Persistent Burden of Severe Hypoglycemia and Impaired Awareness of Hypoglycemia Among People With Type 1 Diabetes Despite Technology Use: A Follow-up Survey

IF 22.6 1区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Diabetes Care Pub Date : 2026-02-26 DOI:10.2337/dc25-2345
Jennifer L. Sherr, Rebecca L. Molinsky, Tathabbai Pakalapati, Jordan S. Sherwood, Megan E. Peter, Emilee M. Cornelius, Jeremy Pettus
{"title":"Persistent Burden of Severe Hypoglycemia and Impaired Awareness of Hypoglycemia Among People With Type 1 Diabetes Despite Technology Use: A Follow-up Survey","authors":"Jennifer L. Sherr, Rebecca L. Molinsky, Tathabbai Pakalapati, Jordan S. Sherwood, Megan E. Peter, Emilee M. Cornelius, Jeremy Pettus","doi":"10.2337/dc25-2345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE To assess longitudinal trends in glycemic metrics, prevalence of severe hypoglycemic events (SHEs), impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH), and technology use (continuous glucose monitoring [CGM], automated insulin delivery [AID]) in a real-world U.S. cohort of adults with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This was a cross-sectional study of adults with type 1 diabetes conducted ∼2 years after participants enrolled in the original retrospective observational study. Participants self-reported technology use, insulin delivery method, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), IAH, and SHEs. Change was assessed among these variables from the initial and follow-up study. RESULTS Approximately 2 years after the original survey, 1,056 adults responded to the follow-up survey and were eligible for analysis (53% response rate; mean [SD] age: 46 [16] years; mean [SD] type 1 diabetes duration: 29 [16] years; 71% female; 97% White). Most reported using CGMs in the original study (91.8%) and at follow-up (94.4%), while the use of AID increased 17.7%. In the original study, 61.7% reported HbA1c <7% vs. 67.4% at follow-up. Proportions of individuals with IAH and SHEs remained high at ∼30% and ∼20%, respectively, in both studies. CONCLUSIONS Although most participants used CGM and the use of AID increased, approximately one-third of respondents did not achieve HbA1c targets, ∼20% continued to have SHEs in the last year, and ∼30% had IAH. This highlights that while CGM and AID systems are a significant advancement, their use alone has not mitigated the risk of severe hypoglycemia, and glucose management still remains suboptimal.","PeriodicalId":11140,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes Care","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":22.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2337/dc25-2345","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To assess longitudinal trends in glycemic metrics, prevalence of severe hypoglycemic events (SHEs), impaired awareness of hypoglycemia (IAH), and technology use (continuous glucose monitoring [CGM], automated insulin delivery [AID]) in a real-world U.S. cohort of adults with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This was a cross-sectional study of adults with type 1 diabetes conducted ∼2 years after participants enrolled in the original retrospective observational study. Participants self-reported technology use, insulin delivery method, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), IAH, and SHEs. Change was assessed among these variables from the initial and follow-up study. RESULTS Approximately 2 years after the original survey, 1,056 adults responded to the follow-up survey and were eligible for analysis (53% response rate; mean [SD] age: 46 [16] years; mean [SD] type 1 diabetes duration: 29 [16] years; 71% female; 97% White). Most reported using CGMs in the original study (91.8%) and at follow-up (94.4%), while the use of AID increased 17.7%. In the original study, 61.7% reported HbA1c <7% vs. 67.4% at follow-up. Proportions of individuals with IAH and SHEs remained high at ∼30% and ∼20%, respectively, in both studies. CONCLUSIONS Although most participants used CGM and the use of AID increased, approximately one-third of respondents did not achieve HbA1c targets, ∼20% continued to have SHEs in the last year, and ∼30% had IAH. This highlights that while CGM and AID systems are a significant advancement, their use alone has not mitigated the risk of severe hypoglycemia, and glucose management still remains suboptimal.
1型糖尿病患者的持续严重低血糖负担和低血糖意识受损,尽管使用技术:一项随访调查
目的:在美国1型糖尿病成人队列中,评估血糖指标的纵向趋势、严重低血糖事件(SHEs)的流行、低血糖认知受损(IAH)和技术使用(连续血糖监测[CGM]、自动胰岛素输送[AID])。研究设计和方法:这是一项针对1型糖尿病成人患者的横断面研究,在参与者加入最初的回顾性观察性研究后2年进行。参与者自我报告技术使用情况、胰岛素递送方式、糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)、IAH和hes。从初始和后续研究中评估这些变量之间的变化。结果:在最初的调查大约2年后,1056名成年人对随访调查做出了回应,并有资格进行分析(反应率53%;平均[SD]年龄:46亿岁;平均[SD] 1型糖尿病病程:29亿岁;71%的女性;97%的白人)。大多数报告在原始研究(91.8%)和随访(94.4%)中使用cgm,而AID的使用增加了17.7%。在最初的研究中,61.7%的患者报告了HbA1c &;lt;7% vs. 67.4%。在两项研究中,IAH和she患者的比例仍然很高,分别为30%和20%。尽管大多数参与者使用了CGM,并且AID的使用增加了,但大约三分之一的受访者没有达到HbA1c目标,约20%的人在去年继续患有she,约30%的人患有IAH。这突出表明,虽然CGM和AID系统是一项重大进步,但仅使用它们并不能降低严重低血糖的风险,而且血糖管理仍处于次优状态。
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
Diabetes Care
Diabetes Care 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
27.80
自引率
4.90%
发文量
449
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The journal's overarching mission can be captured by the simple word "Care," reflecting its commitment to enhancing patient well-being. Diabetes Care aims to support better patient care by addressing the comprehensive needs of healthcare professionals dedicated to managing diabetes. Diabetes Care serves as a valuable resource for healthcare practitioners, aiming to advance knowledge, foster research, and improve diabetes management. The journal publishes original research across various categories, including Clinical Care, Education, Nutrition, Psychosocial Research, Epidemiology, Health Services Research, Emerging Treatments and Technologies, Pathophysiology, Complications, and Cardiovascular and Metabolic Risk. Additionally, Diabetes Care features ADA statements, consensus reports, review articles, letters to the editor, and health/medical news, appealing to a diverse audience of physicians, researchers, psychologists, educators, and other healthcare professionals.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书