Suppr超能文献

一项随机临床试验评估了在标准化教育中使用连续血糖监测(CGM)与在接受指尖血糖监测的基础上增加家庭行为干预相比,对 1 型糖尿病的非常年幼的儿童的效果。

A Randomized Clinical Trial Assessing Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) Use With Standardized Education With or Without a Family Behavioral Intervention Compared With Fingerstick Blood Glucose Monitoring in Very Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes.

出版信息

Diabetes Care. 2021 Feb;44(2):464-472. doi: 10.2337/dc20-1060. Epub 2020 Dec 17.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the effects of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) combined with family behavioral intervention (CGM+FBI) and CGM alone (Standard-CGM) on glycemic outcomes and parental quality of life compared with blood glucose monitoring (BGM) in children ages 2 to <8 years with type 1 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a multicenter ( = 14), 6-month, randomized controlled trial including 143 youth 2 to <8 years of age with type 1 diabetes. Primary analysis included treatment group comparisons of percent time in range (TIR) (70-180 mg/dL) across follow-up visits.

RESULTS

Approximately 90% of participants in the CGM groups used CGM ≥6 days/week at 6 months. Between-group TIR comparisons showed no significant changes: CGM+FBI vs. BGM 3.2% (95% CI -0.5, 7.0), Standard-CGM vs. BGM 0.5% (-2.6 to 3.6), CGM+FBI vs. Standard-CGM 2.7% (-0.6, 6.1). Mean time with glucose level <70 mg/dL was reduced from baseline to follow-up in the CGM+FBI (from 5.2% to 2.6%) and Standard-CGM (5.8% to 2.5%) groups, compared with 5.4% to 5.8% with BGM (CGM+FBI vs. BGM, < 0.001, and Standard-CGM vs. BGM, < 0.001). No severe hypoglycemic events occurred in the CGM+FBI group, one occurred in the Standard-CGM group, and five occurred in the BGM group. CGM+FBI parents reported greater reductions in diabetes burden and fear of hypoglycemia compared with Standard-CGM ( = 0.008 and 0.04) and BGM ( = 0.02 and 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

CGM used consistently over a 6-month period in young children with type 1 diabetes did not improve TIR but did significantly reduce time in hypoglycemia. The FBI benefited parental well-being.

摘要

目的

本研究评估了连续血糖监测(CGM)联合家庭行为干预(CGM+FBI)与单独 CGM(标准-CGM)相比,对血糖监测(BGM)在 2 至<8 岁 1 型糖尿病儿童的血糖结果和父母生活质量的影响。

研究设计和方法

这是一项多中心(=14)、6 个月、随机对照试验,包括 143 名 2 至<8 岁的 1 型糖尿病儿童。主要分析包括在随访期间治疗组之间的时间在范围内(TIR)(70-180mg/dL)百分比的比较。

结果

约 90%的 CGM 组参与者在 6 个月时每周至少使用 CGM 6 天。组间 TIR 比较显示无显著变化:CGM+FBI 与 BGM 相比为 3.2%(95%CI-0.5,7.0),标准-CGM 与 BGM 相比为 0.5%(-2.6,3.6),CGM+FBI 与标准-CGM 相比为 2.7%(-0.6,6.1)。与 BGM 组相比,CGM+FBI 组(从 5.2%降至 2.6%)和标准-CGM 组(从 5.8%降至 2.5%)的葡萄糖水平<70mg/dL 的时间从基线到随访期间均减少,而 BGM 组则从 5.4%降至 5.8%(CGM+FBI 与 BGM 相比,<0.001,标准-CGM 与 BGM 相比,<0.001)。CGM+FBI 组未发生严重低血糖事件,标准-CGM 组发生 1 例,BGM 组发生 5 例。CGM+FBI 组的父母报告糖尿病负担和对低血糖的恐惧较标准-CGM 组(=0.008 和 0.04)和 BGM 组(=0.02 和 0.002)有更大的降低。

结论

在 1 型糖尿病的幼儿中,持续使用 6 个月的 CGM 并没有改善 TIR,但显著减少了低血糖时间。FBI 有益于父母的幸福感。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

3
Advances in Continuous Glucose Monitoring: Clinical Applications.持续血糖监测的进展:临床应用
Endocrinol Metab (Seoul). 2025 Apr;40(2):161-173. doi: 10.3803/EnM.2025.2370. Epub 2025 Apr 8.
8
7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2025.7. 糖尿病技术:2025年糖尿病照护标准
Diabetes Care. 2025 Jan 1;48(Supplement_1):S146-S166. doi: 10.2337/dc25-S007.
9
Managing Type 1 Diabetes in an Inpatient Child Psychiatric Care Setting.在儿童住院精神科护理环境中管理1型糖尿病
Diabetes Spectr. 2024 Aug 15;37(3):234-240. doi: 10.2337/dsi24-0008. eCollection 2024 Summer.

本文引用的文献

3
13. Children and Adolescents: .儿童和青少年: 。
Diabetes Care. 2020 Jan;43(Suppl 1):S163-S182. doi: 10.2337/dc20-S013.
5
Advances in technology for management of type 1 diabetes.1 型糖尿病管理技术的进展。
Lancet. 2019 Oct 5;394(10205):1265-1273. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31142-0. Epub 2019 Sep 15.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验