The impact of structured self-monitoring of blood glucose on clinical, behavioral, and psychosocial outcomes among adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is considered of little clinical benefit for adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, but no comprehensive review of a structured approach to SMBG has been published to date. Purpose: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of sSMBG on HbA1c, treatment modifications, behavioral and psychosocial outcomes, and; examine the moderating effects of sSMBG protocol characteristics on HbA1c. Data sources: Four databases searched (November 2020; updated: February 2022). Study selection: Inclusion criteria: non-randomized and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective observational studies; reporting effect of sSMBG on stated outcomes; among adults (≥18 years) with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. Studies excluded if involving children or people with insulin-treated or other forms of diabetes. Data extraction and analysis: Outcome data extracted, and risk of bias/quality assessed independently by two researchers. Meta-analysis was conducted for RCTs, and moderators explored (HbA1c only). Data synthesis: From 2,078 abstracts, k=23 studies were included (N=5,372). Risk of bias was evident and study quality was low. Outcomes assessed included: HbA1c (k=23), treatment modification (k=16), psychosocial/behavioral outcomes (k=12). Meta-analysis revealed a significant mean difference favoring sSMBG in HbA1c (-0·29%, 95% CI: -0·46 to -0·11, k=13) and diabetes self-efficacy (0.17%, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.33, k=2). Meta-analysis revealed no significant moderating effects by protocol characteristics. Limitations: Findings limited by heterogeneity in study designs, intervention characteristics, and psychosocial assessments. Conclusion: A small positive effect of sSMBG on HbA1c and diabetes self-efficacy was observed. Narrative synthesis of sSMBG intervention characteristics may guide future implementation. PROSPERO registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020208857, identifier CRD42020208857.

Low-Intensity mental health Support via a Telehealth Enabled Network for adults with diabetes (LISTEN): protocol for a hybrid type 1 effectiveness implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Mental health problems are common among people with diabetes. However, evidence-based strategies for the prevention and early intervention of emotional problems in people with diabetes are lacking. Our aim is to assess the real-world effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and implementation of a Low-Intensity mental health Support via a Telehealth Enabled Network (LISTEN), facilitated by diabetes health professionals (HPs). METHODS: A hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation trial, including a two-arm parallel randomised controlled trial, alongside mixed methods process evaluation. Recruited primarily via the National Diabetes Services Scheme, Australian adults with diabetes (N = 454) will be eligible if they are experiencing elevated diabetes distress. Participants are randomised (1:1 ratio) to LISTEN-a brief, low-intensity mental health support program based on a problem-solving therapy framework and delivered via telehealth (intervention) or usual care (web-based resources about diabetes and emotional health). Data are collected via online assessments at baseline (T0), 8 weeks (T1) and 6 months (T2, primary endpoint) follow-up. The primary outcome is between-group differences in diabetes distress at T2. Secondary outcomes include the immediate (T1) and longer-term (T2) effect of the intervention on psychological distress, general emotional well-being, and coping self-efficacy. A within-trial economic evaluation will be conducted. Implementation outcomes will be assessed using mixed methods, according to the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Data collection will include qualitative interviews and field notes. DISCUSSION: It is anticipated that LISTEN will reduce diabetes distress among adults with diabetes. The pragmatic trial results will determine whether LISTEN is effective, cost-effective, and should be implemented at scale. Qualitative findings will be used to refine the intervention and implementation strategies as required. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial has been registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN: ACTRN12622000168752) on 1 February, 2022.

'Is Insulin Right for Me?': Web-based intervention to reduce psychological barriers to insulin therapy among adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes-A randomised controlled trial.

AIMS: To test 'Is Insulin Right for Me?', a theory-informed, self-directed, web-based intervention designed to reduce psychological barriers to insulin therapy among adults with type 2 diabetes. Further, to examine resource engagement and associations between minimum engagement and outcomes. METHODS: Double-blind, two-arm randomised controlled trial (1:1), comparing the intervention with freely available online information (control). Eligible participants were Australian adults with type 2 diabetes, taking oral diabetes medications, recruited primarily via national diabetes registry. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: prior use of injectable medicines; being 'very willing' to commence insulin. Data collections were completed online at baseline, 2-week and 6-month follow-up. PRIMARY OUTCOME: negative insulin treatment appraisal scale (ITAS) scores; secondary outcomes: positive ITAS scores and hypothetical willingness to start insulin. ANALYSES: intention-to-treat (ITT); per-protocol (PP) examination of outcomes by engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12621000191897. RESULTS: No significant ITT between-arm (intervention: n = 233; control: n = 243) differences were observed in primary (2 weeks: Mdiff [95% CI]: -1.0 [-2.9 to 0.9]; 6 months: -0.01 [-1.9 to 1.9]), or secondary outcomes at either follow-up. There was evidence of lower Negative ITAS scores at 2-week, but not 6-month, follow-up among those with minimum intervention engagement (achieved by 44%) compared to no engagement (-2.7 [-5.1 to -0.3]). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to existing information, 'Is insulin right for me?' did not improve outcomes at either timepoint. Small intervention engagement effects suggest it has potential. Further research is warranted to examine whether effectiveness would be greater in a clinical setting, following timely referral among those for whom insulin is clinically indicated.

The experiences and support needs of students with diabetes at university: An integrative literature review.

AIMS: Commencing university presents particular challenges for young adults with diabetes. This integrative literature review aimed to synthesise the research exploring the experiences and support needs of university students with diabetes. METHODS: Medline, CINAHL, PsychInfo and EMBASE databases were searched for quantitative and qualitative studies, among undergraduate and postgraduate students with type 1 or type 2 diabetes conducted in the university setting. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full-text articles. Data were analysed thematically and synthesised narratively utilising the ecological model as a framework for interpreting findings and making recommendations. RESULTS: We identified 25 eligible papers (20 studies) utilising various methods: individual interview, focus group, survey, online forum. Four themes were identified: barriers to self-care (e.g. lack of structure and routine); living with diabetes as a student; identity, stigma and disclosure; and strategies for managing diabetes at university. Students in the early years at university, recently diagnosed or moved away from home, reported more self-care difficulties, yet few accessed university support services. Risky alcohol-related behaviours, perceived stigma and reluctance to disclose diabetes inhibited optimal diabetes management. CONCLUSION: Despite the heterogeneity of studies, consistent themes related to diabetes self-care difficulties and risky behaviours were reported by young adults with diabetes transitioning to university life. No effective interventions to support students with diabetes were identified in this setting. Multilevel approaches to support students to balance the competing demands of study and diabetes self-care are needed, particularly in the early years of university life.

Feasibility and acceptability of e-learning to upskill diabetes educators in supporting people experiencing diabetes distress: a pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes distress is a commonly experienced negative emotional response to the ongoing burden of diabetes. Holistic diabetes care, including attention to diabetes distress, is recommended in clinical guidelines, yet not routinely implemented. Diabetes health professionals have highlighted lack of training as a barrier to implementation of psychological care. Therefore, we developed an e-learning: 'Diabetes distress e-learning: A course for diabetes educators' to address this need. This pilot study aimed to examine the feasibility of evaluating the e-learning in a randomised controlled trial study, the acceptability of the e-learning to credentialled diabetes educators (CDEs); and preliminary evidence of its effect upon CDEs' diabetes distress-related knowledge, motivation, confidence, behavioural skills, and barriers to implementation. METHODS: A pilot, unblinded, 2-armed, parallel group randomised controlled trial. Participants were recruited during a 4-month timeframe. Eligible participants were CDEs for ≥ 1 year providing care to ≥ 10 adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes per week. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1 computer automated) to 1 of 2 learning activities: diabetes distress e-learning (intervention) or diabetes distress chapter (active control). They had 4 weeks to access the activity. They completed online surveys at baseline, 2-week and 12-week follow-up. RESULTS: Seventy-four eligible CDEs (36 intervention, 38 active control) participated. At baseline, recognition of the clinical importance of diabetes distress was high but knowledge and confidence to provide support were low-to-moderate. Engagement with learning activities was high (intervention: 83%; active control: 92%). Fifty-five percent returned at least 1 follow-up survey. All 30 intervention participants who returned the 2-week follow-up survey deemed the e-learning high quality and relevant. Systemic barriers (e.g., financial limitations and access to mental health professionals) to supporting people with diabetes distress were common at baseline and follow-up.  CONCLUSIONS: The e-learning was acceptable to CDEs. The study design was feasible but needs modification to improve follow-up survey return. The e-learning showed potential for improving diabetes distress-related knowledge, confidence and asking behaviours, but systemic barriers to implementation remained. Systemic barriers need to be addressed to facilitate implementation of support for diabetes distress in clinical practice. Future larger-scale evaluation of the e-learning is warranted.

Enhancing the capacity of the health workforce to deliver best practice diabetes care.

Diabetes prevalence is increasing; the technologies and medicines used to manage diabetes have become more complex, and the specialist health workforce with qualifications in diabetes is insufficient. Generalist health professionals have limited diabetes knowledge, despite engaging with people with diabetes in healthcare daily. An innovative framework is needed to align with the Australian National Diabetes Strategy to build a competent, flexible and adaptive workforce to promote excellence in diabetes care. A three-staged modified Delphi technique was used to identify a consensus Capability Framework for Diabetes Care (the 'Framework'). An implementation phase followed, involving representation from people with diabetes and key health professional organisations to co-design and implement the 'Framework'. The 'Framework' can guide curricula at universities and TAFE institutes, and the professional development and practice of Australian nurses, allied health professionals, First Nations Australians health workers and practitioners, pharmacists, midwives and health assistants when delivering care to people living with diabetes. The 'Framework' defines nine core capabilities that healthcare providers require to deliver diabetes care effectively, underpinned by three sets of attributes for seven practice levels to enable the workforce. Information within the practice levels provides a nationally consistent approach to learning and training different healthcare providers in the essential elements of diabetes care. A 'living' evidence-based national 'Framework' for the whole health workforce and associated online resources will help promote a more responsive health workforce delivering better and more equitable diabetes care.

Web-based intervention to reduce psychological barriers to insulin therapy among adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes: study protocol for a two-armed randomised controlled trial of 'Is insulin right for me?'.

INTRODUCTION: Psychological barriers to insulin therapy are associated with the delay of clinically indicated treatment intensification for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D), yet few evidence-based interventions exist to address these barriers. We describe the protocol for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) examining the efficacy of a novel, theoretically grounded, psychoeducational, web-based resource designed to reduce psychological barriers to insulin among adults with non-insulin treated T2D: 'Is insulin right for me?'. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Double-blind, parallel group RCT. A target sample of N=392 participants (n=196/arm) will be randomised (1:1) to 'Is insulin right for me?' (intervention) or widely available online resources (control). Eligible participants include adults (18-75 years), residing in Australia, currently taking oral hypoglycaemic agents to manage T2D. They will be primarily recruited via invitations and reminders from the national diabetes registry (from a purposefully selected sample of N≥12 000). EXCLUSION CRITERIA: experience of self-administered injectable; previously enrolled in pilot RCT; 'very willing' to start insulin as baseline. Outcomes will be assessed via online survey at 2 weeks and 6 months. Primary outcome between-group: difference in mean negative Insulin Treatment Appraisal Scores (ITAS negative) at 2-week and 6-month follow-up. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: between-group differences in mean positive insulin appraisals (ITAS positive) and percentage difference in intention to commence insulin at follow-up time points. All data analyses will be conducted according to the intention-to-treat principle. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Deakin University Human Research Ethics Committee (2020-073). Dissemination via peer-reviewed journals, conferences and a plain-language summary. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12621000191897; Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry.

'Is insulin right for me?': Feasibility of a pilot randomised controlled trial and acceptability of a web-based intervention to reduce psychological barriers to insulin therapy among adults with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: Acceptable and accessible interventions are needed to address 'psychological insulin resistance', which is a common barrier to insulin uptake among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Our aim was to test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) study design and acceptability of a theoretically grounded, psycho-educational, web-based resource to reduce negative insulin appraisals among adults with T2D. METHODS: A double-blinded, parallel group, two-arm pilot RCT (1:1), comparing intervention with active control (existing online information about insulin). Eligible participants were Australian adults with T2D, taking oral diabetes medications. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: prior use of injectable medicines; being 'very willing' to commence insulin. Primary outcomes: study feasibility (recruitment ease, protocol fulfilment, attrition, data completeness); secondary outcomes: intervention acceptability (intervention engagement, user feedback) and likely efficacy (negative Insulin Treatment Appraisal Scale [ITAS] scores at follow-up). Online surveys completed at baseline and 2 weeks. RESULTS: During 4-week recruitment, 76 people expressed interest: 51 eligible and 35 enrolled (intervention = 17, control = 18; median[interquartile range] age = 62[53, 69] years; 17 women). Protocol fulfilment achieved by 26 (74%) participants (n = 13 per arm), with low participant attrition (n = 6, 17%). Intervention acceptability was high (>80% endorsement, except format preference = 60%). ITAS negative scores differed between-groups at follow-up (M diff = -6.5, 95% confidence interval: -10.7 to -2.4), favouring the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This novel web-based resource ("Is insulin right for me?") is acceptable and associated with a likely reduction in negative insulin appraisals, relative to existing resources. This pilot shows the study design is feasible and supports conduct of a fully powered RCT.

'For me, it didn't seem as drastic a step as being controlled by insulin': A qualitative investigation of expectations and experiences of non-insulin injectable therapy among adults with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: This qualitative study aims to explore beliefs, attitudes and experiences of injectable glucagon-like-peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) use and discontinuation, as well as attitudes to further injectable treatment intensification, among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: Nineteen in-depth semi-structured interviews lasting (mean ± standard deviation) 45 ± 18 min were conducted, face-to-face (n = 14) or via telephone (n = 5). Transcripts were analysed using inductive template analyses. Eligible participants were English-speaking adults with T2D who had recently initiated (≤3 years) GLP-1RA treatment. RESULTS: Participants were aged 28-72 years, who predominantly lived in metropolitan areas (n = 15), and had an experience of daily (n = 11) and/or once-weekly (n = 13) GLP-1RA formulations. Six participants had discontinued treatment and seven had trialled two or more formulations. Expectations and experiences of GLP-1RA were related to the perceived: (1) symbolism and stigma of injectable diabetes treatment; (2) ease of injectable administration and device preferences; (3) treatment convenience and social impact; (4) treatment efficacy and benefits, and; (5) negative treatment side effects. Some participants reported increased receptiveness to insulin therapy following their GLP-1RA experience, others emphasised unique concerns about insulin beyond injectable administration. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a novel understanding of expectations and experience of non-insulin injectables among Australian adults with T2D. Our data suggest expectations may be informed by attitudes to insulin therapy, while perceived treatment benefits (e.g. weight-related benefits, administration frequency) may motivate uptake and ongoing use despite concerns. Experience of GLP-1RA injections may impact receptiveness to future insulin use.

'Is Insulin Right for Me?' Development of a theory-informed, web-based resource for reducing psychological barriers to insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a theory and evidence-based web intervention to reduce psychological barriers towards insulin therapy among adults with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: Salient psychological barriers towards insulin were identified from the literature and classified using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Relevant TDF domains were mapped to evidence-based behaviour change techniques (BCTs), which informed the content for each barrier. Acceptability was explored using cognitive debriefing interviews (n=6 adults with T2D). RESULTS: 'Is Insulin Right for Me' addresses eight barriers, phrased as common questions: Does insulin mean my diabetes is more serious? Do insulin injections cause complications? Is it my fault I need to inject insulin? Will I gain weight? Will injecting hurt? What about hypos? Will injecting insulin be a burden? What will others think of me? BCTs, including persuasive communication and modelling/demonstration, were delivered using appropriate methods (eg, demonstration of the injection process). Participant suggestions for improvement included clear and direct messages, normalising insulin and avoiding confronting images. CONCLUSIONS: 'Is Insulin Right for Me' is the first theory and evidence-based, web intervention designed to reduce psychological barriers towards insulin therapy for adults with T2D. Evaluation is needed to determine its impact on negative appraisals and receptiveness towards insulin.

Developing a novel diabetes distress e-learning program for diabetes educators: an intervention mapping approach.

Diabetes distress is a common negative emotional response to the ongoing burden of living with diabetes. Elevated diabetes distress is associated with impaired diabetes self-management and quality of life yet rarely identified and addressed in clinical practice. Health professionals report numerous barriers to the provision of care for diabetes distress, including lack of skills and confidence, but few diabetes distress training opportunities exist. The purpose of this paper is to describe how we utilized Intervention Mapping to plan the development, implementation, and evaluation of a novel diabetes distress e-learning program for diabetes educators, to meet a well-documented need and significant gap in diabetes care. A multidisciplinary team (combining expertise in research, health and clinical psychology, diabetes education, nursing, tertiary education, and website architecture) developed a diabetes distress e-learning program. We followed a six-step process (logic model of the problem, program outcomes and objectives, program design, program production, program implementation plan, and evaluation plan) known as Intervention Mapping. The program is underpinned by educational and psychological theory, including Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives and social cognitive theory. We developed a short (estimated 4 h) e-learning program for diabetes educators, which draws on the content of the Diabetes and Emotional Health handbook and toolkit. It integrates a 7As model, which provides a stepwise approach to identifying and addressing diabetes distress. Our diabetes distress e-learning program has been developed systematically, guided by an Intervention Mapping approach. In the next phase of the project, we will trial the e-learning.

Diabetes distress is more strongly associated with HbA1c than depressive symptoms in adolescents with type 1 diabetes: Results from Diabetes MILES Youth-Australia.

BACKGROUND: Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is higher during adolescence than at any other life stage. Some research among adolescents indicates that depressive symptoms are associated with suboptimal HbA1c. However, research among adults suggests diabetes distress is a stronger predictor of HbA1c than depressive symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative contributions of depressive symptoms and diabetes distress to explain the variance in HbA1c among adolescents with type 1 diabetes. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Diabetes MILES Youth Study respondents aged 13 to 19 years completed questionnaires assessing depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire for Adolescents: PHQA-8), diabetes distress (Problem Areas in Diabetes-Teen version: PAID-T), and self-reported socio-demographic and clinical variables, including their most recent HbA1c. Stepwise hierarchical multiple regression was conducted to examine the contributions of depressive symptoms and diabetes distress to HbA1c. RESULTS: Participants (N = 450) had a (mean ± SD) age of 15.7 ± 1.9 years; diabetes duration of 6.9 ± 4.3 years; and 38% (n = 169) were male. Twenty-one percent (n = 96) experienced moderate-to-severe depressive symptoms (PHQA-8 ≥ 11) and 36% (n = 162) experienced high diabetes distress (PAID-T > 90). In the final regression model, HbA1c was explained by: diabetes duration (ß = .14, P = .001), self-monitoring of blood glucose (ß = -.20, P < .001), and diabetes distress (ß = .30, P < .001). Following the addition of diabetes distress, depressive symptoms were no longer significantly associated with HbA1c (P = .551). The final model explained 18% of the variance in HbA1c. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with evidence from studies among adults, diabetes distress mediated the relationship between depressive symptoms and HbA1c among adolescents with type 1 diabetes. These findings suggest that clinicians need to be aware of diabetes distress.

Cut Points for Identifying Clinically Significant Diabetes Distress in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes Using the PAID-T: Results From Diabetes MILES Youth-Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To establish cut point(s) for the Problem Areas in Diabetes-teen version (PAID-T) scale to identify adolescents with clinically meaningful, elevated diabetes distress. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were available from the Diabetes Management and Impact for Long-term Empowerment and Success (MILES) Youth-Australia Study, a national survey assessing various psychosocial indicators among self-selected National Diabetes Services Scheme registrants. Participants in the current study (n = 537) were (mean ± SD) 16 ± 2 years old, had type 1 diabetes for 6 ± 4 years, and 62% (n = 334) were girls. They completed measures of diabetes distress (PAID-T) and depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire for Adolescents) and self-reported their most recent HbA1c and frequency of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). Relationships between the PAID-T and the psychological and clinical variables were examined to identify a clinically meaningful threshold for elevated diabetes distress. ANOVA was used to test whether these variables differed by levels of distress. RESULTS: Two cut points distinguished none-to-mild (<70), moderate (70-90), and high (>90) diabetes distress. Moderate distress was experienced by 18% of adolescents and high distress by 36%. Mean depressive symptoms, self-reported HbA1c, and SMBG differed significantly across the three levels of diabetes distress (all P < 0.001), with moderate-to-large effect sizes. CONCLUSIONS: Using the PAID-T, this study defined two clinically meaningful cut points to distinguish none-to-mild, moderate, and high diabetes distress in adolescents (aged 13-19). Based on these cut points, most respondents experienced at least moderate diabetes distress, which was clinically significant. Establishing thresholds for elevated diabetes distress will aid clinicians and researchers to interpret PAID-T scores, prompt discussion and intervention for those with unmet needs, and enable the effectiveness of interventions to be evaluated.

Strengths, Risk Factors, and Resilient Outcomes in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: Results From Diabetes MILES Youth-Australia.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the challenges of living with type 1 diabetes, many adolescents achieve "resilient outcomes": high engagement in self-management behaviors such as self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), good quality of life (QOL), and within-target glycemic outcomes (HbA1c). Adaptive diabetes-related behaviors (i.e., "strengths") are associated with resilient outcomes, yet the combination of risks and strengths in relation to resilient outcomes is unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate relations among diabetes strengths and resilient outcomes in the context of psychological and family risk factors. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 471 Australian adolescents with type 1 diabetes (mean age 15.7 ± 1.9 years; diabetes duration 6.9 ± 4.2 years; 62% female; 53% using insulin pumps) completed a national cross-sectional survey about their diabetes-related strengths, risk factors (depressive/anxiety symptoms, family conflict), and resilient outcomes (SMBG frequency, general QOL, HbA1c). RESULTS: Greater diabetes strengths were significantly related to resilient outcomes: more frequent SMBG (r = 0.39), lower HbA1c (r = -0.31), and higher general QOL (r = 0.50), as well as to lower risks: fewer depressive (r = -0.45) and anxiety (r = -0.40) symptoms and less conflict (r = 0.28). In multivariate regressions, diabetes strengths consistently related to all resilient outcomes beyond significant risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: In a large sample of Australian adolescents, diabetes strengths were strongly related to key resilient outcomes, even in the presence of well-documented psychological and family risk factors. More research is needed to determine whether strengths reduce or buffer other risks. Given the associations with self-management, HbA1c, and general QOL, monitoring and enhancing diabetes strengths may support resilience promotion during a vulnerable developmental period.

Severe hypoglycemia, impaired awareness of hypoglycemia, and self-monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes: Results from Diabetes MILES-Australia.

AIMS: To assess prevalence of severe hypoglycemia, awareness and symptoms of hypoglycemia, and their associations with self-monitoring of blood glucose. METHODS: Diabetes MILES-Australia Study participants completed validated questionnaires and study-specific items. RESULTS: Of 642 adults with type 1 diabetes, 21% reported ≥1 severe hypoglycemic event in the past six months, and 21% reported impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH). Severe hypoglycemia was increased four-fold for those with IAH compared with intact awareness (1.4±3.9 versus 0.3±1.0). Of those with IAH, 92% perceived autonomic and 88% neuroglycopenic symptoms, albeit at lower glucose thresholds compared to people with intact awareness. Those with IAH were more likely to perceive both symptom types at the same glucose level or to perceive neuroglycopenic symptoms first (all p<0.001). Eighteen percent with IAH treated hypoglycemia only when they perceived symptoms and another 18% only when their capillary glucose was <3.0mmol/L. CONCLUSIONS: One in five adults with type 1 diabetes had IAH or experienced severe hypoglycemia in the past sixmonths. Total loss of hypoglycemia symptoms was rare; most people with IAH retained autonomic symptoms, perceived at relatively low glucose levels. Frequent self-monitoring of blood glucose prompted early recognition and treatment of hypoglycemia, suggesting severe hypoglycemia risk can be minimized.

The Use of Mobile Applications Among Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes: Results from Diabetes MILES Youth-Australia.

BACKGROUND: The use of mobile applications ("apps") for diabetes management is a rapidly developing area and has relevance to adolescents who tend to be early technology adopters. Apps may be useful for supporting self-management or connecting young people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) with their peers. However, outside controlled trials testing the effectiveness of apps, little is known about app usage in this population. Our aim was to explore app usage among adolescents with T1D. METHODS: Diabetes MILES Youth-Australia is a national, online cross-sectional survey focused on behavioral and psychosocial aspects relevant to adolescents with T1D. Associations between app usage and demographic, clinical, and psychosocial variables were analyzed using logistic regression. RESULTS: In total, 425 adolescents with T1D responded to the app questions (mean age, 16 ± 2 years; 62% female; diabetes duration 7 ± 4 years). Overall, 21% (n = 87) indicated that they used an app for diabetes management. Of these, 89% (n = 77) reported carbohydrate counting as the most common purpose. Of those not using apps, 44% (n = 149) indicated that this was due either to no awareness of suitable apps or a belief that apps could not help. App usage was associated significantly with shorter T1D duration, higher socioeconomic status, and at least seven daily blood glucose checks. CONCLUSIONS: Only one in five respondents were using apps to support their diabetes management; most apps used were not diabetes specific. App users can be characterized as having a more recent T1D diagnosis, checking blood glucose more frequently, and being from a middle-to-high socioeconomic background.

Diabetes MILES Youth-Australia: methods and sample characteristics of a national survey of the psychological aspects of living with type 1 diabetes in Australian youth and their parents.

BACKGROUND: Type 1 diabetes is a complex and demanding condition, which places a substantial behavioural and psychological burden on young people and their families. Around one-third of adolescents with type 1 diabetes need mental health support. Parents of a child with type 1 diabetes are also at increased risk of psychological distress. A better understanding of the motivators, behaviours and psychological well-being of young people with diabetes and their parents will inform improvement of resources for supporting self-management and reducing the burden of diabetes. The Diabetes MILES (Management and Impact for Long-term Empowerment and Success) Youth-Australia Study is the first large-scale, national survey of the impact of diabetes on the psychosocial outcomes of Australian adolescents with type 1 diabetes and their parents. METHODS/DESIGN: The survey was web-based to enable a large-scale, national survey to be undertaken. Recruitment involved multiple strategies: postal invitations; articles in consumer magazines; advertising in diabetes clinics; social media (e.g. Facebook, Twitter). Recruitment began in August 2014 and the survey was available online for approximately 8 weeks. A total of 781 young people (aged 10-19 years) with type 1 diabetes and 826 parents completed the survey. Both genders, all ages within the relevant range, and all Australian states and territories were represented, although compared to the general Australian population of youth with type 1 diabetes, respondents were from a relatively advantaged socioeconomic background. DISCUSSION: The online survey format was a successful and economical approach for engaging young people with type 1 diabetes and their parents. This rich quantitative and qualitative dataset focuses not only on diabetes management and healthcare access but also on important psychosocial factors (e.g. social support, general emotional well-being, and diabetes distress). Analysis of the Diabetes MILES Youth-Australia Study data is ongoing, and will provide further insights into the psychosocial problems facing young people with type 1 diabetes and their parents. These will inform future research and support services to meet the needs of young Australians with type 1 diabetes and their families.

Mothers after Gestational Diabetes in Australia (MAGDA): A Randomised Controlled Trial of a Postnatal Diabetes Prevention Program.

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is an increasingly prevalent risk factor for type 2 diabetes. We evaluated the effectiveness of a group-based lifestyle modification program in mothers with prior GDM within their first postnatal year. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this study, 573 women were randomised to either the intervention (n = 284) or usual care (n = 289). At baseline, 10% had impaired glucose tolerance and 2% impaired fasting glucose. The diabetes prevention intervention comprised one individual session, five group sessions, and two telephone sessions. Primary outcomes were changes in diabetes risk factors (weight, waist circumference, and fasting blood glucose), and secondary outcomes included achievement of lifestyle modification goals and changes in depression score and cardiovascular disease risk factors. The mean changes (intention-to-treat [ITT] analysis) over 12 mo were as follows: -0.23 kg body weight in intervention group (95% CI -0.89, 0.43) compared with +0.72 kg in usual care group (95% CI 0.09, 1.35) (change difference -0.95 kg, 95% CI -1.87, -0.04; group by treatment interaction p = 0.04); -2.24 cm waist measurement in intervention group (95% CI -3.01, -1.42) compared with -1.74 cm in usual care group (95% CI -2.52, -0.96) (change difference -0.50 cm, 95% CI -1.63, 0.63; group by treatment interaction p = 0.389); and +0.18 mmol/l fasting blood glucose in intervention group (95% CI 0.11, 0.24) compared with +0.22 mmol/l in usual care group (95% CI 0.16, 0.29) (change difference -0.05 mmol/l, 95% CI -0.14, 0.05; group by treatment interaction p = 0.331). Only 10% of women attended all sessions, 53% attended one individual and at least one group session, and 34% attended no sessions. Loss to follow-up was 27% and 21% for the intervention and control groups, respectively, primarily due to subsequent pregnancies. Study limitations include low exposure to the full intervention and glucose metabolism profiles being near normal at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Although a 1-kg weight difference has the potential to be significant for reducing diabetes risk, the level of engagement during the first postnatal year was low. Further research is needed to improve engagement, including participant involvement in study design; it is potentially more effective to implement annual diabetes screening until women develop prediabetes before offering an intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12610000338066.

Diabetes Distress Among Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes: a Systematic Review.

Diabetes distress (DD) refers to the negative emotions arising from living with diabetes and the burden of self-management. Among adults, the prevalence and significance of DD are well established, but this is not the case among adolescents. This systematic review investigated among adolescents with type 1 diabetes: the prevalence of DD; demographic, clinical, behavioral and psychosocial correlates of DD and interventions that reduce DD. Consistent with adult studies, around one third of adolescents experience elevated DD and this is frequently associated with suboptimal glycemic control, low self-efficacy and reduced self-care. Three measures of DD have been developed specifically for adolescents, as those designed for adults may not be sufficiently sensitive to adolescent concerns. Interventions reducing DD in the short term include strategies such as cognitive restructuring, goal setting and problem solving. Further work is needed to investigate sustainability of effect. Rigorous research is needed to progress this field among adolescents.

Structured type 1 diabetes education delivered in routine care in Australia reduces diabetes-related emergencies and severe diabetes-related distress: The OzDAFNE program.

AIMS: To evaluate structured type 1 diabetes education delivered in routine practice throughout Australia. METHODS: Participants attended a five-day training program in insulin dose adjustment and carbohydrate counting between April 2007 and February 2012. Using an uncontrolled before-and-after study design, we investigated: HbA1c (% and mmol/mol); severe hypoglycaemia; diabetes ketoacidosis (DKA) requiring hospitalisation, and diabetes-related distress (Problem Areas in Diabetes scale; PAID), weight (kg); body mass index. Data were collected pre-training and 6-18 months post-training. Change in outcome scores were examined overall as well as between groups stratified by baseline HbA1c quartiles. Data are mean ± SD or % (n). RESULTS: 506 participants had data eligible for analysis. From baseline to follow-up, significant reductions were observed in the proportion of participants reporting at least one severe hypoglycaemic event (24.7% (n=123) vs 12.1% (n=59), p<0.001); and severe diabetes-related distress (29.3% (n=145) vs 12.6% (n=60), p<0.001). DKA requiring hospitalisation in the past year reduced from 4.1% (n=20) to 1.2% (n=6). For those with above target baseline HbA1c there was a small, statistically significant improvement (n=418, 8.4 ± 1.1% (69 ± 12 mmol/mol) to 8.2 ± 1.1% (66 ± 12 mmol/mol). HbA1c improvement was clinically significant among those in the highest baseline quartile (n=122, 9.7 ± 1.1% (82 ± 11 mmol/mol) to 9.0 ± 1.2% (75 ± 13 mmol/mol), p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of participants reporting severe hypoglycaemia, DKA and severe diabetes-related distress was at least halved, and HbA1c reduced by 0.7% (7 mmol/mol) among those with highest baseline levels. Structured type 1 diabetes education delivered in routine practice offers clinically important benefits for those with greatest clinical need.