Cargando…

Situational Awareness and Proactive Engagement Predict Higher Time in Range in Adolescents and Young Adults Using Hybrid Closed-Loop

BACKGROUND. Adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes have high HbA1c levels and often struggle with self-management behaviors and attention to diabetes care. Hybrid closed-loop systems (HCL) like the t:slim X2 with Control-IQ technology (Control-IQ) can help improve glycemic control. The pu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Messer, Laurel H., Cook, Paul F., Voida, Stephen, Fiesler, Casey, Fivekiller, Emily, Agrawal, Chinmay, Xu, Tian, Forlenza, Gregory P., Sankaranarayanan, Sriram
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10445779/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37614410
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2023/1888738
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND. Adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes have high HbA1c levels and often struggle with self-management behaviors and attention to diabetes care. Hybrid closed-loop systems (HCL) like the t:slim X2 with Control-IQ technology (Control-IQ) can help improve glycemic control. The purpose of this study is to assess adolescents’ situational awareness of their glucose control and engagement with the Control-IQ system to determine significant factors in daily glycemic control. METHODS. Adolescents (15–25 years) using Control-IQ participated in a 2-week prospective study, gathering detailed information about Control-IQ system engagements (boluses, alerts, and so on) and asking the participants’ age and gender about their awareness of glucose levels 2–3 times/day without checking. Mixed models assessed which behaviors and awareness items correlated with time in range (TIR, 70–180 mg/dl, 3.9–10.0 mmol/L). RESULTS. Eighteen adolescents/young adults (mean age 18 ± 1.86 years and 86% White non-Hispanic) completed the study. Situational awareness of glucose levels did not correlate with time since the last glucose check (p = 0.8). In multivariable modeling, lower TIR was predicted on days when adolescents underestimated their glucose levels (r = −0.22), received more CGM alerts (r = −0.31), and had more pump engagements (r = −0.27). A higher TIR was predicted when adolescents responded to CGM alerts (r = 0.20) and entered carbohydrates into the bolus calculator (r = 0.49). CONCLUSION. Situational awareness is an independent predictor of TIR and may provide insight into patterns of attention and focus that could positively influence glycemic outcomes in adolescents. Proactive engagements predict better TIR, whereas reactive engagement predicted lower TIR. Future interventions could be designed to train users to develop awareness and expertise in effective diabetes self-management.