Amit Shapira, Charlotte W Chen, Lisa K Volkening, Lori M Laffel
{"title":"针对1型糖尿病青年及其护理人员的最新心理社会调查,包括持续血糖监测项目。","authors":"Amit Shapira, Charlotte W Chen, Lisa K Volkening, Lori M Laffel","doi":"10.1177/19322968231159411","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>We added items relevant to continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) to the Diabetes Family Conflict Scale (DFC), Diabetes Family Responsibility Questionnaire (DFR), and Blood Glucose Monitoring Communication Questionnaire (GMC) and evaluated the psychometric properties of the updated surveys.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>Youth with type 1 diabetes who recently started CGM and their parents completed the updated surveys and additional psychosocial surveys. Medical data were collected from self-reports and review of the medical record.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Youth (N = 114, 49% adolescent girls) were aged 13.3 ± 2.7 years and had mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 7.9 ± 0.9%; 87% of them used pump therapy. The updated surveys demonstrated high internal consistency (DFC youth: α = .91, parent: α = .81; DFR youth: α = .88, parent: α = .93; and GMC youth: α = .88, parent: α = .86). Higher youth and parent DFC scores (more diabetes-specific family conflict) and GMC scores (more negative affect related to glucose monitoring) were associated with more youth and parent depressive symptoms (<i>r</i> = 0.28-0.60, <i>P</i> ≤ .003), more diabetes burden (<i>r</i> = 0.31-0.71, <i>P</i> ≤ .0009), more state anxiety (<i>r</i> = 0.24 to <i>r</i> = 0.46, <i>P</i> ≤ .01), and lower youth quality of life (<i>r</i> = -0.29 to -0.50, <i>P</i> ≤ .002). Higher youth and parent DFR scores (more parent involvement in diabetes management) were associated with younger youth age (youth: <i>r</i> = -0.76, <i>P</i> < .0001; parent: <i>r</i> = -0.81, <i>P</i> < .0001) and more frequent blood glucose monitoring (youth: <i>r</i> = 0.27, <i>P</i> = .003; parent: <i>r</i> = 0.35, <i>P</i> = .0002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The updated DFC, DFR, and GMC surveys maintain good psychometric properties. The addition of CGM items expands the relevance of these surveys for youth with type 1 diabetes who are using CGM and other diabetes technologies.</p>","PeriodicalId":15475,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11531009/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Updated Psychosocial Surveys With Continuous Glucose Monitoring Items for Youth With Type 1 Diabetes and Their Caregivers.\",\"authors\":\"Amit Shapira, Charlotte W Chen, Lisa K Volkening, Lori M Laffel\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19322968231159411\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>We added items relevant to continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) to the Diabetes Family Conflict Scale (DFC), Diabetes Family Responsibility Questionnaire (DFR), and Blood Glucose Monitoring Communication Questionnaire (GMC) and evaluated the psychometric properties of the updated surveys.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>Youth with type 1 diabetes who recently started CGM and their parents completed the updated surveys and additional psychosocial surveys. Medical data were collected from self-reports and review of the medical record.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Youth (N = 114, 49% adolescent girls) were aged 13.3 ± 2.7 years and had mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 7.9 ± 0.9%; 87% of them used pump therapy. The updated surveys demonstrated high internal consistency (DFC youth: α = .91, parent: α = .81; DFR youth: α = .88, parent: α = .93; and GMC youth: α = .88, parent: α = .86). Higher youth and parent DFC scores (more diabetes-specific family conflict) and GMC scores (more negative affect related to glucose monitoring) were associated with more youth and parent depressive symptoms (<i>r</i> = 0.28-0.60, <i>P</i> ≤ .003), more diabetes burden (<i>r</i> = 0.31-0.71, <i>P</i> ≤ .0009), more state anxiety (<i>r</i> = 0.24 to <i>r</i> = 0.46, <i>P</i> ≤ .01), and lower youth quality of life (<i>r</i> = -0.29 to -0.50, <i>P</i> ≤ .002). Higher youth and parent DFR scores (more parent involvement in diabetes management) were associated with younger youth age (youth: <i>r</i> = -0.76, <i>P</i> < .0001; parent: <i>r</i> = -0.81, <i>P</i> < .0001) and more frequent blood glucose monitoring (youth: <i>r</i> = 0.27, <i>P</i> = .003; parent: <i>r</i> = 0.35, <i>P</i> = .0002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The updated DFC, DFR, and GMC surveys maintain good psychometric properties. The addition of CGM items expands the relevance of these surveys for youth with type 1 diabetes who are using CGM and other diabetes technologies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15475,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11531009/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19322968231159411\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/3/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19322968231159411","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
Updated Psychosocial Surveys With Continuous Glucose Monitoring Items for Youth With Type 1 Diabetes and Their Caregivers.
Aim: We added items relevant to continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) to the Diabetes Family Conflict Scale (DFC), Diabetes Family Responsibility Questionnaire (DFR), and Blood Glucose Monitoring Communication Questionnaire (GMC) and evaluated the psychometric properties of the updated surveys.
Research design and methods: Youth with type 1 diabetes who recently started CGM and their parents completed the updated surveys and additional psychosocial surveys. Medical data were collected from self-reports and review of the medical record.
Results: Youth (N = 114, 49% adolescent girls) were aged 13.3 ± 2.7 years and had mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 7.9 ± 0.9%; 87% of them used pump therapy. The updated surveys demonstrated high internal consistency (DFC youth: α = .91, parent: α = .81; DFR youth: α = .88, parent: α = .93; and GMC youth: α = .88, parent: α = .86). Higher youth and parent DFC scores (more diabetes-specific family conflict) and GMC scores (more negative affect related to glucose monitoring) were associated with more youth and parent depressive symptoms (r = 0.28-0.60, P ≤ .003), more diabetes burden (r = 0.31-0.71, P ≤ .0009), more state anxiety (r = 0.24 to r = 0.46, P ≤ .01), and lower youth quality of life (r = -0.29 to -0.50, P ≤ .002). Higher youth and parent DFR scores (more parent involvement in diabetes management) were associated with younger youth age (youth: r = -0.76, P < .0001; parent: r = -0.81, P < .0001) and more frequent blood glucose monitoring (youth: r = 0.27, P = .003; parent: r = 0.35, P = .0002).
Conclusions: The updated DFC, DFR, and GMC surveys maintain good psychometric properties. The addition of CGM items expands the relevance of these surveys for youth with type 1 diabetes who are using CGM and other diabetes technologies.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology (JDST) is a bi-monthly, peer-reviewed scientific journal published by the Diabetes Technology Society. JDST covers scientific and clinical aspects of diabetes technology including glucose monitoring, insulin and metabolic peptide delivery, the artificial pancreas, digital health, precision medicine, social media, cybersecurity, software for modeling, physiologic monitoring, technology for managing obesity, and diagnostic tests of glycation. The journal also covers the development and use of mobile applications and wireless communication, as well as bioengineered tools such as MEMS, new biomaterials, and nanotechnology to develop new sensors. Articles in JDST cover both basic research and clinical applications of technologies being developed to help people with diabetes.