A Project in Diabetes Education for Children

Abstract

Forty-eight families with children less than 13 years old attending a paediatric diabetic clinic volunteered for a 2-year randomized crossover trial to determine whether an informal education programme (diabetic club) could improve diabetic control. Group A attended the diabetic club for 10 afternoons of informal education in the first year, while Group B continued at the routine clinic (5 visits per year). For the second year Group A returned to the clinic, Group B attended the club. Glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1) remained stable while attending the club but rose significantly (p less than 0.01) while attending the clinic in both groups (HbA1 at baseline, 1 year, and 2 years: Group A, 9.6 (SD 1.2), 9.6(1.4), 10.7(2.1)%; Group B 8.9(1.3), 10.4(1.4), 10.5(1.4)% (normal reference range 4.7-7.9%)). Other indices of control were unchanged. Diabetic problem-solving scores of parents improved (p less than 0.01) but their knowledge of diabetes did not correlate with their child's HbA1. Dietary intake showed a reduction in percentage of energy taken as fat (40% vs 37.7%, p less than 0.05) during club attendance. The percentage of parents reporting helpful social contact between families increased during their club year (Group A 50 to 78%, Group B 32 to 57%, p less than 0.001). Psychological measurements remained unchanged. An education programme for diabetic children may stabilize diabetic control in the short term but this effect is not sustained. The main benefit was the support provided by increased social contact with families of other diabetic children within the informal framework of the diabetic club.

Effectiveness of Self-Management Training in Type 2 Diabetes

“…Many have also noted the lack of a relationship between SMBG and glycemic control for combined I-1 and I-2 C: Relaxation training to cope with stress All groups got nine weekly sessions of 1.5 h BL, baseline; BS, blood sugar; BP, blood pressure; C, C-1, C-2, control groups; CAI, computer-assisted instruction; CHO, carbohydrate; D/SBP, diastolic/systolic blood pressure; DM, diabetes mellitus; DM2, type 2 diabetes; FBS, fasting blood sugar; F/U, follow-up; HCW, health-care worker; I, I-1, I-2, I-3, intervention groups; IP, inpatient; NSD, no significant difference; OP, outpatient; PA, physical activity; q, every; RN, registered nurse; SD, significant difference; TC, telephone call. subjects with type 2 diabetes (111-116), although several randomized controlled trials have shown a relationship in type 1 diabetes (117,118).…”

Computerized Learning Technologies for Diabetes: A Systematic Review

“…14,28,30,38 The number of sessions ranged from 1 19,20 to 19 18 and the duration of the sessions ranged from 10 minutes 18 to 3.5 hours. 15 All trials except one provided a form of usual care to the control group. The one exception provided an attention control condition with an entertainment video game.…”

“…The one exception provided an attention control condition with an entertainment video game. 16 Three computerized approaches were observed in these trials: computerized touch-screen assessment and instruction, 15 Trials included in the games or simulation category represent an educational video game with role playing, 16 a simulation for hypoglycemia problem solving, 30 and an interactive educational diabetes simulator that could be downloaded from the Internet. 33 There were 24 diabetes education topics included in the trials ( Table 2).…”

“…Some were broad and categorized their outcomes under knowledge 18,27,37 or learning results. 30 However, others were more specific in stating that factual diabetic knowledge, 15 problem-solving diabetic knowledge, 15 exchange lists knowledge, 35,36 recognition of foods containing concentrated carbohydrates, 35,36 dietetic knowledge, 34 and child diabetes knowledge test score 16 were assessed.…”

“…The 10 learning outcomes were measured in eight different trials 15,16,18,37,30,[34][35][36][37] in various manners. Some were broad and categorized their outcomes under knowledge 18,27,37 or learning results.…”