Laurel H Messer1, Molly L Tanenbaum2, Paul F Cook3, Jessie J Wong2, Sarah J Hanes2, Kimberly A Driscoll4, Korey K Hood2. 1. Barbara Davis Center, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. 2. Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California. 3. College of Nursing, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado. 4. Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
Abstract
Background: Adolescents with diabetes have the highest A1cs of all age groups. Diabetes devices (insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors [CGM]) can improve glycemic outcomes, and although the uptake of devices has increased, they remain underutilized in this population. This study characterizes adolescent-reported barriers to diabetes device use to determine targets for clinician intervention. Methods: We surveyed 411 adolescents with type 1 diabetes (mean age 16.30 ± 2.25 years) on barriers to diabetes device use, technology use attitudes (general and diabetes specific), benefits and burdens of CGM, self-efficacy for diabetes care, diabetes distress, family conflict, and depression. We characterize barriers to device uptake; assess demographic and psychosocial differences in device users, discontinuers, and nonusers; and determine differences in device use by gender and age. Results: The majority of adolescents used an insulin pump (n = 307, 75%) and more than half used CGM (n = 225, 55%). Cost/insurance-related concerns were the most commonly endorsed barrier category (61%) followed by wear-related issues (58.6%), which include the hassle of wearing the device (38%) and dislike of device on the body (33%). Adolescents who endorsed more barriers also reported more diabetes distress (P = 0.003), family conflict (P = 0.003), and depressive symptoms (P = 0.014). Pump and CGM discontinuers both endorsed more barriers and more negative perceptions of technology than current users, but reported no difference from device users in diabetes distress, family conflict, or depression. Gender was not related to the perceptions of devices. Conclusions: Clinicians can proactively assess attitudes toward diabetes technology and perceptions of benefits/burdens to encourage device uptake and potentially prevent device discontinuation among adolescents.
Background: Adolescents with diabetes have the highest A1cs of all age groups. Diabetes devices (insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors [CGM]) can improve glycemic outcomes, and although the uptake of devices has increased, they remain underutilized in this population. This study characterizes adolescent-reported barriers to diabetes device use to determine targets for clinician intervention. Methods: We surveyed 411 adolescents with type 1 diabetes (mean age 16.30 ± 2.25 years) on barriers to diabetes device use, technology use attitudes (general and diabetes specific), benefits and burdens of CGM, self-efficacy for diabetes care, diabetes distress, family conflict, and depression. We characterize barriers to device uptake; assess demographic and psychosocial differences in device users, discontinuers, and nonusers; and determine differences in device use by gender and age. Results: The majority of adolescents used an insulin pump (n = 307, 75%) and more than half used CGM (n = 225, 55%). Cost/insurance-related concerns were the most commonly endorsed barrier category (61%) followed by wear-related issues (58.6%), which include the hassle of wearing the device (38%) and dislike of device on the body (33%). Adolescents who endorsed more barriers also reported more diabetes distress (P = 0.003), family conflict (P = 0.003), and depressive symptoms (P = 0.014). Pump and CGM discontinuers both endorsed more barriers and more negative perceptions of technology than current users, but reported no difference from device users in diabetes distress, family conflict, or depression. Gender was not related to the perceptions of devices. Conclusions: Clinicians can proactively assess attitudes toward diabetes technology and perceptions of benefits/burdens to encourage device uptake and potentially prevent device discontinuation among adolescents.
Authors: Molly L Tanenbaum; Laurel H Messer; Christine A Wu; Marina Basina; Bruce A Buckingham; Danielle Hessler; Shelagh A Mulvaney; David M Maahs; Korey K Hood Journal: Diabetes Res Clin Pract Date: 2021-09-14 Impact factor: 8.180
Authors: Karishma A Datye; Daniel R Tilden; Angelee M Parmar; Eveline R Goethals; Sarah S Jaser Journal: Curr Diab Rep Date: 2021-05-15 Impact factor: 4.810
Authors: Gregory P Forlenza; Bruce A Buckingham; Sue A Brown; Bruce W Bode; Carol J Levy; Amy B Criego; R Paul Wadwa; Erin C Cobry; Robert J Slover; Laurel H Messer; Cari Berget; Susan McCoy; Laya Ekhlaspour; Ryan S Kingman; Mary K Voelmle; Jennifer Boyd; Grenye O'Malley; Aimee Grieme; Kaisa Kivilaid; Krista Kleve; Bonnie Dumais; Todd Vienneau; Lauren M Huyett; Joon Bok Lee; Jason O'Connor; Eric Benjamin; Trang T Ly Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2021-01-18 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: Trisha Shang; Jennifer Y Zhang; Andreas Thomas; Mark A Arnold; Beatrice N Vetter; Lutz Heinemann; David C Klonoff Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2021-06-13
Authors: Trisha Shang; Jennifer Y Zhang; B Wayne Bequette; Jennifer K Raymond; Gerard Coté; Jennifer L Sherr; Jessica Castle; John Pickup; Yarmela Pavlovic; Juan Espinoza; Laurel H Messer; Tim Heise; Carlos E Mendez; Sarah Kim; Barry H Ginsberg; Umesh Masharani; Rodolfo J Galindo; David C Klonoff Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2021-07