to their young child's insulin and glucose data during a clinical trial to inform use of data sharing in routine pediatric diabetes care. Research Design and Methods Interviews with 33 parents of 30 children (aged 1–7 years) with type 1 diabetes participating in a randomized trial (KidsAP02) comparing hybrid closed‐loop system use with sensor‐augmented pump therapy. Data were analyzed using a qualitative descriptive approach. Results Parents reported multiple benefits to healthcare professionals being able to remotely access their child's glucose and insulin data during the trial, despite some initial concerns regarding the insights offered into everyday family life. Key benefits included: less work uploading/sharing data; improved consultations; and, better clinical input and support from healthcare professionals between consultations. Parents noted how healthcare professionals' real‐time data access facilitated remote delivery of consultations during the COVID‐19 pandemic, and how these were more suitable for young children than face‐to‐face appointments. Parents endorsed use of real‐time data sharing in routine clinical care, subject to caveats regarding data access, security, and privacy. They also proposed that, if data sharing were used, consultations for closed‐loop system users in routine clinical care could be replaced with needs‐driven, ad‐hoc contact. Conclusions Real‐time data sharing can offer clinical, logistical, and quality‐of‐life benefits and enhance opportunities for remote consultations, which may be more appropriate for young children. Wider rollout would require consideration of ethical and cybersecurity issues and, given the heightened intrusion on families' privacy, a non‐judgmental, collaborative approach by healthcare professionals.