Abstract
A low-burden electronic health record (EHR) workflow has been devised to systematize the collection and validation of 6 key diabetes self-management habits: (1) checks glucose at least 4 times/day or uses continuous glucose monitor (CGM); (2) gives at least 3 rapid-acting insulin boluses per day; (3) uses insulin pump; (4) delivers boluses before meals; (5) reviewed glucose data since last clinic visit, and (6) has changed insulin doses since the last clinic visit. To describe the performance of these habits and examine their association with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and time in range (TIR). This cross-sectional study included individuals with known type 1 diabetes who were seen in a US pediatric diabetes clinic in 2019. Habit performance, total habit score (sum of 6 habits per person), HbA1c levels, and TIR. Of 1344 patients, 1212 (609 [50.2%] males; 66 [5.4%] non-Hispanic Black; 1030 [85.0%] non-Hispanic White; mean [SD] age, 15.5 [4.5] years) were included, of whom 654 (54.0%) were using CGM and had a TIR. Only 105 patients (8.7%) performed all 6 habits. Habit performance was lower among older vs younger patients (age ≥18 years vs ≤12 years: 17 of 411 [4.1%] vs 57 of 330 [17.3%]; P < .001), Black vs White patients (3 [4.5%] vs 95 [9.2%]; P < .001), those with public vs private insurance (14 of 271 [5.2%] vs 91 of 941 [9.7%]; P < .001), and those with lower vs higher parental education levels (<college degree vs ≥college degree: 35 of 443 [7.9%] vs 66 of 574 [11.5%]; P < .001). After adjustment for demographic characteristics and disease duration, for every 1-unit increase in total habit score, we found a mean (SE) 0.6% (0.05) decrease in HbA1c among all participants and a mean (SE) 2.86% (0.71) increase in TIR among those who used CGMs. Multiple regression models revealed that performing each habit was associated with a significantly lower HbA1c level (habit 1: -0.16% [95% CI, -1.91% to -1.37%]; habit 2: -1.01% [-1.34% to -0.69%]; habit 3: -0.71% [95% CI, -0.93% to -0.49%]; habit 4: -0.97% [95% CI, -1.21% to -0.73%]; habit 5: -0.44% [95% CI, -0.71% to -0.17%]; habit 6: -0.75% [95% CI, -0.96% to -0.53%]; all P < .001). There were differences in HbA1c according to race, insurance, and parental education, but these associations were attenuated with the inclusion of the 6 habits, which had more robust associations with HbA1c levels than the demographic characteristics. These findings suggest that a focus on increasing adherence to the 6 habits could be critical for improving disparities in glycemic outcomes; these metrics have been adopted by the Type 1 Diabetes Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative for continuous quality improvement.
Highlights
IntroductionDespite the landmark findings of the 1993 Diabetes Control and Complications Trial, demonstrating that frequent blood glucose (BG) monitoring and intensive insulin therapy were effective for improving hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and delaying the onset and progression of microvascular complications in type 1 diabetes,[1] there has been a translational gap in the achievement of optimal glycemic outcomes more than 25 years later
There were differences in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) according to race, insurance, and parental education, but these associations were attenuated with the inclusion of the 6 habits, which had more robust associations with HbA1c levels than the demographic characteristics. These findings suggest that a focus on increasing adherence to the 6 habits could be critical for improving disparities in glycemic outcomes; these metrics have been adopted by the Type 1 Diabetes Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative for continuous quality improvement
Despite the landmark findings of the 1993 Diabetes Control and Complications Trial, demonstrating that frequent blood glucose (BG) monitoring and intensive insulin therapy were effective for improving hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and delaying the onset and progression of microvascular complications in type 1 diabetes,[1] there has been a translational gap in the achievement of optimal glycemic outcomes more than 25 years later
Summary
Despite the landmark findings of the 1993 Diabetes Control and Complications Trial, demonstrating that frequent blood glucose (BG) monitoring and intensive insulin therapy were effective for improving hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and delaying the onset and progression of microvascular complications in type 1 diabetes,[1] there has been a translational gap in the achievement of optimal glycemic outcomes more than 25 years later. In 2020, ADA set an even tighter glycemic goal of HbA1c levels of less than 7.0% or 53 mmol/mol[5] for children, which only 10.2% of patients achieved in 2020.6 significant racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in glycemic outcomes for racial and ethnic minority populations in the US (vs White populations) across the Type 1 Diabetes Exchange (T1DX) Research Registry[7] and SEARCH study cohorts have been reported.[8]. Patient self-management is an essential part of effective diabetes care, but key self-management habits associated with improved glycemic outcomes have not been consistently measured in the clinical setting using a structured, reportable format, limiting opportunities for conducting continuous QI
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.