Reassessing the Burden of Food Insecurity in Youth and Young Adults With Youth-onset Diabetes: The Importance of Marginal Food Security.

Angela D Liese, Emmanuel F Julceus, Andrea D Brown, Catherine Pihoker, Edward A Frongillo, Katherine A Sauder, Faisal S Malik, Anna Bellatorre, Beth A Reboussin, Jason A Mendoza
{"title":"Reassessing the Burden of Food Insecurity in Youth and Young Adults With Youth-onset Diabetes: The Importance of Marginal Food Security.","authors":"Angela D Liese, Emmanuel F Julceus, Andrea D Brown, Catherine Pihoker, Edward A Frongillo, Katherine A Sauder, Faisal S Malik, Anna Bellatorre, Beth A Reboussin, Jason A Mendoza","doi":"10.1016/j.jcjd.2024.10.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Whereas marginal food insecurity has been recognized as important in Canadian food security policy, the category of marginal food security (MFS) is often ignored in US food security research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prevalence of FI was estimated according to the conventional and an alternate classification of MFS with food insecurity among 938 youth and young adults (YYA) with youth-onset type 1 diabetes (T1D) and 156 with youth-onset of type 2 diabetes (T2D) from the SEARCH Food Security Cohort Study (2018-2021). Multivariable regression was used to estimate the association of MFS and conventionally defined food insecurity (FI) ascertained with diabetes-related outcomes, including acute diabetes complications, health care utilization, and diabetes self-management among YYA with T1D.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>MFS affected 10% of participants with T1D diabetes and 20% of participants with T2D. Classifying MFS with FI increased FI prevalence from 18.0% to 27.8% in participants with T1D and 34.6% to 55.1% in participants with T2D. Compared to T1D with high food security, YYA with T1D who were FI had higher odds hypoglycemia (2.1, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.6) and ketoacidosis (1.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.6), but no association was seen in MFS. The FI group also had higher odds of emergency department use and hospitalization (2.3, 95% CI 1.5 to 3.4; 2.4, 95% CI 1.5 to 3.9) and lower odds of technology use and checking glucose (0.6, 95% CI 0.4 to 0.9; 0.3, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.6). The MFS group exhibited associations of similar directions.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>Health care providers should consider care of patients with T1D and MFS the same way they care for patients with FI.</p>","PeriodicalId":93918,"journal":{"name":"Canadian journal of diabetes","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian journal of diabetes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjd.2024.10.006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Whereas marginal food insecurity has been recognized as important in Canadian food security policy, the category of marginal food security (MFS) is often ignored in US food security research.

Methods: Prevalence of FI was estimated according to the conventional and an alternate classification of MFS with food insecurity among 938 youth and young adults (YYA) with youth-onset type 1 diabetes (T1D) and 156 with youth-onset of type 2 diabetes (T2D) from the SEARCH Food Security Cohort Study (2018-2021). Multivariable regression was used to estimate the association of MFS and conventionally defined food insecurity (FI) ascertained with diabetes-related outcomes, including acute diabetes complications, health care utilization, and diabetes self-management among YYA with T1D.

Results: MFS affected 10% of participants with T1D diabetes and 20% of participants with T2D. Classifying MFS with FI increased FI prevalence from 18.0% to 27.8% in participants with T1D and 34.6% to 55.1% in participants with T2D. Compared to T1D with high food security, YYA with T1D who were FI had higher odds hypoglycemia (2.1, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.6) and ketoacidosis (1.6, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.6), but no association was seen in MFS. The FI group also had higher odds of emergency department use and hospitalization (2.3, 95% CI 1.5 to 3.4; 2.4, 95% CI 1.5 to 3.9) and lower odds of technology use and checking glucose (0.6, 95% CI 0.4 to 0.9; 0.3, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.6). The MFS group exhibited associations of similar directions.

Discussion and conclusion: Health care providers should consider care of patients with T1D and MFS the same way they care for patients with FI.

重新评估青少年糖尿病患者的粮食不安全负担:边缘粮食安全的重要性。
导言:边缘性粮食不安全在加拿大的粮食安全政策中被认为是重要的,而在美国的粮食安全研究中,边缘性粮食不安全(MFS)类别却常常被忽视:方法:根据 SEARCH 粮食安全队列研究(2018-2021 年)中患有青年发病型 1 型糖尿病(T1D)的 938 名青年和青年成人(YYA)以及患有青年发病型 2 型糖尿病(T2D)的 156 名青年的传统和替代 MFS 粮食不安全分类,估算了 FI 的流行率。研究采用多变量回归法估算了MFS和传统定义的食物不安全(FI)与糖尿病相关结果(包括急性糖尿病并发症、医疗保健利用率和T1D青少年糖尿病自我管理)之间的关联:结果:10%的 T1D 患者和 20% 的 T2D 患者受 MFS 影响。将 MFS 与 FI 分类后,T1D 患者的 FI 患病率从 18.0% 上升至 27.8%,T2D 患者的 FI 患病率从 34.6% 上升至 55.1%。与食品安全程度高的 T1D 青少年相比,患有 T1D 的 FI 青少年发生低血糖(2.1,95%CI 1.2-3.6)和酮症酸中毒(1.6,95%CI 1.0-2.6)的几率更高,但在 MFS 中未见相关性。FI 组使用急诊室和住院的几率也较高(2.3,95%CI 1.5-3.4;2.4,95%CI 1.5-3.9),而使用技术和检查血糖的几率较低(0.6,95%CI 0.4-0.9;0.3,95%CI 0.1-0.6)。MFS组的相关性方向相似:医疗服务提供者应像护理 FI 患者一样护理 T1D 和 MFS 患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信