Comparisons of school-day glycemia in different settings for children with type 1 diabetes using continuous glucose monitoring.

Objective: Using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), we examined patterns in glycemia during school hours for children with type 1 diabetes, exploring differences between school and non-school time. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of CGM metrics in children 7-12 years (n=217, diabetes duration 3.5±2.5 years, hemoglobin A1c 7.5±0.8%). Metrics were obtained for weekday school hours (8 AM to 3 PM) during four weeks in fall 2019. Two comparison settings included weekend (fall 2019) and weekday (spring 2020) data when children had transitioned to virtual school due to COVID-19. We used multilevel mixed models to examine factors associated with time in range (TIR) and compare glycemia between in-school, weekends, and virtual school. Results: Though CGM metrics were clinically similar across settings, TIR was statistically higher, and time above range (TAR), mean glucose, and standard deviation (SD) lower, for weekends and virtual school (p<0.001). Hour and setting exhibited a significant interaction for several metrics (p<0.001). TIR in-school improved from a mean of 40.9% at the start of the school day to 58.0% later in school, with a corresponding decrease in TAR. TIR decreased on weekends (60.8 to 50.7%) and virtual school (62.2 to 47.8%) during the same interval. Mean glucose exhibited a similar pattern, though there was little change in SD. Younger age (p=0.006), lower hemoglobin A1c (p<0.001), and insulin pump use (p=0.02) were associated with higher TIR in-school. Conclusion: Although TIR was higher for weekends and virtual school, glycemic metrics improve while in-school, possibly related to beneficial school day routines.

Modern diabetes devices in the school setting: Perspectives from school nurses.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the experiences, practices, and attitudes of school nurses related to modern diabetes devices (insulin pumps, continuous glucose monitors, and hybrid-closed loop systems). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 40 public school nurses caring for children in elementary and middle schools. Developed with stakeholder input, the interview questions explored experiences working with devices and communicating with the health care system. Deidentified transcripts were analyzed through an iterative process of coding to identify major themes. RESULTS: School nurses reported a range of educational backgrounds (58% undergraduate, 42% graduate), geographic settings (20% urban, 55% suburban, 25% rural), and years of experience (20% <5 years, 38%, 5-15 years, 42% >15 years). Four major themes emerged: (a) As devices become more common, school nurses must quickly develop new knowledge and skills yet have inconsistent training opportunities; (b) Enthusiasm for devices is tempered by concerns about implementation due to poor planning prior to the school year and potential disruptions by remote monitors; (c) Barriers exist to integrating devices into schools, including school/classroom policies, liability/privacy concerns, and variable staff engagement; and (d) Collaboration between school nurses and providers is limited; better communication may benefit children with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Devices are increasingly used by school-aged children. School nurses appreciate device potential but share structural and individual-level challenges. Guiding policy is needed as the technology progressively becomes standard of care. Enhanced training and collaboration with diabetes providers may help to optimize school-based management for children in the modern era.