OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effects of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) combined with family behavioral intervention (CGM+FBI) and CGM alone (Standard-CGM) on glycemic outcomes and parental quality of life compared with blood glucose monitoring (BGM) in children ages 2 to <8 years with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a multicenter (N = 14), 6-month, randomized controlled trial including 143 youth 2 to <8 years of age with type 1 diabetes. Primary analysis included treatment group comparisons of percent time in range (TIR) (70-180 mg/dL) across follow-up visits. RESULTS: Approximately 90% of participants in the CGM groups used CGM ≥6 days/week at 6 months. Between-group TIR comparisons showed no significant changes: CGM+FBI vs. BGM 3.2% (95% CI -0.5, 7.0), Standard-CGM vs. BGM 0.5% (-2.6 to 3.6), CGM+FBI vs. Standard-CGM 2.7% (-0.6, 6.1). Mean time with glucose level <70 mg/dL was reduced from baseline to follow-up in the CGM+FBI (from 5.2% to 2.6%) and Standard-CGM (5.8% to 2.5%) groups, compared with 5.4% to 5.8% with BGM (CGM+FBI vs. BGM, P < 0.001, and Standard-CGM vs. BGM, P < 0.001). No severe hypoglycemic events occurred in the CGM+FBI group, one occurred in the Standard-CGM group, and five occurred in the BGM group. CGM+FBI parents reported greater reductions in diabetes burden and fear of hypoglycemia compared with Standard-CGM (P = 0.008 and 0.04) and BGM (P = 0.02 and 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: CGM used consistently over a 6-month period in young children with type 1 diabetes did not improve TIR but did significantly reduce time in hypoglycemia. The FBI benefited parental well-being.
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effects of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) combined with family behavioral intervention (CGM+FBI) and CGM alone (Standard-CGM) on glycemic outcomes and parental quality of life compared with blood glucose monitoring (BGM) in children ages 2 to <8 years with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a multicenter (N = 14), 6-month, randomized controlled trial including 143 youth 2 to <8 years of age with type 1 diabetes. Primary analysis included treatment group comparisons of percent time in range (TIR) (70-180 mg/dL) across follow-up visits. RESULTS: Approximately 90% of participants in the CGM groups used CGM ≥6 days/week at 6 months. Between-group TIR comparisons showed no significant changes: CGM+FBI vs. BGM 3.2% (95% CI -0.5, 7.0), Standard-CGM vs. BGM 0.5% (-2.6 to 3.6), CGM+FBI vs. Standard-CGM 2.7% (-0.6, 6.1). Mean time with glucose level <70 mg/dL was reduced from baseline to follow-up in the CGM+FBI (from 5.2% to 2.6%) and Standard-CGM (5.8% to 2.5%) groups, compared with 5.4% to 5.8% with BGM (CGM+FBI vs. BGM, P < 0.001, and Standard-CGM vs. BGM, P < 0.001). No severe hypoglycemic events occurred in the CGM+FBI group, one occurred in the Standard-CGM group, and five occurred in the BGM group. CGM+FBI parents reported greater reductions in diabetes burden and fear of hypoglycemia compared with Standard-CGM (P = 0.008 and 0.04) and BGM (P = 0.02 and 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: CGM used consistently over a 6-month period in young children with type 1 diabetes did not improve TIR but did significantly reduce time in hypoglycemia. The FBI benefited parental well-being.
Authors: Michelle A Van Name; Marisa E Hilliard; Claire T Boyle; Kellee M Miller; Daniel J DeSalvo; Barbara J Anderson; Lori M Laffel; Stephanie E Woerner; Linda A DiMeglio; William V Tamborlane Journal: Pediatr Diabetes Date: 2017-04-21 Impact factor: 4.866
Authors: Nicole C Foster; Roy W Beck; Kellee M Miller; Mark A Clements; Michael R Rickels; Linda A DiMeglio; David M Maahs; William V Tamborlane; Richard Bergenstal; Elizabeth Smith; Beth A Olson; Satish K Garg Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2019-01-18 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: Nelly Mauras; Roy Beck; Dongyuan Xing; Katrina Ruedy; Bruce Buckingham; Michael Tansey; Neil H White; Stuart A Weinzimer; William Tamborlane; Craig Kollman Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2011-12-30 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Naama Barnea-Goraly; Mira Raman; Paul Mazaika; Matthew Marzelli; Tamara Hershey; Stuart A Weinzimer; Tandy Aye; Bruce Buckingham; Nelly Mauras; Neil H White; Larry A Fox; Michael Tansey; Roy W Beck; Katrina J Ruedy; Craig Kollman; Peiyao Cheng; Allan L Reiss Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2013-12-06 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Matthew J Marzelli; Paul K Mazaika; Naama Barnea-Goraly; Tamara Hershey; Eva Tsalikian; William Tamborlane; Nelly Mauras; Neil H White; Bruce Buckingham; Roy W Beck; Katrina J Ruedy; Craig Kollman; Peiyao Cheng; Allan L Reiss Journal: Diabetes Date: 2013-10-29 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Molly L Tanenbaum; Dessi P Zaharieva; Ananta Addala; Priya Prahalad; Julie A Hooper; Brianna Leverenz; Ana L Cortes; Nora Arrizon-Ruiz; Erica Pang; Franziska Bishop; David M Maahs Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2022-08-08 Impact factor: 4.213
Authors: Mona M Elbalshy; Sara Styles; Jillian J Haszard; Barbara C Galland; Hamish Crocket; Craig Jefferies; Esko Wiltshire; Paul Tomlinson; Martin I de Bock; Benjamin J Wheeler Journal: Pediatr Diabetes Date: 2022-03-13 Impact factor: 3.409
Authors: Mona Elbalshy; Jillian Haszard; Hazel Smith; Sarahmarie Kuroko; Barbara Galland; Nick Oliver; Viral Shah; Martin I de Bock; Benjamin J Wheeler Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2022-04-25 Impact factor: 4.213