Search

Background: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a chronic condition affecting nearly 1.9 million people in the United States. Young adults (YAs) with T1D face unique challenges in managing their condition, experiencing poorer health and well-being than other age groups. The current study is evaluating the Resilient, Empowered, Active Living (REAL) intervention, previously shown to improve glucose levels and quality of life among YAs with diabetes, using telehealth delivery (REAL-T) to expand reach and accessibility. This paper reports on the methodology and baseline participant characteristics of the REAL-T study., Methods: REAL-T is a two-arm randomized controlled trial that recruited 18-30 year olds with T1D via clinics and social media advertising. Data collection, which was adapted to be fully remote due to COVID-19, occurs every three months for one year. Participants receive either usual care or a 6-month telehealth occupational therapy intervention. The primary outcome is glycated hemoglobin (A1c); secondary outcomes include diabetes distress, quality of life, and continuous glucose monitor-derived measures., Results: The study enrolled a diverse sample of 209 YAs with T1D. Analysis of baseline data indicates equivalence between the intervention and control groups. Study participants have notably higher diabetes distress and poorer mental well-being than similar populations., Conclusion: The REAL-T study successfully adapted to remote implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic. By examining long-term outcomes, mediating pathways, and cost-effectiveness, the study will contribute knowledge of the impact of tailored interventions for YAs with T1D, designed to reduce disparities and improve health and well-being in this population., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Adolescents and young adults (AYA) from diverse and marginalized backgrounds with type 1 diabetes (T1D) generally have higher hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and less frequent continuous glucose monitor (CGM) use than AYA from more privileged backgrounds. Further, scant data address the impact of virtual peer groups (VPG) on health-related outcomes for ethnically and racially diverse AYA with T1D. Methods: CoYoT1 to California was a 15-month randomized controlled trial for AYA aged 16-25 years. In this study, AYA were randomized to receive standard care ( n  = 28), or CoYoT1 care ( n  = 40), which consisted of person-centered provider visits and bimonthly VPG. VPG were AYA-driven discussions. AYA completed the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS), Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D), and Diabetes Empowerment Scale-Short Form (DES-SF) scales at baseline and all study visits. Results: Participants were 50% Latinx and 75% publicly insured. Among CoYoT1 care participants, 19 attended at least 1 VPG session (VPG attendees) and 21 did not attend any VPG sessions. VPG attendees participated in 4.1 VPG sessions on average. VPG attendees had a relative reduction in HbA1C (treatment effect -1.08%, effect sizes values [ES] = -0.49, P  = 0.04) and increase in CGM use (treatment effect +47%, ES = 1.00, P  = 0.02) compared to standard care. VPG participation was not associated with statistically significant changes in DDS, CES-D, and DES-SF scores. Conclusions: In a 15-month randomized controlled trial, AYA with T1D who participated in VPG reported significant improvements in HbA1c and CGM use. Peer interactions may support unmet needs of AYA with T1D from diverse and marginalized backgrounds. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03793673.

Background: Diabetes technologies, such as insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors (CGM), have been associated with improved glycemic control and increased quality of life for young people with type 1 diabetes (T1D); however, few young people use these devices, especially those from minority ethnic groups. Current literature predominantly focuses on white patients with private insurance and does not report experiences of diverse pediatric patients with limited resources., Methods: To explore potential differences between Latinx and non-Latinx patients, English- and Spanish-speaking young people with T1D ( n  = 173, ages 11-25 years) were surveyed to assess attitudes about and barriers to diabetes technologies using the Technology Use Attitudes and Barriers to Device Use questionnaires., Results: Both English- and Spanish-speaking participants who identified as Latinx were more likely to have public insurance ( P  = .0001). English-speaking Latinx participants reported higher Hemoglobin A1c values ( P  = .003), less CGM use ( P  = .002), and more negative attitudes about technology (generally, P  = .003; and diabetes-specific, P  < .001) than either non-Latinx or Spanish-speaking Latinx participants. Barriers were encountered with equivalent frequency across groups., Conclusions: Latinx English-speaking participants had less positive attitudes toward general and diabetes technology than Latinx Spanish-speaking and non-Latinx English-speaking peers, and differences in CGM use were associated with socioeconomic status. Additional work is needed to design and deliver diabetes interventions that are of interest to and supportive of patients from diverse ethnic and language backgrounds.