Search

BackgroundType 1 diabetes in young children is a heavy parental burden. As part of pilot phase of the KIDSAP01 study, we conducted a baseline assessment in parents to study the association between hypoglycemia fear, parental well-being and child behavior.MethodsAll parents were invited to fill in baseline questionnaires: hypoglycemia fear survey (HFS), WHO-5, Epworth Sleepiness Scale and Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ).Results24 children (median age: 5-year, range 1-7 years, 63% male, mean diabetes duration: 3 ± 1.7 years) participated. 23/24 parents filled out the questionnaires. We found a higher score for the hypoglycemia fear behavior 33.9 ± 5.6 compared to hypoglycemia worry 34.6 ± 12.2. Median WHO-5 score was 16 (8 - 22) with poor well-being in two parents. Median daytime sleepiness score was high in five parents (>10). For six children a high total behavioral difficulty score (>16) was reported. Pro social behavior score was lower than normal in six children (r = - 0.50, p r = - 0.44, p r = - 0.45, p = .05) and positively with child age and diabetes duration (r = 0.58, p r = 0.6, p ConclusionRegular screening of parental well-being, hypoglycemia fear and child behavior should be part of routine care to target early intervention.

OBJECTIVE We aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of hybrid closed-loop insulin delivery in children with type 1 diabetes aged 1–7 years as well as evaluate the role of diluted insulin on glucose control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In an open-label, multicenter, multinational, randomized crossover study, 24 children with type 1 diabetes on insulin pump therapy (median age 5 years [interquartile range 3–6] and mean ± SD HbA1c 7.4 ± 0.7% [57 ± 8 mmol/mol] and total insulin 13.2 ± 4.8 units/day) underwent two 21-day periods of unrestricted living and we compared hybrid closed-loop with diluted insulin (U20) and hybrid closed-loop with standard strength insulin (U100) in random order. During both interventions, the Cambridge model predictive control algorithm was used. RESULTS The proportion of time that sensor glucose was in the target range between 3.9 and 10 mmol/L (primary end point) was not different between interventions (mean ± SD 72 ± 8% vs. 70 ± 7% for closed-loop with diluted insulin vs. closed-loop with standard insulin, respectively; P = 0.16). There was no difference in mean glucose levels (8.0 ± 0.8 vs. 8.2 ± 0.6 mmol/L; P = 0.14), glucose variability (SD of sensor glucose 3.1 ± 0.5 vs. 3.2 ± 0.4 mmol/L; P = 0.16), or the proportion of time spent with sensor glucose 0.99). Total daily insulin delivery did not differ (17.3 ± 5.6 vs. 18.9 ± 6.9 units/day; P = 0.07). No closed-loop–related severe hypoglycemia or ketoacidosis occurred. CONCLUSIONS Unrestricted home use of day-and-night closed-loop in very young children with type 1 diabetes is feasible and safe. The use of diluted insulin during closed-loop does not provide additional benefits compared with standard strength insulin.

Antioxidant intake can affect both free radical and the nutritional status of children receiving cancer treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate whether children with cancer met their antioxidant requirements.A prospective observational study was performed at a single hospital in England from June 2008 to February 2010. Children with a solid tumour, lymphoma or leukaemia were included. Dietary intakes including 3 modes of feeding ('diet alone', 'diet + tube' feeding or 'diet + vitamin-mineral supplementation' (VMS)) were collected with an estimated food record (EFR) 1 and 3 month post-diagnosis. Four and 24-hr food recalls were performed to validate the food records.Forty two children were included: 57% leukaemia or lymphoma and 43% solid tumours. Sixty seven percent underwent chemotherapy and 33% a combination of therapies. In months 1 and 3, greater numbers of children achieved ≥100% of requirements for 'diet + VMS' (p0.05) than for other feeding modes. However, considerable proportions of all feeding groups did not achieve 100% of the Recommended Nutrient Intake (RNI) for vitamin A, C, E, selenium and zinc. This was most marked in the 'diet alone' group. Significant proportions did not achieve the Lower Recommended Nutrient Intake (LRNI) for some antioxidants. The 'diet alone' group had the highest proportion not meeting LRNI for vitamin A (p0.001; 1st month) and zinc (p0.02; 3rd month).Inadequate antioxidant intake was observed in a significant proportion of cancer patients when feeding was not augmented in any way. More research is required to determine the clinical implications of these findings.