Remote monitoring improved glycemic control in children with type 1 diabetes

Intensive remote therapy (IRT) was able to improve blood glucose control in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes, according to a study published Feb. 21 in Pediatric Diabetes.

Continual communication between type 1 diabetes patients and care providers is key in maintaining glycemic control, but routine in-person visits can strain a patient. In response, researchers from Children’s Minnesota and UnitedHealth Group Research & Development aimed to provide insight into the potential benefits of IRT in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes.

The study included 117 pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes, of which 60 received IRT while the remaining 57 received conventional care. During the six months of the study, both groups continued quality clinic visits and uploaded data collected from their diabetes devices. The IRT group’s data was received, and patients were contacted with changes in care needed to be made. Measures of blood glucose control and diabetes-related quality of life were included in the findings.

Results found the IRT group experience increased glycemic control after six months by reducing glycated hemoglobin by 0.34, compared to the 0.05 in the conventional care group. Broken down, children ages 8 to 12 in the IRT group reduced their glycated hemoglobin by 0.15 while the conventional care group saw a 0.02 reduction. Children ages 13 to 17 in the IRT group saw a 0.50 reduction, compared to a 0.06 reducing in the conventional care group. Additionally, diabetes-related quality of life increased by 6.5 points in the IRT group, compared to 1.3 points in the conventional care group. In the three months following the intervention, glycated hemoglobin changed minimally in children aged 8 to 12 but increased by 0.22 in children aged 13 to 17.

 “IRT substantially affected diabetes metrics and improved quality of life among pediatric patients with T1D,” wrote first author Laura Gandrud, of Children's Minnesota, and colleagues. “Adolescents experienced a stronger treatment effect, but had difficulty in sustaining improved control after intervention cessation.”