Literature DB >> 17540955

Continuing stability of center differences in pediatric diabetes care: do advances in diabetes treatment improve outcome? The Hvidoere Study Group on Childhood Diabetes.

Carine E de Beaufort1, Peter G F Swift, Chas T Skinner, Henk J Aanstoot, Jan Aman, Fergus Cameron, Pedro Martul, Francesco Chiarelli, Dennis Daneman, Thomas Danne, Harry Dorchy, Hilary Hoey, Eero A Kaprio, Francine Kaufman, Mirjana Kocova, Henrik B Mortensen, Pal R Njølstad, Moshe Phillip, Kenneth J Robertson, Eugen J Schoenle, Tatsuhiko Urakami, Maurizio Vanelli.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To reevaluate the persistence and stability of previously observed differences between pediatric diabetes centers and to investigate the influence of demography, language communication problems, and changes in insulin regimens on metabolic outcome, hypoglycemia, and ketoacidosis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was an observational cross-sectional international study in 21 centers, with clinical data obtained from all participants and A1C levels assayed in one central laboratory. All individuals with diabetes aged 11-18 years (49.4% female), with duration of diabetes of at least 1 year, were invited to participate. Fourteen of the centers participated in previous Hvidoere Studies, allowing direct comparison of glycemic control across centers between 1998 and 2005.
RESULTS: Mean A1C was 8.2 +/- 1.4%, with substantial variation between centers (mean A1C range 7.4-9.2%; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between centers in rates of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis. Language difficulties had a significant negative impact on metabolic outcome (A1C 8.5 +/- 2.0% vs. 8.2 +/- 1.4% for those with language difficulties vs. those without, respectively; P < 0.05). After adjustement for significant confounders of age, sex, duration of diabetes, insulin regimen, insulin dose, BMI, and language difficulties, the center differences persisted, and the effect size for center was not reduced. Relative center ranking since 1998 has remained stable, with no significant change in A1C.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite many changes in diabetes management, major differences in metabolic outcome between 21 international pediatric diabetes centers persist. Different application between centers in the implementation of insulin treatment appears to be of more importance and needs further exploration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17540955     DOI: 10.2337/dc07-0475

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetes Care        ISSN: 0149-5992            Impact factor:   19.112


  52 in total

Review 1.  Clinical requirements for closed-loop control systems.

Authors:  William L Clarke; Eric Renard
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2012-03-01

2.  Exploring Variation in Glycemic Control Across and Within Eight High-Income Countries: A Cross-sectional Analysis of 64,666 Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes.

Authors:  Dimitrios Charalampopoulos; Julia M Hermann; Jannet Svensson; Torild Skrivarhaug; David M Maahs; Karin Akesson; Justin T Warner; Reinhard W Holl; Niels H Birkebæk; Ann K Drivvoll; Kellee M Miller; Ann-Marie Svensson; Terence Stephenson; Sabine E Hofer; Siri Fredheim; Siv J Kummernes; Nicole Foster; Lena Hanberger; Rakesh Amin; Birgit Rami-Merhar; Anders Johansen; Knut Dahl-Jørgensen; Mark Clements; Ragnar Hanas
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2018-04-12       Impact factor: 19.112

3.  Physical activity and sedentary behavior in adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

Authors:  Sara Fleet Michaliszyn; Melissa Spezia Faulkner
Journal:  Res Nurs Health       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.228

4.  5(th) Annual Symposium on Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose (SMBG) applications and beyond, May 3-5, 2012, Dublin, Ireland.

Authors:  Hilary Hoey; Anita Mlinac; Cam-Tuan Tran; Christof Schlaeger
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 6.118

5.  Can integrated technology improve self-care behavior in youth with type 1 diabetes? A randomized crossover trial of automated pump function.

Authors:  Orla M Neylon; Michele A O'Connell; Susan M Donath; Fergus J Cameron
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2014-06-17

6.  Treatment recommendations following 3-day masked continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in youth with type 1 diabetes.

Authors:  Lisa E Rasbach; Ashley E Atkins; Kerry M Milaszewski; Joyce Keady; Lisa M Schmidt; Lisa K Volkening; Lori M Laffel
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2014-03-22

Review 7.  One center in Brussels has consistently had the lowest HbA1c values in the 4 studies (1994-2009) by the Hvidoere International Study Group on Childhood Diabetes: What are the "recipes"?

Authors:  Harry Dorchy
Journal:  World J Diabetes       Date:  2015-02-15

8.  Evaluating the accuracy and large inaccuracy of two continuous glucose monitoring systems.

Authors:  Lalantha Leelarathna; Marianna Nodale; Janet M Allen; Daniela Elleri; Kavita Kumareswaran; Ahmad Haidar; Karen Caldwell; Malgorzata E Wilinska; Carlo L Acerini; Mark L Evans; Helen R Murphy; David B Dunger; Roman Hovorka
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2012-12-20       Impact factor: 6.118

9.  Long-term glycemic control as a result of initial education for children with new onset type 1 diabetes: does the setting matter?

Authors:  Susanne M Cabrera; Nayan T Srivastava; Jennifer M Behzadi; Tina M Pottorff; Linda A Dimeglio; Emily C Walvoord
Journal:  Diabetes Educ       Date:  2013-02-20       Impact factor: 2.140

10.  Self-reported history of overweight and its relationship to disordered eating in adolescent girls with Type 1 diabetes.

Authors:  J T Markowitz; M R Lowe; L K Volkening; L M B Laffel
Journal:  Diabet Med       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.