In a cohort of European paediatric diabetic patients, the rate of DKA was significantly higher in females and in children with migration background and early teenage years.
This study analyzed whether area deprivation is associated with disparities in health care of pediatric type 1 diabetes in Germany. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We selected patients <20 years of age with type 1 diabetes and German residence documented in the "diabetes patient follow-up" (Diabetes-Patienten-Verlaufsdokumentation [DPV]) registry for 2015/2016. Area deprivation was assessed by quintiles of the German Index of Multiple Deprivation (GIMD 2010) at the district level and was assigned to patients. To investigate associations between GIMD 2010 and indicators of diabetes care, we used multivariable regression models (linear, logistic, and Poisson) adjusting for sex, age, migration background, diabetes duration, and German federal state. RESULTS We analyzed data from 29,284 patients. From the least to the most deprived quintile, use of continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGMS) decreased from 6.3 to 3.4% and use of long-acting insulin analogs from 80.8 to 64.3%, whereas use of rapid-acting insulin analogs increased from 74.7 to 79.0%; average HbA 1c increased from 7.84 to 8.07% (62 to 65 mmol/mol), and the prevalence of overweight from 11.8 to 15.5%, but the rate of severe hypoglycemia decreased from 12.1 to 6.9 events/100 patient-years. Associations with other parameters showed a more complex pattern (use of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion [CSII]) or were not significant. CONCLUSIONS Area deprivation was associated not only with key outcomes in pediatric type 1 diabetes but also with treatment modalities. Our results show, in particular, that the access to CGMS and CSII could be improved in the most deprived regions in Germany.
ObjectiveTo estimate diabetes-related direct health care costs in pediatric patients with early-onset type 1 diabetes of long duration in Germany.Research Design and MethodsData of a population-based cohort of 1,473 subjects with type 1 diabetes onset at 0–4 years of age within the years 1993–1999 were included (mean age 13.9 (SD 2.2) years, mean diabetes duration 10.9 (SD 1.9) years, as of 31.12.2007). Diabetes-related health care services utilized in 2007 were derived from a nationwide prospective documentation system (DPV). Health care utilization was valued in monetary terms based on inpatient and outpatient medical fees and retail prices (perspective of statutory health insurance). Multiple regression models were applied to assess associations between direct diabetes-related health care costs per patient-year and demographic and clinical predictors.ResultsMean direct diabetes-related health care costs per patient-year were €3,745 (inter-quartile range: 1,943–4,881). Costs for glucose self-monitoring were the main cost category (28.5%), followed by costs for continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (25.0%), diabetes-related hospitalizations (22.1%) and insulin (18.4%). Female gender, pubertal age and poor glycemic control were associated with higher and migration background with lower total costs.ConclusionsMain cost categories in patients with on average 11 years of diabetes duration were costs for glucose self-monitoring, insulin pump therapy, hospitalization and insulin. Optimization of glycemic control in particular in pubertal age through intensified care with improved diabetes education and tailored insulin regimen, can contribute to the reduction of direct diabetes-related costs in this patient group.
To investigate natural course, treatment, and outcomes in familial versus sporadic type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSIn a population-based study, we compared patients with onset of type 1 diabetes before the age of 20 years who had a first-degree relative with type 1 diabetes (familial diabetes) with patients with type 1 diabetes who had no first-degree relative with type 1 diabetes (sporadic diabetes) at diagnosis and over the first 10 treatment years, using multivariable regression and proportional hazards models. Patients were identified from the Diabetes Prospective Follow-up Registry (DPV) between 1995 and 2018. RESULTSOf 57,371 patients with type 1 diabetes, 53,606 (93.4%) had sporadic diabetes and 3,765 (6.6%) had familial diabetes. Familial diabetes, compared with sporadic diabetes, was associated with younger age (median 7.9 vs. 9.7 years, P < 0.001), lower prevalence of ketoacidosis (11.9% vs. 20.4%, P < 0.001), and lower HbA 1c levels (9.7% vs. 11.1%, P < 0.001) at onset and higher prevalence of associated autoimmune disease (16.7% vs. 13.6%, P < 0.001). Over 10 years, patients with familial diabetes, in comparison with sporadic diabetes, more often used insulin pumps (P < 0.001) and had a lower rate of severe hypoglycemia (12.97 vs. 14.44 per 100 patient-years, P < 0.001) but similar HbA 1c levels (P ‡ 0.08) and ketoacidosis rates (1.85 vs. 2.06 per 100 patient-years, P = 0.11). In familial and sporadic diabetes, absence of ketoacidosis at onset predicted fewer events of severe hypoglycemia (hazard ratio [HR] 0.67, P < 0.001, and 0.91, P < 0.001, respectively) and of ketoacidosis (HR 0.64, P 5 0.007, and 0.66, P < 0.001, respectively) after 10 years. CONCLUSIONSFamilial type 1 diabetes, compared with sporadic type 1 diabetes, is characterized by earlier disease manifestation and higher autoimmune comorbidity as well as less metabolic decompensation at onset, likely related to higher disease awareness in affected families, while the course of disease is similar. These findings may have implications for the generalizability of results of diabetes prevention trials from patients with familial type 1 diabetes to patients with sporadic type 1 diabetes.The prevalence of familial type 1 diabetes varies, with estimates ranging from 5% (1) to 12.2% (2) depending on the population investigated, the length of observation,
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.